Note to writers of footnotes everywhere: just because you CAN, doesn't mean you SHOULD.

[lauraredcloud]

After I complained when the footnotes TOTALLY SPOILED ME for a plot development in Can You Forgive Her?, my mom recommended that I do what she does, which is not to flip to the notes during the book, but to read them all at the end. That way you get any interesting historical notes, but you don't have the experience of being like, "Well, that was a waste of a flip," and if they stay something like "This is foreshadowing for two chapters from now when Lord Dealywhatsit snaps and totally unexpectedly goes on a murderous rampage!" (NOT A REAL EXAMPLE), you won't be ACTIVELY ANGRY at them. (I mean, why would you do that?! You gotta figure at least a percentage of the people reading the book--more than half, I would hazard--are reading it for the first time!)

(Also, you don't need to point out foreshadowing! Jerks!)

Well I just finished Eustace Diamonds on the bus this morning and I was reading the notes and they SPOIL ME FOR SOMETHING AT THE END OF THE NEXT BOOK


WHYYYYYYYYY


(why) 

Comments

[rakafkaven.livejournal.com]

I think you mean endnotes. Footnotes are at the bottom of the page that references them (except when they spill over onto multiple pages). Footnotes are generally inoffensive and often delightful. Endnotes are all together at the end of the book. Endnotes are a pustulent abomination upon the face of every delicious cake in the world.

[forelyse.livejournal.com]

It's sort of like how I went to the House website to see if I could watch the episode I missed yesterday, and they already had all the results and spoilers on the front page.

[laura-redcloud.livejournal.com]

oooh I better avoid that. I haven't seen it yet.

Laura!

[sliceydicey.livejournal.com]

Laura, don't you know that only tawdry fiction relies on cheap surprises to give you your thrills? If the novel or show were REALLY good, you could know exactly what happens going in and it wouldn't detract from the experience or the message in the least! In fact, it would add to the experience since you wouldn't be overly distracted by pesky emotions or expectations! You could view the work as the author intended, with a cold and analytical eye for the truth.

As an example, consider Soylant Green. We all knew that Soylant Green was made out of people going in, but it just made the experience all the more rich and poignant as we patiently watched Charlton Heston stripped of first his friend then his dignity and finally a reliable and delicious source of food until his only recourse was a sort of "silent scream" as he thrust his hand into the air in remembrance (or perhaps defiance?) of former times.

For these reasons I never pass up an opportunity to discuss the plot of the final Harry Potter book with people who haven't read it yet. Besides, those people are morons anyway.

Re: Laura!

[laura-redcloud.livejournal.com]

Well, I re-read books routinely, so I don't rely on the surprise to enjoy the book (actually I often like them better the second time), but I still want to have ever had the experience of reading it without knowing what is going to happen. There's a difference between knowing exactly what will happen and how awesome it will be (because you read it before) and sort of knowing some of the facts of what will happen but not having EARNED that knowledge (because someone told you).

As a Writer (brag), I do sometimes put moments of revelation in my stories which I expect the unspoiled reader to find more badass than the spoiled one.