Some faggot college academic gets to write an intro to a great piece of literature and spoils the ending without any...

>some faggot college academic gets to write an intro to a great piece of literature and spoils the ending without any warning

Why is this ok? And don't hit me with

>Hur dur reading for plot

That's pure autism.

What else is an introduction supposed to tell you? It's your own fault for reading them before the book.

If you're supposed to read it after the book then it should be in the back of the book, no?

You don't need to spoil the plot to tell me the author's and book's background along with some important themes of the book.

>reading for plot

Just don't read introductions.
They're usually written under the pretense that the reader already has read the novel anyway.

>tfw the unbearable lightness of being spoiled me anna karenina

>reading for the plot
>reading the introduction to some ancient piece of shit and being surprised it spoils the ending
>giving a shit about spoilers in any medium

.

>reading for the plot

If I told you Macbeth dies, would you be mad? Would you hate me for spoiling the ending? Would you no longer read Shakespeare even though all of his plays are thoroughly embedded within our culture and most of his endings are well-known? Does knowing the general plot of Macbeth make you appreciate his genius any less?

If you answered yes to any of those questions, just fucking kill yourself already you worthless pleb

>reading for plot

Please just go back to playing video games.

You can't *spoil* literature lmao

Not as bad as notes that spoil key things that are OBVIOUSLY supposed to be slowly decoded

>reading for plot

>disdain for academics

Chip-on-your-shoulder much?

>not as bad as cuck writer that spoils his entire play in the prologue

>tfw living in western culture and being raised in a non-pleb home has inadvertently spoiled every single piece of great literature for me

I feel nothing, because plot is for plebs, aesthetics is for aristocrats.

I always skip intros to classic books because they assume you've read them before. I go back and read them when I'm finished, though.

>reading the introduction first
You a dumb nigger.

If the literature is good then knowing the ending won't spoil the book, but it's entirely unnecessary to spoil the ending in the *intro* of a book, it's pretentious. Suspense is fun.

>hey bro, can we commission you to write a brief analysis of this work under the assumption that the reader hasnt read the book but without spoiling anything at all? Thanks!
yeah, that's not how it works

you read the back cover (or the inside of the dust jacket) before the book, and the 'introduction' afterward, dumbass.

OP is an idiot but this is actually heinous, especially if its a footnote and not an endnote

What? Macbeth dies? REEEEEE thanks for spoiling it.

>They're usually written under the pretense that the reader already has read the novel anyway.

No they aren't, shut the fuck up.

reading the back cover is plebeian behaviour.

Goethe is not a cuck desu

Honestly fuck you for spoiling macbeth

I havent read shakespear yet, you are a terrible person kill yourself

hes right you know

Yes they are? They normally only appear in super classic literature that it wouldn't be surprising if the majority of readers are visiting it for the 2nd+ time.

thats fuckin gay

spoiler tags exist for a reason

Practically every titular tragic character dies at the end, user.

Tbh all of my favourite books were thoroughly spoiled to me.

>reading the introduction

this

can't believe you fuckers actually do this