Wade writes:

I haven't read the original short-story; it would be illuminating to see how it compares to the novel.

Naah, it's too late for that, for you.

Because I suspect once you have absorbed the longer version, you won't be able to see the shorter in the same way as you would if you hadn't. That's why I wrote, specifically: "maybe one would have had to read the short first" -- that last word being so significant that I should perhaps have emphasised it.

This is just a guess, but I *think* it works the same way as with films based on books: If you see the film first, the book is "ruined" for you; you'll never quite be able to get what's so great about it.