Introductions

only after i've read the book

>>8327247
ok why after?

>>8327279
because i don't want to spoil shit, and i like to experience the book and form my own opinions first and then check out what other people thought afterwards

I usually try to except in the case of some where the intro is like 40 pages

I'd rather the plot be spoiled so i can better pick up on themes and devices theoughout the text and help have a better context of the book

>>8327335
Don't want to hear others opinion on something before I do it.

>>8327335
seems reasonable
>>8327343
this is also what I do, easier to catch on when english is not my main language

I read the first part that describes the state of life the author was in and the current events of the time. I stop when the plot begins to be revealed and the story is analyzed. I read this part after the book. I think it should be 2 essays.

Most people know the basic plot of the classics before reading them, I don't think the spoilers are that big of a deal. I prefer reading the introductors analysis after I've read the book though.

It depends on what kind of introduction it is.

I like introductions that introduce the author in a general way and place the work int he context of his life and times.

If it's one of those lit crit analysis introductions, I'll give it a chance for like 5 pages. If it's good, I'll read it, but much more often, it's bad, in which case I tear it out of my copy and throw it in the trash where it belongs.

>>8327242
What edition is this?

I just had an introduction spoil snow country for me and I'm pretty triggered