BOOK-A-HOLICS discussion

I think epilogues are alright and will read them if the book was good, but I detest introductions, unless they're employed, in essence, as a first chapter or an extension of the story/body of the book. If it's 50-some pages to prep the reader, and for the author to give histories and explanations ... no, no, no. I believe the body of the book should be able to stand on it's own.

Would you say introductions, epilogues, and the likes, are an equal part of the book or a separate entity? Do you consider them useful or an annoyance?

Do you read them faithfully? Never? Or does it depend?

Are there any introductions or epilogues, in books you've read, that have stood out to you as indispensable to the book?

I must be honest here and say that on the rare occassion that I read the forward of a book;it has less to do with the content of the forward and more to do with the fame of its writer.

I usually begin reading forwards and/or introductions, and then I continue or discontinue based on how interesting they are. If they concern historical details, research insights, what parts are fiction and what parts aren't, or interesting author background, I usually finish them. I almost always read and finish an epilogue and/or afterword because I love knowing what happened next, and you get an idea whether or not there will be a sequel.

Every single word! If the author felt it wasn't pertinent, it wouldn't be there.

I know prologues are no longer in vogue, but there are times when one is necessary to set up a story-line, arouse curiosity, or otherwise contribute to the whole. I want the full impact of what the author has to offer. The prologue and epilogue tell me more than I would otherwise know about the circumstances, characters or nuances of the story.

And as a writer myself, the Acknowledgments are especially helpful in providing a behind-the-scenes accounting of the story's development: the research, sources, contributors ... agent, editor and publisher ... and the author's reasoning in matters. It's one of my favorite parts of a book!

I normally start reading them but if it is nothing about the story then I skip it. Otherwise I like books that start with chapter 1.

I only read the Forward if it's written by someone I'm very familiar with, and very interested in.
I always read the prologue/preface and epilogue, though! They're part of the story -- might as well be called the first and last chapters, as far as I'm concerned.

I usually always attempt to read the Forward, most of the time I find them uninteresting and just end up skipping them. I usually always read the prologue and epilogue as they are part of the story. The aknowledgements I usually skip unless they happen on the rare occasion to be interesting.

What exactly are we talking about? A prologue or forward by the book's author? In that case, yes, I will read it. But I skip introductions by others - yet, I will generally read them afterwards.

The main reason is because, more than once, I got burned. There is nothing I hate more than some lofty critic writing an introduction and giving away the ending. Last time it happened was with 'Grapes of Wrath'. I read the intro and some genius spends two pages describing the significance of the closing scene.

I'm with Veljiko on this one, if the book's author has written then yes I will read it but too many times I've read an introduction by someone else and it's either completely spoiled the ending or has made me so bored that I don't want to carry on. If the original author wanted me to know their entire life history or the entire background as to why/where the book was written they would have included it.

Personally I think that kind of detail and analysis should be published in separate volumes so those that are interested can read them while those of us who just want to enjoy the book aren't stuck with pages of text we wont read (would save so much space on my shelves if I could get rid of the intros in my classic volumes)

I tend to read it all. I am of the opinion that the epilogues, prologues and all that jazz was supplied for a good reason (other than to bore the reader to death in most cases). I have often found them superfluous but sometimes the epilogues happily answer some questions that the end of the novel itself failed to do.

I do prefer it if the book's author has written it themselves (as stated above in other posts)as often a third party (or is that second party?) gets the whole thing messed up. Interpretations are best left unwritten unless they are from the author or confirmed by the author.

I just started reading the Book of pirates by Henry Brooke. His preface starts:

"It is customary to introduce a preface in books, and it is the privilege, and mostly the custom, of readers to pass it by unnoticed. Hence the necessity of a preface, and hence the inutility of one."

I was somehow surprised to find that the habit of skipping prefaces is not a novelty to be attributed to the shortened attention span often associated with the stress and speed of modern life...

I usually don't read the intro/forward or anything like that but any epilogue or things like that at the end I will pretty much read.

I highly doubt I can say I have truly read a book from cover to cover.

If it written by the author as a part of the book I will always read it as I begin the book. If it a literary commentary, I will wait until after I've read the book as I now realize that sometimes there are spoilers in those introductions. I won't say that I always read them...it depends on how excited I am by the book, or if the the introduction/whatever is interesting.