I'm sure this has been discussed often here but it just makes me really mad how the Introduction sections in most books work flawlessly as a post-reading piece, rather than the actual fucking introduction. I have so many times read an introduction to a book which gives away later plot developments. At that point I don't even know the characters, but now it's in my head that so and so character, whenever I get to meet him/her, will eventually land up in that described situation, and go *ahh, so that's what the intro was talking about. *
Admittedly it makes me angrier than most I think because I have OCPD (so I must read books in even, chronological sittings and chunks, I don't want to get into it here but I have posted about this in the past) but even so the practice is BIZARRE to me and I hate it.
Even when the introduction doesn't explicitly give away the plot developments, it talks to the reader like someone who has already read the book and is looking for more academic, consolidated information about it. What gives?
Any time I read "With an introduction by insert other famous author" I automatically roll my eyes, and have to train myself to skip it and come back to it after I've read the book. It doesn't even serve the purpose of introducing anything.
by AUsernameIsBornToday