Recognising the name afterwards

Text A: an original contemporary practice extract.

At the reading group, we received an opening page without its cover or author’s name. I enjoyed its dry description of a family breakfast and wanted to know what happened next. When the organiser revealed the writer, I recognised someone whose earlier book I had abandoned. I began searching the page for the qualities I had disliked before.

Another reader asked whether the sentences had changed during the announcement. I read them again. My earlier experience was still a reason to be cautious about choosing a whole novel, but it could not honestly replace the response I had just had to this page. I borrowed the book without promising to finish it. The exercise had shown how quickly a name could start doing work that belonged to the words.

Text B: an original contemporary practice extract.

At a tasting evening, the bakery placed small pieces of cake on numbered plates. I chose the lemon one as my favourite. Its label was then turned over, revealing the bakery whose cakes I usually called too sweet. I almost explained my choice as an exception before I had asked what recipe they had used.

The baker said this was a new version, and invited us to taste it again. I still preferred it. That did not prove every cake from the shop would suit me, or make my earlier visits imaginary. It meant the name on this particular plate needed to take its place beside what I had tasted. I wrote a comment about the lemon cake rather than a verdict on the whole shop.

Both texts describe the effects of learning who had produced the work.

What similarities do the effects of learning who had produced the work share in these extracts? Use evidence from both texts to support your answer.