In this kewl comment, the writer basically said, 'Don't decide a book is "wrong" until you've rehd all its appendices and prologues."

I agree with that, but some people don't know where to find all the appendices and/or wouldn't bother to read them if they could find them; and you can't open all the books ... sure, you can wait for the key to open them or wait for them to open themselves; but we are 'given a limited amount of time on this planet ...

Also, most books are members each of their 'type' of book ... e.g. a Romance, a Science-Fiction, a Murder-Mystery, or a Political Comedy. And "when you've rehd one [type of book], you've rehd them all."

We all know that's not true about most 'types of books,' but the fastest explanation of things is usually worth more to a person than investing the time to examine the things' full content—if I see a Poetry Collection on the library shelf, I look at it and say (without even opening it), "A bunch of inspired words; some rhyme, some don't rhyme ... yawwwn," and then seek out the hottest librarian I can find.

Librarians: they may not work much on their bodies, but they inherently know how to use them to the greatest-possible wonderfulness. And I don't mean "you have to work for a library to know how to use your body well." I mean, 'people with the power to become librarians–people with-reading, -writing, -organizing, and -"serving the cause" on their minds—super-kewl writers." One superkewl writer I know only reads textbooks, only watches movies that may teach her something, because all the rest will only show her things that she could imagine without any help, 'teach' her things she already knows. And how does she decide to read or not to read? Looking at the Cover.