Spoilers

Stanley Fish wrote a piece that spoke favorably of THE HUNGER GAMES but it also contained spoilers.

When this was brought to his attention, he defended it by saying only genre needs a surprise at the end to hold the reader's interest. This debate has been raging over at Mulholland Books this week and was picked up by THE GUARDIAN.

I think any book can be spoiled by giving too much away. Not just so-called genre books. If I read history, I expect (sometimes) to know how it turns out. But with fiction, there might be a certain inevitability inherent in the story but that should only go so far. The more I know about how a book ends, the less pleasurable it is. I want the author, not the reviewer, to tell the story. What do you think?