I should note that I'm specifically talking about plot spoilers in this video, and decidedly not about trigger and content warnings (which serve an entirely different and important function). Spinster's Library is pro content warnings in books, classic and otherwise.
OMG yes, I mean I've learnt by now never to read the introduction first BUT I'm still sometimes making the mistake of reading the blurbs and that's how I got some major spoilers for E.M.Forster's Where Angels Fear To Tread and a few others. I hate that.
This is a lesson us, classic readers, learn the hard way; I always avoid introductions as well as blurbs of classics. I think I might even have been spoiled by a footnote! It is annoying, because it would be nice to have an introduction that gives you a bit of context about the authors life, the publication of the book or the historical events of the time *before* reading it, and then have an afterward that discusses the plot and themes of the book. I just checked and my Oxford Classics edition of the Tenant of Wildfell Hall (and a couple of others) does have a warning for first time readers at the start of the introduction; but still, why put it at the beginning?
I skip over the introductions of all books until after I’ve read them. I’ve learned the hard way that these introductions will just ruin everything for me lol
I hate that introductions do this, fortunately I usually skip them haha. *RU-vidrs* do this to me all the time. I dont Watch booktube anymore unless I’ve already read what they’re talking about and even then they’ve slipped a spoiler for another book in sometimes.
I ♥your rants, Claudia! At some point they started doing this with movie trailers; all the little plot points included. They're like mini-movies with no need to waste time on watching the whole thing. Very vexing!
I hated it when I came across spoilers in an introduction to 'The Haunting of Hill House' by Shirley Jackson, published by Penguin, and then again in her anthology 'Dark Tales,' the introduction also contained spoilers for several stories.
100% agree with everything you've said! I would also add that people in general tend to spoil classics when discussing them too. Or they assume that, because you're able to pick out a Shakespeare reference or retelling in other media, it means you automatically know everything about it. I don't! I really don't! Yes, I can watch a movie with the lovers from bickering families trope and pinpoint that as a Romeo & Juliet reference. How did I know that? No idea. But I didn't actually read the play until this past summer - after our professor did a lengthy and spoilerly discussion before we even opened our books. That felt like it took me out of the story quite a bit. Because I wasn't learning anything from it. I wasn't questioning it. I wasn't deep into their love story. I opened the book knowing what I was supposed to take away from it. That's happened in nearly every class where I've read classic lit. Assumed knowledge has killed classics for far too many people.
Anna Karenina was spoiled to me in the introduction. That was probably one of the reasons (though there was other stuff, too) why I never did finish the book, I think I had a little over 100 pages left, so I was almost at the end. I now better not to read the introduction and I don't like that at all because I really would like to know the possible historical context of the book beforehand because I am interested in history. Also one has to remember to read it, too, before returning it to library or something. The Murder of Roger Ackroyd was also spoiled somewhere to me, which was a shame because I had just been thinking about reading the new translation, and I had forgotten the thing because I am pretty sure I had known it already, might have even read it as a child. I once read a blog post/review about it and it spoiled the book, too. I contacted the blogger and asked him not to spoil it for others but received a pretty arrogant reply, thankfully I have forgotten what it said, exactly. But I know now not to read his blog again, both for the possible spoilers and his patronising attitude.
This is a major pet peeve of mine as well. I only have one classic, so far, that actually bothered to mention at the beginning of the introduction that it would spoil things and should be read afterward if this was your first reading. Conversely, most of my classics contain in their introductions have major spoilers that can completely change the reading experience. I wish they were truly an introduction to the book vs final analysis.
I think I have the same edition of The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, and I didn't read the back until I was finished because I have found Penguin to be very guilty of spoiling major plot points, in this case the entire plot. One of the most egregious back cover spoilers I have seen is one that not only revealed that one character goes undercover as someone else, but gives both the character's actual name and alias.
I completely agree with you! I think it's ridiculous that this happens when all could easily be fixed by skipping the introduction and adding an afterword instead. I find that this happens a lot with plays too! Of course I've learned to skip them by now, but I live for plot, so more than one reading experience has been ruined for me thanks to these introductions.
Yes, I hate this! I hate the general expectation in media that everyone already knows the classics. I recently had a book spoiled for me in a TV show... where one character spoils the book for another. And for every viewer. I was so annoyed.
I haven’t read all classics to speak authoritatively on this issue, but I’ve read enough to know this is a problem that demands a solution. In any case, adding on to your observations, could it also be that the publisher wittingly does this because of their faith in the story itself? That is, at least to their mind, an event happening isn’t as important as how it happens. Essentially, they are giving an “elevator speech” instead of contextualizing. Edit: i think these kind of introductions are meant for marketing purposes to engage readers by throwing “crumbs (albeit big ones)” in the introduction.
I avoid the introduction altogether. Even after I've read it. I don't care what some scholar says a book means. The story tells me. And I've got a brain to figure it out.
I always skip introductions, but I can't help reading back covers and, as I tend to read for fun, serious spoilers usually destroy any interest I may have on reading a book . I've also encountered the opposite problem: no description whatsoever, even with less well-known classics.
Perhaps it has something to do with the versions of classics that are most easily available? The most popular editions of classics tend to be those marketed towards students, and the introductions in those are intros to study of the book not intros to the books themselves. (Edit: not a particularly helpful convention as you have pointed out) I wouldn’t be surprised to find that the ‘student editions’ were originally more affordable than others and so are the ones that have survived the longest.
I have always skipped the introduction, because I want to get straight to the story. It's arrogant to assume that people have already read all the classics or that they only read classics for education purposes.
I encountered a similar problem in introductory courses to literature in university. I was taking them as ...introduction so I can begin to tackle more books in communication with classics. The professors just assumed that in our first year we had already read the top 100 classics and dropping spoilers left, right, and centre and assuming we have all already read all these...skipped over, and then made us read things much more recent. It was a weird feeling because I consistently felt like I had not read enough, but I didn't know where to turn to to get an introduction!
Hi Claudia! I always love your videos and it was very heart warming to see you snuggled up to Wuthering Heights at the beginning of this video 😂👏 I truly agree with you. In fact, the classics seem to contain the best plots of all and are often re used and re spun more then any other genre of books. It seems also assumed that everyone already knows the classics even before reading them. But despite a little exposure by their fame or perhaps seeing a movie they definitely should be introduced with freshness and excitement. Absolutely. Great to see your post and I am very excited for your classic page turners video!! That’s an introduction I don’t want to miss! 🐈⬛❤
I agree with you 100% on all points. I have also been spoiled by introductions, even for modern classics like those published by Persephone Books. It's so deflating and disappointing. I've learned the hard way to read them afterwards--if I love a book having something to read about it once I've finished is an added pleasure. Looking forward to your follow up video.
I was just thinking about this topic yesterday. I'm a mother of 3 and work full time and need a page turn to really distract me in my busy life. I love the classics! Thank you so much for this video.
Hi Claudia! You'd love the intro of the Penguin audio version of "Dracula" (beautifully read by Mark Gatiss): "Both for ease of listening and because it contains details of the plot we've placed the introduction to this Penguin Classic at the end of the audio book."
I was pleasantly surprised during Victober when I decided to re-read 'Jane Eyre' (one of my life-long favourites) followed by a re-read of 'Wuthering Heights' (a book I'd previously hated but wanted to give a second chance). My reason for reading these two books this way was because having loved JE for a good 30 years, revisiting it in Autumn is like sitting down to chat with an old friend; my first read of it being back when I was 11 or 12, right after having read L.M. Montgomery's 'Emily Of New Moon' trilogy, so my mind was already primed for classic literature from a similar period. The time I had previously read WH was after reading some much more recent books of an entirely different vein, which I think made WH feel very jarring and I just couldn't get along with the book. I figured that if I read JE first, it would get me into the whole Brontë-land vibe and prime me for going into WH with the best possible mindset. And it worked because I now love WH! Anyway, all of that was to say that I noticed during these re-reads that there notes at the top of the Introduction and Prefaces, warning new readers that they might not want to read any of the supplemental material prior to the text proper, because they contained things that would spoil the story. This was great to see and I'm very pleased that they did this, despite neither text being new to me. The WH version I have is the Penguin Classics imprint with a J. M. W. Turner painting on the front. My JE is a Penguin Leatherbound Edition; a lovely hardback in navy/Prussian blue and with gold embossed detailing. So both are Penguin editions, just in different formats, but whilst both came with a good amount of introductory supplemental material, they also both printed little warnings for new readers. I don't know how long they've been doing this, but it's lovely of them to (perhaps subsequent to having received some feedback or complaints from readers) have opted to do this. My Penguin Classics 'Anna Karenina' is a few years older, and it has no warnings on the intro/preface pages, so it looks like the warnings are a more recent addition. For those new to classics (maybe if you're buying one for someone for a gift?) It might be an idea to opt for these newer Penguin Classics. It's nice even for those of us who know about the spoilers often found in classic book supplementals, to have that little reminder there for those days when we're a bit away with the fairies and almost forget. Nice job Penguin. Keep it up and maybe you'll end up influencing other imprints from different publishers to do the same. (Also, everyone watching this needs to save it, share it, get the warnings out to whoever will need to see/hear/learn it. Thank you Spinster!)
I agree wholeheartedly. When you first start reading classics and you are unaware of this issue, you get burned and learn quickly. I've always wondered why the introduction can't be an afterward. Even now that I know to skip the introduction I have to make sure I don't read blurbs or basically any reviews or anything because spoilers are everywhere. It is infuriating. I read for the story not themes since I am no longer in school. I can appreciate the themes I see, but I'm not going to write a paper so the plot and character development are why I'm there.
Well, I deliberately buy books that have an introduction. Sometimes I read that first, other times I don't. But I don't mind finding spoilers out for classic works like that. If spoilers bother you just don't read the academic's note about the text until you've finished the book. I buy these editions specifically for the scholarly opinions on the work.
Oh I thought I'd made it clear in the video that, while I know to skip an introduction, many people who are new to reading classics won't. My suggestion to print these notes as afterwords instead of introductions would make everyone happy, don't you think?
Your second surmise about the reason for the placement of these analysis is, in my view the correct one, And I believe it is a reasonable decision. The authors, whether one likes it or not, have long before now become "great" writers, and readers have a right to give priority to the question why this is so, over and above the plot of the book. Why look down your nose at readers who want to know why such and such a novel is great? After all, in part it is because of the genius of the author and not because of the nature of the plot that most readers want to read a book. Most Austin readers do not want to find out about Emma, I expect, or a handful of "little women" of no name or familiarity. They want to read a Jane Austin book, . I personally would hope that a reader wants to know more about a novel than simply its plot. There is simply no reason to suppose that the plot is uppermost on the minds of a reader when one speaks of Austin, Shakespeare or other canonical author.
My suggestion of having these analyses as afterwords instead of forewords would still work for readers like you who don't care about the story aspects of the novels. But I sincerely doubt your assertion that "most readers" of Jane Austen don't care about the plot of the books. You only have to ask Austen fans to know.
They care about the plot, but they care more about reading a story by the great Jane Austin. That's why they call themselves "Austin fans." Yes, why not ask them? You may be surprised. @@SpinstersLibrary
And I like to read them first as forwards to revel in the turns of genius that I am about to read. That's just going to be an individual preference either way not something to recommend to others. By the way, they can be trusted to read a forward last if they want to.
![Stop spoilering classics already! [CC]](/img/logo.svg){kind=logo}
