Why am I doing this again?

[mrissa]

[Poll #1757672]

Comments

[swan-tower.livejournal.com]

I quite like story notes, but I like them to go at the end of the collection, where they won't prejudice me about the story before I read it. (And if they're boring, I can ignore them without trouble.)

[buymeaclue.livejournal.com]

I like this, too.

A bad set of extra material is much, much worse than nothing. But no extras at all tends to leave me feeling vaguely left out.

[netmouse.livejournal.com]

Right - either at the end of the collection, or possibly right after the story. Only rarely have I read "intro" notes that I felt added something positive.

On the other hand, I think an editor's introduction to the whole anthology or collection is really valuable, and adds to the professionalism and the experience. I might read it after I read the stories, but I like for it to be there.

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

So to be clear: if a long-standing major print publisher chooses to have the author or a fellow author introduce the collection instead of the editor, that feels less professional to you on average?

[netmouse.livejournal.com]

hmm...

If it's a single author collection, it's fine to have either the author or a fellow author write the intro.

If it's an anthology, I really like to get an intro from the editor, to get the "this is what we did and how and why backstory. But then, I'm an historian, so I'm more interested in backstory than in third-party literary analysis, which is what I think I more often see if it is someone else writing the intro.

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

Ah. I tend to distinguish verbally between "collection" and "anthology," so I'm only asking about single author collections here.