No chapter titles in end-notes

[Moonraker]

We're all entitled to our little quirks, and one of mine concerns books with copious end notes (bibilographical references at the back of the book linked by numbers to the main text). These are given under chapter numbers but more often than not the chapter titles are not given.

When reading the main text I often flick to the back to see the author's source, but then have to check the number of the chapter I'm reading. (OK, I should train myself to check this first.) Whereas if the end notes gave the chapter title as well, all I need to do is to glance at the top of the page I'm reading to guide me to the right entry at the back. Alternatively alongside "Chapter 3" in the notes the publishers could add "(pp46-56)" or whatever.

Or am I just lazy?

[LtColSki USMC0302]

I tend to bounce back and forth between the chapter and the notes section quite a bit. I've found that marking the relevant portion of the "notes" section with a second bookmark makes the "Flip-Ex" a bit more manageable. Personally, I'd prefer that the notes be at the bottom of the page, but with some authors this would eat up half of every page, if not more.

Regards,

~Dan

[swizz]

that drives me mad too! I think in some cases it is just a case of that being the publisher's standard format. Personally if there are a lot of notes I like them to be at the bottom of the relevant page - but you don't see that too often!

Swizz

[Moonraker]

that drives me mad too! I think in some cases it is just a case of that being the publisher's standard format. Personally if there are a lot of notes I like them to be at the bottom of the relevant page - but you don't see that too often!

Swizz

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In the old letterpress days having footnotes at the bottom of the page in a different point size added to the production costs, but today such is the versatility of electronic page composition this shouldn't be a problem. As Dan suggests, too many would intrude. I think that footnotes should be confined to supplementary information that would break up the flow of the main text, with bibiographical references - which can look a bit messy - on their own at the back.

[Steven Broomfield]

I tend to do the same as Dan - have 2 bookmarks. That siad, I'd rather end notes were at the end of chapters, rather than at the end of the book. On the other hand, it's better to have end notes, whatever the trouble, than not have end notes, which is extremely irritating!

[armourersergeant]

i thought it was just me, glad to see i am not alone.

regards

Arm

[spike10764]

I tend to read the back notes last and turn back to scan the chapters they refer to. If it's not reading the book twice, it's like at least 1 1/2 times.......

Maybe I should adopt the two bookmarks system

[Muerrisch]

Footnotes in a smaller point size are much to be preferred.

[armourersergeant]

Footnotes in a smaller point size are much to be preferred.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes where possible this is better as it helps with instant referal to the point being made. I greatly liked the references to Generals in the recent Haig diaries by Bourne and Sheffield at the bottom of the page.

regards

Arm

[Bruce Dennis]

References/notes don't have to be hard work.

The style that I find most comfortable to follow is that used by Diana Weston in her great piece "Wilful Murder" about the sinking of the Lusitania. In the notes section at the end of the book, she has chapter headings and page numbers indexed. She then quotes the opening words of the sentence and gives her source(s).

Naturally her story-telling skill made the difference between success and so-so, but I believe a part of her skill was in choosing such a "friendly" style for imparting the volumes of information contained in her work.

Of course that is just my opinion.

Regards,

Bruce

[Staffsyeoman]

Yup. Add me to the 'no chapter titles in endnotes' deplorer. One way round the lighthouse is the manner of some American academic titles:

"Notes to Pages 27-30" (etc) at the top of each page, and all references sequential.

But one always deplores the lack of an index; better even a bad one than none at all.

[Moonraker]

Perhaps authors who belong to this Forum could make my original point to their publishers: include chapter titles and/or page numbers in end notes?

[Guest]

Footnotes in a smaller point size are much to be preferred.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Totally agree.

[Bruce Dennis]

Thanks, Pals. I am researching a book and have really learned something from your observations. I will make sure the references are plainly labeled and easily understood.

It has made me think about some of the books that seemed to be awkward to get through.

Anything else about the layout or format of books annoy/distract you?

Regards,

Bruce

[Moonraker]

Thanks, Pals.  I am researching a book and have really learned something from your observations.  I will make sure the references are plainly labeled and easily understood.

It has made me think about some of the books that seemed to be awkward to get through. 

Anything else about the layout or format of books annoy/distract you?

Regards,

Bruce

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks, Pals.  I am researching a book and have really learned something from your observations.  I will make sure the references are plainly labeled and easily understood.

It has made me think about some of the books that seemed to be awkward to get through. 

Anything else about the layout or format of books annoy/distract you?

Regards,

Bruce

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Bruce:

1. Allow for lots of "white space". A page full of text with long paragraphs is off-putting to the eye and quite heavy-going. Any quotations longer than, say, 40 words, should be free-standing and indented.

2. Even top publishers seem to be skimping on their editing of text nowadays, so get it read by someone who is reasonably expert in the subject in question and/or someone in the question. Many of us get too close to our subject, and an objective eye can pick out inconsistencies, over-use of a word or phrase, favourite spelling errors (even with PC spellcheck) and allusions that make sense to the writer but not necessarily all other people. (A recent local history referred to a 1960s "bubble car";I can remember these, but do younger people know what it was?)

3. Bear in mind that some of us have poor eyesight, so don't use too small a font for footnotes and the index. I had to use a magnifying glass when reading one book's notes recently.

4. Too many capital letters make for a spotty page. One can't avoid initial capitals for proper nouns, of course, but in one of my favourite books the author often referred to junior officers who went on to high rank and a string of decorations, all of which he listed even though they weren't relevant to the context.

5. I admire the way that Victorian writers could string together long sentences with lots of clauses and phrases (handwritten too, no back-deleting or switching text), but as far as possible keep everything short: words, sentences, paragraphs.

Good luck!

Moonraker

[Bruce Dennis]

Many thanks, Moonraker. I agree with all that you have said, and I am especially sensitive to esoteric references creeping in that assume the reader has the same knowledge as the writer.

On the original subject, that of notes, "The Ship That Changed the World", Dan Van Der Vat 1985, is the best example I know of frustration with the lack of notes spoiling an otherwise brilliant piece of work. The subject matter in many places overlaps what I am working on, and the only insight to the British sources is "...the British papers I used are mostly in the ADM137 series of naval intelligence documents." His summaries of the tangled relationships of the main players prior to WW1 and the nature of their obligations under an ever-evolving set of treaties from the 1870's until the Great War is masterful, but once again, we are simply given a reading list if we want to know more.

I am deeply impressed with the style and content of "Wilful Murder", which I mentioned earlier in this thread.

Thanks again,

Bruce

[Bernard_Lewis]

For 'Swansea Pals' I was not involved in setting font sizes or styles for the main text or footnotes (which appeared at the end of each chapter - maybe a reasonable compromise?) I guess I could have stamped my feet at proof time had Pen & Sword picked a poor font etc. but it seemed fine to me.

We did indent large portions of quoted documents etc.

One area where we didn't perhaps hit the mark was in the list of men at the back of the book - we ended up doing this in very small size as we had to fit it within a pre-arranged book size - the original pages were copied and reduced to fit. That said the listing does give much useful info including NOK names and addresses so worth doing even in reduced form I think.

Bernard

[Moonraker]

We've debated several times whether footnotes or endnotes are preferable, and I could have made the following comments in several other threads.

 

I've just started reading From Blackout to Bungalows by Julie Davis, comprising 650 very full pages about Wiltshire in the Second World War. It's been written to a high academic standard, with 99 pages of bibliographic endnotes, which is the highest proportion of pages that I can remember.

 

Endnote 2 to Chapter 1 is indicated halfway through the second paragraph, which summarises the build up to war and very briefly mentions several theories as to who was to blame for it. Some 140 words later, this paragraph ends with "^{3 4 5 6 7 8 9}", indicating seven endnotes citing Davis's sources for her summary. That's the most scrupulous citing of references I've ever come across!

 

Moonraker

Edited 7 July , 2017 by Moonraker

[charlesmessenger]

As a GWF author, I will in future adopt the style of giving chapter no and pages nos of that chapter. If, however, it is not a large number of source notes, i now put all references as page footnotes.

 

Charles M

[Derek Black]

It seems odd to me to break the flow of a book by jumping to see the sources at the back while you read?

I'm very much in favour of well researched and cited books, however i let the author do their bit first, then pick it over afterward.

What's the thinking, you can chuck it in early if you dislike the source material?

 

Cheers,
Derek.

[Nick Beale]

I don't mind having the notes at the back of the book (despite the wild extravagance of having two bookmarks) but agree wholeheartedly that the headings of the chapters and the associated notes should be the same. It's no good having "Notes to Chapter 9" if the actual pages of said chapter are headed "Into Battle" (or whatever). I don't memorise the number of the chapter I'm reading, so I'm forever flipping back to see which one it is before consulting the notes.

[IRC Kevin]

Sadly, unless you're self-publishing, the publisher's 'house style' rules. My publisher doesn't allow footnotes and although the endnotes in Volume 1 of my trilogy on the King's Own  carried both title and chapter number; in Volume 2, because of a change to 'house style', the chapter headings were removed, leaving just the chapter number. 

Edited 5 July , 2017 by IRC Kevin

[Moonraker]

13 hours ago, Derek Black said:

It seems odd to me to break the flow of a book by jumping to see the sources at the back while you read?...

In the case of the WWII book that I mentioned yesterday, one chapter comprised 62 pages - and had 464 endnotes citing sources! That's an average of more than seven per page! I admire the author's diligence and ability to marshal so many, but the word "overkill" comes to mind - perhaps unfairly?

 

Moonraker

 

[Guest]

Chapters and/or page numbers for notes at the end of a volume seems widespread and useful when reading a book-rather than searching to find the Contents page to get the chapter number, etc.

   One good thing about most Great War publishing is that we have not yet succumbed too much to the curse that is modern "citation"- largely,it seems, an undesirable development by sociologists- probably to cover up that their writing is incoherent and rubbish anyway. eg

 

       General Bloggs went to a staff meeting in Amiens on 23rd October 1917 [Murgatroyd 1986], where Haig told him to get him a whisky and soda [Whifflesnooks 1972]  "Sociologist's citation" is a pain in the derriere which interrupts the flow of reading -and in my humble experience, most of the books that use this abomination are second-rate anyway.

[Michael Pegum]

I think that there should be a distinction between notes or comments on the one hand and citations – the sources of information – on the other.

I prefer the system in which notes or comments are at the foot of the relevant page, indicated by a symbol; Word can do this automatically. If a note is more than a couple of lines long, it should be included in the text.

Citations, indicated only by superscript numbers in the text, should be at the end of the chapter. Some may prefer to have all the citations at the end of the book, in one place, but I don’t see the advantage, and it gives rise to the problem which began this thread.

What is to be deplored is mixing notes and citations, so that checking one reference may simply lead to the book or document cited, while not bothering to go to the back of the book  to check another may mean that an interesting comment is missed.

The worst examples of irritating referencing are usually to be found in theses for higher degrees which have been published as books with little revision for the non-academic reader.

Michael