Finding footnotes in genre fiction isn't common, but I'm curious nonetheless about how we all feel as readers when we DO encounter them, for whatever reason.
There seem to be several different ways that footnotes can be used in fiction, with varying degrees of effectiveness.
I've seen footnotes primarily serve as 'asides' by the narrator (in the case of Good Omens, if I recall correctly), and as sources of clarification or orientation directed at either a) the modern reader (I think there's an example of this in Quicksilver), or b) the reader in the fantasy world, if the book is in the form of a history/memoir.
What examples have you seen? Were they effective? Do you wish we could see more footnotes in general, none at all, or only a certain type? Are they totally inelegant, or an overlooked device that's out of fashion?
Posted by halogen (Member # 6494) on :
I think they can be cheesy, but to each their own.
If the author feels strongly about something and wants to point it out as fact they can write it into an epilogue (I believe A SCANNER DARKLY and INDECISION do this).
Posted by annepin (Member # 5952) on :
I recently tried to read Alastor, by Jack Vance. The footnotes there were ridiculous! I felt they were a crutch for not presenting things in a way that was understandable to the rest of us, and that they completely broke the immersion experience.
I have seen asides interspersed in the text. If they are done in the tradition of the omniscient narrator, rather than the author interjecting him or herself, i find that it works. I can't think of an example right now.
In general though, I find this stuff hard to pull off. Nothing like having to go "Huh?", stop reading the story to reference some footnote, and then try to dive back in.
Posted by InarticulateBabbler (Member # 4849) on :
Michael Crichton's Eaters of the Dead has footnotes. The beginning paragraph (Ahmed Ibn Faden's full name) was harder for me to deal with. Most of the footnotes were for historical accuracy. They could've have been skipped or included in the story, though, and worked better.
[This message has been edited by InarticulateBabbler (edited December 28, 2007).]
Posted by Pyre Dynasty (Member # 1947) on :
I dislike footnotes because instead of reading the story I have to worry about whether or not I should read them. When I read I don't see the words unless something forces me to. (instead I see the character's.)
But I have seen them used once where I think it worked. In the Bronze Canticles by Tracy and Laura Hickman. Those books are to be read like history texts, (and I do like reading history texts.)
Posted by KPKilburn (Member # 6876) on :
Did the novel "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" use footnotes? The reason I ask is because the interactive fiction game of the same title used "footnotes", which was rather odd for that genre.
I would think that footnotes could be used effectively, but it would be taking a big chance. I'd see them more effectively used in an epistolary novel (thought I've never actually read one - I did read Dracula years ago, but I didn't recognize it as that type of novel at the time) or perhaps comedy.
Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :
"annepin" mentions Jack Vance---I'd name him King of the Science Fiction Footnote, 'cause nearly every novel of his I've read (but I haven't read all of them) has substantial footnotage, to the detriment of the narrative. It's a shame because he usually has an interesting story to tell and interesting ideas and cultures to share.
(On the other hand, I like footnotes in non-fiction, preferably the back-of-the-book kind, especially the kind that add information not directly in the line of non-fiction narrative. Bruce Catton's Civil War books come to mind in this connection.)
Posted by LCastle (Member # 7363) on :
I was thinking that Hitchhiker's had footnotes too - been awhile since I read it. But it works there because the narrator is in effect a character too, and the footnoting is part of the style..
Posted by Hunter (Member # 4991) on :
In one of the Thursday Next books, Thursday gets stuck in the footnotes, or is only able to speak in footnotes...I need to reread that series. It was used for humorous purposes. I remember getting a sort of vertigo from having to jump down to the footnote section to follow what was going on.
Posted by lehollis (Member # 2883) on :
As with many elements of genre fiction, I think they could be used to good effect if done right. Done right, to me, means that there is a good reason for them to be there--and in this case, I'd say a VERY good reason.
Sure, you'd alienate many readers, even agents, right off the bat. However, there is probably a niche of readers who crave that level of detail and information and might love a novel rich with footnotes.
I learn a lot by experimenting. (For example, I wrote a quirky non-genre "literary" piece one day. I didn't think it was good, but sent it off anyway. It wasn't accepted, but the editor said, "This one was close" and said they read it twice before deciding. That's better than I expected.) So, back to my point ... even if footnotes aren't the most effective thing, it might be worthy of an experimental try to see how it goes. Never be afraid to try something out, once.
Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :
A book with "good" footnotes---Edgar Pangborn's Davy, where some of the other characters chase the narrator across the pages...