Um, authors try to "hook" you. That means, in their metaphor, you are a fish who can't escape because their hook is in your mouth. If you like being hooked, great! If you're not enjoying a book but you need to know the finish . . . read the finish.

The Blurb: Ugh

You can read the blurb and know if it's the type of book you like. You can read the blurb and see if it's interesting.

If that works for you, great.

BUT MOST BLURBS DETRACT FROM YOUR READING EXPERIENCE! Really. The blurb is not designed to improve your enjoyment of the boo; it's designed to hook you. The publishers will do anything they can to get you to read the book.

That includes being misleading. I do sometimes read the blurb after I have read the book. Sometimes it's just an error -- the person writing the blurb of course did not read the book, and apparently the author did not read the blurb.

Blurbs also (often) tell you things you should not know. Think "spoiler". Really, the blurb does not have your best interest in mind; it has the publisher's best interest in mind.

I think a correct statement of the theme/lesson would be harmful in a blurb, as it would give away too much. But, should you find one of those, it is unlikely to be correct.

Evidence, Explanation

The Title: Ugh

One book was titled something like "Don't Use Me". The book was written in third-person. (That's a first-person title.) That ties for worst title with "Shalimar the Clown". Shalimar was an acrobat.

Normally, of course, the title just tells you nothing. Ignore it. Really, you get more out of the color of the book than the title.

Being Contrary

That actually doesn't work well, as a general rule. But it has a certain logic. I have read a book, did not see the point of why it was ever published, and then realized . . . a short description of the book would be interesting; the characters come out flat, but a short description of these characters would seem interesting.

To be very cynical, books get published because they have good titles, blurbs, and starts. If we buy or read books because they have good titles, blurbs, and starts, we are rewarding the publishers for publishing those books.

Prologue

That's rare. Believe it or not, the usual purpose of the prologue is to sell the book. It can (and usually does) undermine your reading enjoyment, by being a spoiler.

One good author, whom I like reading, took the best scene in her book and moved it to the prologue. There, it's still an interesting scene. But the reader doesn't really know what's happening, so it's not a great scene any more.

So she ruined the scene, just to sell her book. I have to say, this scene is also the critical scene in her book; the book turns on this scene. In the actual story, it just gets a sentence.

In another book, which I liked, the prologue is from the middle of the book, about a character's death. Now, the whole book depends on the reader liking this sometimes-difficult-to-like character. That worked for me, BECAUSE I DID NOT READ THE PROLOGUE. Um, if you know a character is going to die, you are not going to attach to that character.

The Immediate Start

Actually Reading the Book

And a critical issue -- how much do you want to be "hooked". Are you reading an uninteresting book only because you want to know the ending?

Endings