posted
I was reading through some of the old posts in the 'Fragments & Feedback' section and noticed a few comments saying that they weren't sure whether their story should have a prologue or not.
I am unclear on how you know whether it's right to have a prologue or not. Same goes for an epilogue.
How do you know whether to include these or not? Are there set rules or is it just down to taste?
posted
It's a matter of taste, to some degree. In my case, I'm using a prologue because I have a snippet of action that is relevant to the rest of the story, but is not the main story itself. This event, however, triggers the rest of the events in the story and I decided to show it.
Prologues are considered by some readers to be "throw-away" scenes, so make sure the information matters. Too many writers use the prologue it as an excuse for an infodump.
While I personally usually read the prologue, I've seen a lot of people comment here on Hatrack that they never do. I read Tad Williams' book "Shadowmarch", didn't read the prologue--it was heavy infodump on the background of the world, and I wanted to get into the meat of the story with the characters. For that particular book, I never felt I missed anything by not reading the prologue, and as a writer that is a bad thing. If the info really doesn't contribute something valuable to the story, in MY opinion you should simply leave it out.
I always like Epilogues because if I've stuck with a book to the end, I hate putting it down... an epilogue is sort of a wind-down to make sure the characters are all settled.
posted
I agree. A good many prologues are used just to give the history of some world, or demonstrate its magic, or hint at dark nefarious nasty-meanness going on in the shadowy underworld that will of course boil to the surface and spawn chocolate thieving goblins in the third chapter (so the reader knows where they came from...which of course spoils the whole surprise). Why give that info away? Personally I've tried to avoid having prologuish scenes. And even if I have that first scene that revolves around events distant from my main character/protag..so long as that scene is still significant and is actually moving the story forward, why can't it just be titled Chapter One? If you've got a lot of history and world-building and such that you want in the book, consider making it on of those appendices at the end, something the reader can flip to if they want, and don't have to feel obligated to read just so they can understand the world they are delving into.
As for epilogues...the only warning there is if they draw out too long. Yes, it's good to have closure, but if too much air is let out, then the story will end flat.
posted
The only set rule I can think of is this: If you have a prologue, you must essentially hook the reader TWICE. Once to get them interested in the prologue and then to get them interested in the novel itself. Prologues are set apart in same way -- time, distance, or POV are some I can think of off the top of my head.
I would agree that you should never use a prologue as an excuse for an infodump and I would not read a prologue that is a pure history of the world. Prologues must be inherently interesting.
I remember that OSC doesn't like prologues but I'm a little fuzzy on exactly what he said about them.
I think that nowadays you can count on astute fantasy and scifi readers to read prologues and epilogues, but I also think it's wise to repeat any information you have in there at some other point in the novel.
An epilogue, IMHO, is a peak forward for those who are interested enough in the main characters to care. The story should be completely over by the time the epilogue takes place and no new information relevant to the main plot should happen there. But, for example, let's say you had a romance subplot and the took hooked up near the end of the novel (and it should be resolved, mind, by the real end of the novel), then you could have a prologue that takes place one year later with the happy couple standing over an infant...I don't know, maybe someone else can disagree with me but that's the sort of thing I expect in an epilogue
posted
One person's prologue is another person's chapter one.
I have written at least one story that starts with the Epilogue and ends with the Prologue. It's also in first person present tense.
It has, of course, been rejected three times.
Broadly, I have to agree with much of what's been said here. If the "prologue" is just infodump to give your reader the ground rules and background of the world... then you're not doing your job properly. Until the reader has something ro someone to care about, why do they want to read 1000 years of ancient history? Find better ways to get the information to the reader. Drip-feed it, hither and yon, in conversations or documents or flashbacks or footnotes or just about anything other than a prologue.
But that isn't the only type of prologue. There are prologues that (usualy with epilogues) serve as a shell, add context to the story that's between them. They can stand "outside" the main story, and yet be integral to it, or illuminate it in such a way as to give it greater resonance, greater meaning.
Hard to describe, but it's kind of a "you know it when you see it" thing.
posted
I never skip the prologue, but if it's unreadable, that means I'll never read your book.
The only exception to this rule is when I'm giving feedback and I need to know whether I should tell the reader to cut the prologue or just that the whole thing is junk. But that's the same condition under which I'll skip anything else, like a first chapter.
I believe that it's the writer's responsibility to put the best foot forward. If you put something in the prologue, then it better be something that I'll enjoy so much that it makes me want to read the rest of your book. I don't care what you put at the top of your first page, if you (and not somebody else) wrote it, then it better convince me that you're a good writer.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
