To prologue or not to prologue

[burgy61]

I just started to read a fantasy book and it has a prologue in it, but the new Stephen King book I bought does not. I am wondering what the pros and cons of prologues are.

[Provrb1810meggy]

I believe the general concession at AW will be not to prologue, because prologues are usually what happens before the story or background information. Most people will think it's best to jump right in. I don't really have an opinion either way.

[Beware_of_Italics]

I know that a lot of people look down on prologues, but then there are those who don't mind at all. Since we can't please everybody, I would write the prologue if your story demands it. To me, the story comes first regardless.

[reenkam]

I think that if the prologue is interesting and gives actual information needed then you should have it. If you're just writing a prologue because you think you'd like one there, because someone said they're nice, or because you just like the idea of writing backstory that's not needed then you shouldn't have it. Sometimes they work, sometimes they don't. But you have to remember to keep them interesting because it would be the first thing the agent/reader reads and it'll still have to hook them into the story.

Oh, and the "you" is general to all writers.....

[Alexandra Little]

Most prologue's I read are either a) bad, b) give information that, while interesting, does not affect the plot, or c) is revealed later in the novel anyway. If it involves your main character and is the start of your story, just put it under chapter one.

[althrasher]

No rule is absolute...although typically I would say no prolouge, my WIP opens with a dream, which is quite forbidden, I think.
Wouldn't sweat it...if it fits, go with it!
(But if a beta says it slows you down, reconsider and see if there's some other way you can plant that info.)

[sassandgroove]

http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=63303&highlight=prologue

http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?p=82529#post82529

http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?p=82533#post82533

http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=49889&highlight=prologue

http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7173&highlight=prologue

http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40106&highlight=prologue

http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35285&highlight=prologue

[sassandgroove]

I usually read Prologues.

I think it was Uncle Jim that said if you need to start the story there, make it your first chapter. I also noticed in in previous discussions some people said they skip prologues, which is incentive enough for me to make it "Chapter One" instead of "Prologue."

[Penguin Queen]

my WIP opens with a dream, which is quite forbidden, I think.

By whom? The national league of publishers? ;)

If the prologue is right for your story and if you write it well, then write it.
Well.

[Sunny7L]

Most prologue's I read are either a) bad, b) give information that, while interesting, does not affect the plot, or c) is revealed later in the novel anyway. If it involves your main character and is the start of your story, just put it under chapter one.I totally agree. Though, I don't believe it's an entirely bad thing, I often wonder why it simply isn't "Chapter One" in the story. And, even when it pulls me into the story I get a little annoyed when "C" it's a spoiler. I don't like reading anything when I already know word-for-word what's coming.

[Alexandra Little]

I totally agree. Though, I don't believe it's an entirely bad thing, I often wonder why it simply isn't "Chapter One" in the story. And, even when it pulls me into the story I get a little annoyed when "C" it's a spoiler. I don't like reading anything when I already know word-for-word what's coming.

Even if it's backstory, I don't like reading it. Think of Lord of the Rings, book and movie. The movie sticks in a prologue because they can do that, and explaining that information the way the characters originally recieve it is not as interesting on screen and would be a drag. And while I'm not saying LotR would be a bad book if Tolkien had used a prologue (he's a master of writing), we still haven't become invested in the characters--we don't care about the story. A movie can afford to pull us along for a few minutes since we've already bought the ticket--a book can't.

And like Uncle Jim said, if the story starts in the prologue, just call it chapter one and get on with it.

[Captain Morgan]

The main reason I have seen on these forums for avoiding prologue is because there are some readers who skip reading them.

I think it's a shame, but that's how it is.

[Stuart Clark]

My current WIP has a prologue.

I didn't make it Chapter one because it is only two pages long (nearly all of my chapters are 10-20 pages long), involves two characters that appear nowhere else in the book but sets the scene for everything that is to follow.

Hence - a prologue.

[Shady Lane]

I'd say if you're at all on the fence--don't do it.

[reenkam]

Epilogues usually confuse me a little...since time passes but I never know just how much...but they're fun, otherwise. It's like when you watch a TV show and there are credits, but then a little bit more of the show post-credits. It happens in movies sometimes, too.

[lfraser]

I honestly don't understand why some people don't read prologues. What's that all about? I mean, why not skip chapter three, as well? Or the second paragraph of every page? If a prologue is only two pages long, and it's part of a book that you're interested in reading, why would you not read it?

And if a prologue is integral to your story, why would you hesitate to write it?

[Captain Morgan]

I have never, ever skipped reading a prologue. I don't plan to either, as some authors put important things in there. I don't need to get even more confused than I already do with some of the sci-fi novels out there.

I have skipped the footnotes now and then, when the writer insists on filling each page with one and they do nothing for the story...

[blacbird]

The Fantasy genre is more heavily infected with the prologue virus than any other. There seems to be a philosophy that, if you're building fantasy worlds, you need to do some explaining before you start telling your story. 90% of the time, at least for beginning writers, it's a mistake. Frankly, I can't recall reading a prologue that gave me anything that couldn't have been provided within the context of the main story, but some good writers get away with it by being . . . well . . . good.

Mostly, as a reader, I don't much like 'em.

caw

[san_remo_ave]

I'll read a prologue, but for the most part I can live without them. They're used quite frequently in romances, but they're usually something that I would have learned in the main story anyway.

It's as if the author is afraid that Chapter 1 isn't compelling enough to grab the reader, so they plop in an extra-tantalizing-tidbit. It's usually distracting and when it's not, I wonder why it wasn't just treated as Chapter 1....

Me, I don't use them.

[Varthikes]

I've got a prologue in my current WIP that tells an event that happens about half a year before the timespan of the rest of the story, but is significant for the story.

[Toxic_Waste]

I am about 50-50 on reading or not reading prologues. I usually skim through them to see if they look tolerable. If there is "something important" in there the author put in for readers to know, then why not work it into the chapters? I guess it's just a style thing, but I have yet to read one that I liked. I always have to force myself to keep reading.

I would not use the technique.

[Carmy]

I have a prologue in one WIP which takes place 20 years before Chapter One. The MC wasn't born at the time. Readers can ignore the prologue if they like, but they'll miss out on a lot of links to it by what the MC does.

Personally, I always read prologues, and I sometimes find them a more interesting read than the chapters. Probably because the writing is frequently more concise.

[Dawnstorm]

I always read prologues.

I've never read a bad prologue in a good book.

I've never read a good prologue in a bad book.

Has anyone here an example of a bad prologue in a good book?

[Bufty]

Here we go round the mulberry....:snoopy:

I'm getting a strange deja-vu feeling with this thread. Try the Search function above for Threads with Prologue in them. I think the last - and as normal with this topic - inconclusive one was only a couple of weeks ago.

[NiennaC]

I said it on this thread (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1391734#post1391734), and I'll say it again. I love the prologue! I think if your story revolves around something that's happened in the past, it's the best way to avoid info. dumping later on.

[Prawn]

I like em! I vote Obama and Prologue in 2008!

[blacbird]

I said it on this thread (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1391734#post1391734), and I'll say it again. I love the prologue! I think if your story revolves around something that's happened in the past, it's the best way to avoid info. dumping later on.

So, an info-dump right up front is preferable to an info-dump later on?

caw

[NiennaC]

So, an info-dump right up front is preferable to an info-dump later on?

caw

No. I'm saying, instead of giving the info. in a dump, you can write out the scene that's being referred to like a regular story and put it in the prologue so people can be there, see it, read it, and not have it told to them through another character. This is the best way, in my opinion, to do this, except for flashbacks. That way, you can reference it just enough so the reader knows your character's learned what's going on, but not so much that it becomes a dump, because the reference is enough now, since the reader knows what's going on from the scene in the prologue.

[blacbird]

If it works, great. It's just been my experience that once an info-dump, always an info-dump, and prologues are notorious places for finding such. Hence the recommendation made by many that the relevant information be "feathered in" to the story at appropriate moments, rather than slathered on in one place, regardless of where that place is.

My experience with manuscript review and critiquing has also been that, commonly, half or more of the information presented in a prologue is irrelevant, and can be done without altogether. That can be difficult for a writer to see if it's all set up at the beginning, where it has the appearance of being a foundation for what follows.

caw

[ORION]

My editor and agent love my prologue and epilogue

[Captain Morgan]

In my current book, the protagonist is having a dream. So I put this in the prologue, NOT the first chapter. Now... in the every end of the book, it ties into the dream, which is at the very front.

The only problem, is if some reader decided to skip the prologue that I laid out for him... then he'll be somewhat confused...

[Roger J Carlson]

Of the last 4 books I bought (this week), 3 had Prologues. They were published by Ace, Baen, and DAW. So some people are doing it successfully.

[funidream]

First book coming (Berkley/Penguin Spring of 2008) has both a prologue and an epilogue.

The WIP (which Berkley bought based on a synopsis) also begins with a prologue.

I think a well-crafted prologue can be a great, simple and exciting way to expose a complicated backstory.

I don't understand why anyone would skip a prologue. If there was no prologue, would you skip Chapter 1?

[Little Red Barn]

I always read the prologue.

[blacbird]

I just had a thought on prologues that hadn't occurred to me before. Perhaps it's been expressed by others elsewhere, but I'll throw it out for consideration here.

I wonder if the really bad prologues I've objected to got to be the way they are because they were written first, before the actual story was written. It occurs to me that a prologue ought to be about the last thing you write, only after the story itself has been set down. That way, the writer knows what is relevant to put in the prologue.

caw

[Joni Holderman]

I think you need to ask yourself "What purpose does my prologue serve?"

If the answer is, "It's essential information that the reader needs, and can't get anwhere else" then you keep it.

If the answer is, "It's not absolutely essential, but it's interesting back story" than you ditch it.

The worst reason to keep any scene, including a prologue, is "I wrote it and I like it."

I think mystery and thriller writers often use the prologue to establish the stakes of the conflict.

For example, the prologue will be a murder/torture scene, perhaps told from the criminal's point of view. The rest of the novel is about a young girl fleeing this criminal. Used in this way, the prologue lets the reader know exactly what the girl's fate will be, if she is caught. That dramatically increases the novel's tension.

[Joni Holderman]

I wonder if the really bad prologues I've objected to got to be the way they are because they were written first, before the actual story was written. It occurs to me that a prologue ought to be about the last thing you write, only after the story itself has been set down. That way, the writer knows what is relevant to put in the prologue.

caw

Well, I hope not. Because any decent writer is going to go back through the novel and examine every scene (in fact, every word and sentence) to see if it makes the whole better. And, discard anything that doesn't.

So the fact that they wrote it first is no excuse.

[julie thorpe]

I confess I'm a little bemused by this whole prologue issue. How can anybody say prologues are not acceptable when any number of current published novels have them? So there are plenty of prologues currently getting past both agents and editors.

Anyway,surely, applying a blanket rule like this is a bit like saying 'all Chinese people look the same" (or some other sweeping generalisation). There may be a grain of truth in it at the most superficial level (skin color, hair color, eye shape or whatever) but at any deeper level it is nonsense. It seems to me that if a reader's appreciation of a story is enhanced by a prologue, then a prologue is fine. If not,not. Simple as that, surely?

Just a further observation. I have been noticing the number of times it has been said on AW that prologues are a no-no. But only a few weeks ago an agent I was in contact with recommended the novels of a certain best-selling writer as being what 'the market' was looking for, so I bought a bunch of them to read and analyse. And guess what? Every single one has a prologue--and plenty of the dreaded 'info-dumps' as well. And even, now and again, the even more dreaded backstory.And again guess what? -- the books were great reading, the characterisation lively, conflict cleverly sustained, and the denouements satisfying.

It wasn't until the second analytical reading that I realised how many so-called rules the author had 'broken' . . . and before anyone says that genius is allowed to break all the rules, yes, they were good tales--but not as great as all that!

[burgy61]

Wow, thank you all for your posts. I apologize for not doing a search first , but I will get the hang of this yet. My prologue is set in the future and chapter one starts out threes years prior to the prologue. Chapter one starts out with a political debate on weather or not to bring our troops home from Iraq, a little slow. I am hoping that the prologue will entice the reader to want to know how we got to that point.

[blacbird]

Julie, the same way anybody can say that every single last element of style, composition, length, voice, content, mood or anything else is "unacceptable".

I don't think anybody said prologues were "unacceptable". The major point from those of us who have made cautionary comments is that they are often unnecessary, often excuses for superfluous info-dumps, or just plain clumsy ways of story set-up that could be done better within the main narrative. My comments were mainly directed at prologues I've seen in unpublished manuscripts rather than published work by well-known writers.

caw

[Anthony Ravenscroft]

As one writer said to a group, "Go ahead & repeat the mantra, 'Steve King does it! Steve King does it!' Because the fact of the matter is that you're not Steve King, & it's unlikely that you will ever become Steve King, but when you do then maybe you'll be able to get away with what Steve King gets away with. Until then, you're just whining when you should be working."

Beginners often abuse prologues & all other noncore matter -- epilogues, maps, cast-lists, timelines, biographies, quotes from songs & other books (real & imaginary) -- just as they tend to abuse adjectives, pronouns, punctuation, grammar, spelling...

Therefore it doesn't seem much of a stretch to hope they'll work on learning to write rather than taking the ol' crutches out for yet another hobble around the trailer park.

[Scribhneoir]

My prologue is set in the future and chapter one starts out threes years prior to the prologue. Chapter one starts out with a political debate on weather or not to bring our troops home from Iraq, a little slow. I am hoping that the prologue will entice the reader to want to know how we got to that point.

Instead of trying to use a prologue to divert attention from chapter one and generate reader interest, I think you'd do better to work on livening up the first chapter. Handled right, a debate offers plenty of opportunities for creating tension and conflict and even a sense of foreboding.

I've got nothing against prologues as a reader or a writer, but they need to justify their existence by being something more than sleight-of-hand covering up a dull beginning.