Pick up classic work of literature

woah that's really legit

I like introductions but I always read them after the book like you say.

Actually, i really know what youre getting at

yeah me too, I like to compare my thoughts and interpretations, not be told what to think like a tool

>a
>women

dude...

>book has old introduction from author
>as well as a forward from the author's son
>and a contemporary introduction from the author's other son

Damn near put my fist through the wall.

women are better at non-fiction than men though

stop going to metafilter that article was shit

>the 'art speaks for itself' meme

what?

When it's a book, I'd say it does. It's not my fault you're too stupid to form your own opinion on something so you need to read about it from some "expert" at the beginning of the book.

>It's not my fault you're too stupid to form your own opinion on something

that's literally why you believe books speak for themselves though. you can't ascertain period details and cultural nuances from reading the book itself you idiot. maybe if you read introductions instead of just guessing what they are you'd have a better opinion of them

>women
>serious academics

nah you just need to learn more about writing breh and probably the context of the novel

Intros are better read after the book

Uh excuse me I happen to know over six hundred highly decorated female scholars who are the BEST at memorizing dumbed-down versions of the critical methodologies established by male geniuses.

Are you saying that derivative, repetitive, redundant, completely non-transgressive applications of consensus-established versions of deconstruction and the genealogical method to oversaturated areas of study ISN'T "serious" academic work?

That's fucking SEXIST! I'LL HAVE YOU EXTRA-ACADEMICALLY DESTROYED FOR MAKING ME FEEL BAD! I'M A SERIOUS ACADEMIC!

>introduction to the four major tragedies
>"Further Reading:"
>"1. Women and Gender in Rennaisance tragedy"
>"2. ..."

(an actual Shakespeare introduction by a women)

>americanized
wtf is that

>Reading introductions instead of diving head on
Top tier pleb

This, what's the point of reading introductions again? If you want to read other people's opinions, just google once you're done with the book and choose one you want to read instead.

It's the worst. Every fucking time.

Just started Middlemarch, the Oxford World Classics edition. Introduction is by a "Felicia" and is one of the worst things I've ever read.
Her opening sentence literally made me laugh out loud -

>The nineteenth century was an age of intense intellectual ferment.

Fucking lol.
Positively absurd.

After this the stupid bitch rambles on for 42 pages in the most tortured English prose my brain has ever had the misfortune of processing.

Check out this sentence -

>Neither of these had yet been published at the time of the action of Middlemarch but it is to works of this kind that the artist Will Ladislaw, one of the novel's central characters, alludes when he observes of his cousin, the elderly cleric Edward Casaubon, that, because he is ignorant of the latest German scholarship, the book he has in mind to write, the Key to All Mythologies, will inevitably be obsolete even before it is begun.

>, that,
>, that,
>, that,
>, that,

This is how Gibbon would have written if he had been literally retarded. I bailed after 10 pages. I can't decide whether to rip the pages out of my copy or to keep it and periodically re-read it as a reminder of how bad it can get.

Women. Not even once.

Go back to your containment board

>/r9k/ for hating women
>/pol/ for being a nazi
>Veeky Forums for.....?

being a faggot apparently

Veeky Forums for not being a piece of shit

If your reproduction of that sentence is accurate, holy shit. Man, that's horrible.