Prologue AND Epilogue? Too much??

I did it in my first book, and no one ever complained. I hear a lot of people saying that 'readers skip prologues/epilogues' but to be quite frank that's not been my experience. Why would a reader want to ignore a chunk of writing that they've paid for? Especially if it's exciting and well-written. Most readers that write or email an author are begging for more details, wanting to know everything that they can about the story, world and characters. They want to know what colour Howl's hair was when he was a baby, or what Alanna's wedding dress was like. They don't usually write to say 'Hey, I really wish you'd left that bit out'. If you think both those pieces of writing are necessary and good, keep them in and damn the devil, I say.

I usually skip the prologues and epilogues. I skip the prologues because I want to get to the story. If what's happening in the prologue was really that important, the author would have called it Chapter 1. And if the story is finished, I see no reason to read the epilogue. I"ve never been the sort to read every little thing the author writes.

Writing Jedi said:

Hi!

I wrote my novel with a prologue and an epilogue, but now some aspiring writers that I know have suggested that would be "too much"...as in one or the other would be tolerable but not both.

My prologue is set two years before the main action, and the epilogue is set two years after. I considered both parts essential to the story, and I only made them, um, "logues" instead of chapters because of the time shift from the main story. The prologue is a 10-page scene and the epilogue is a 14-page scene.

So, is there anything wrong with this construction? Better to incorporate at least one into the main body? Does it really matter??

All opinions wanted please!!!

Thanks.

Click to expand...

For my way of thinking, if you have a prologue, you must have an epilogue, or there is no balance. If there's a before the story, there should be an after the story. If you don't need an epilogue for balance, you shouldn't need a prologue. The "prologue" is probably material that can be incorporated into the story itself.

Just a thought. Is the prologue really essential knowledge that must be in the reader's mind prior to the reading of the main story or is it simply information that you as the writer needed to keep in mind as you wrote the story, and which could therefore be referred to or fed in as the story unfolded?

Shadow_Ferret said:

I usually skip the prologues and epilogues. I skip the prologues because I want to get to the story. If what's happening in the prologue was really that important, the author would have called it Chapter 1. And if the story is finished, I see no reason to read the epilogue. I"ve never been the sort to read every little thing the author writes.

Click to expand...

There are certainly many bad and inappropriate prologues out there, but it really doesn't work at all teh way you think. Something can be incredibly important, but not be right as chapter one because it's pre-story, and the surest way to get a rejection is to make chapter one pre-story. It's almost a guaranteed rejection, and at the very best a certain request for a rewrite.

No one can force a reader to read a prologue, but it's just wrong to think if something is important it should be called chapter one. That would be horrible structure, an inappropriate opening to the story, and a sure rejection. Real prologues cannot be called chapter one, but they can be vitally important to understanding what the story is all about.

Real prologues and real epilogues can be vital to understanding some stories, but if you don't read them, you'll never have a clue what you missed, or what you don't know about the story that you should know.

Jamesaritchie said:

For my way of thinking, if you have a prologue, you must have an epilogue, or there is no balance. If there's a before the story, there should be an after the story. If you don't need an epilogue for balance, you shouldn't need a prologue. The "prologue" is probably material that can be incorporated into the story itself.

Click to expand...

An excellent point. What the need for a prologue generally means is that something important and worth writing about happens outside the main arc of the story - and in that case there are likely to be other important events worth writing about which occur after the finish of the story proper (for instance, the evil stepmother is defeated, the enchanted prince freed from the spell and the kingdom saved...but does the heroine ever get to see her father and her home again?).

To be honest, I too skip prologues and epilogues. I go straight in there and read the story. I always think that if the author can't manage to include all the information needed for a good story within the story itself, then they aren't a good writer. I also want an ending to the story. So also skip the epilogue.

Chickenchargrill said:

To be honest, I too skip prologues and epilogues. I go straight in there and read the story. I always think that if the author can't manage to include all the information needed for a good story within the story itself, then they aren't a good writer. I also want an ending to the story. So also skip the epilogue.

Click to expand...

The point of a prologue and epilogue (if they are used appropriately) is that they are part - a vital part - of the story. Just because they don't have the word 'CHAPTER' emblazoned across the top, why would you think they're somehow disconnected, useless? Yes, a lot of writers in the past have used them as info-dumps, but then a lot of writers have written books which were full of info-dumps anyway. That didn't make me give up reading books completely, so nor should the odd badly concieved prologue or epilogue make anyone give up reading them completely.

I can tell you this, if the writer HAS used a prologue and epilogue as they should be used, chances are that by not giving them a chance you're missing out on something that would have enriched and deepened your enjoyment of everything that came after and before. Who is the loser? Not the writer, I'm afraid. It's you.

The prologue should be an introduction, setting the scene, telling the reader what came before the actual story. An epilogue should be what happens to the characters after the story. But the story itself should be contained in the middle and it's the story I buy the book for

Having thought about it, I can't remember the last book I read with either anyway. Other than fantasy books.

Writing Jedi said:

Hi!

I wrote my novel with a prologue and an epilogue, but now some aspiring writers that I know have suggested that would be "too much"...as in one or the other would be tolerable but not both.

My prologue is set two years before the main action, and the epilogue is set two years after. I considered both parts essential to the story, and I only made them, um, "logues" instead of chapters because of the time shift from the main story. The prologue is a 10-page scene and the epilogue is a 14-page scene.

So, is there anything wrong with this construction? Better to incorporate at least one into the main body? Does it really matter??

All opinions wanted please!!!

Thanks.

Click to expand...

Of course, this may be me but the idea of someone telling you not to write a prologue or epilogue for your story because they don't like it is kinda like someone telling you not to write about strong female protagonists or not to have a person of color in your story because they don't like it.

Go out and look at published books in the same genre you're writing. If they contain prologues and/or epilogues then obviously it should be OK. Whether or not it's done right is another question entirely and will be answered by beta readers, an agent, an editor and ultimately by the buying public.

Good luck in whichever path you decide to follow...

I guess I've never come across a "good" prologue. They've always seemed like an after thought, or for a place for the writer to throw in this sledgehammer-like foreshadowing. Garbage that never made sense until AFTER I finished the book.

Nor have I come across a good prologue that didn't seem like "And then after all that Bill went on to become a successful plumber, always remembering his adventure fondly."

Chickenchargrill said:

The prologue should be an introduction, setting the scene, telling the reader what came before the actual story. An epilogue should be what happens to the characters after the story. But the story itself should be contained in the middle and it's the story I buy the book for

Click to expand...

The story is what happens to the characters. Whether it happens to them in neat little sections called 'chapters' or neat little sections called 'prologues' is surely irrelevant. And the trend for using a prologue merely to scene-set is the reason they have gotten a bad name - but it is not the correct use of that particular literary device.

Also, forgot to mention that yes, I do read to a schedule. I have two young children that take up much of my time. So if I do get chance to read a book at all, it has to be read within an evening or two.

That's not to say that you shouldn't have a prologue and epilogue in your book.

Mr. Poopy Pants said:

That just sounds like a massive generalization to me, man.

Bottom line, if they work, keep them, if not, toss them.

Click to expand...

Brava!

For more on this interesting subject, see what was discussed previously on these threads:

http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=30791&highlight=prologue


http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17402&page=1&highlight=prologue


http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25040&page=1&highlight=prologue


For those who find themselves skipping prologues, I recommend you go straight to Chapter Seven, and then Chapter Sixteen. I have found these to be commonly the most important chapters, and doing this will limit the amount of troublesome reading you have to do.

Sounds like you feel rather stringly about your eppi and pro. If they are essential and you feel they are nessesary, keep them. You are the writer and as such you know what needs to be said to truly complete your story and fully exress the themes. There are no rules! Muhahahaha! However, it sounds as if people skip around sometimes. This isn't because epilouges and prolouges are worthless. They can be extremely valid and important....if tyhe writer knows what he/she is doing. Since there is a lot of horrible stuff on the shelves and several writers put in eppis and pros for the sake of just doing it or do it poorly because they treat it like a seperate entety from the book (which you shoulld never do, the book must be treated like a whole including all the little eppis and pros) pros and eppis have a bad name and people skip them. So, since these sound like relevant pieces, keep them. Even call them epilouges and prolougues if you want to, but to avoid skippage you may want to just call them chapter one and chapter....one number after your current last chapter number. Now I feel like writting my opinion on prologues and epilogues. Prologues are okay. They give the reader extra information that they often need and can even give the nessesary BANG! at the start of a story. Epilogues annoy me though.

Shadow_Ferret said:

I guess I've never come across a "good" prologue.

Click to expand...

How would you know that if you never bother to read them?

I'm definitely in the "why skip a chunk of a story just because it has the word PROLOQUE at its beginning" camp. If it really bothers you to see that word, write CHAPTER 0 on a piece of masking tape and put it over the word PROLOGUE.

And as for only having a certain amount of time to read ... every book is a different length. Some books with prologues and epilogues are way shorter than others that have neither. Just show the author the respect of reading what he/she wrote the way they want you to read it so that you experience the story the way it was intended to be experienced. Then decide if it was good or not.

I certainly agree that putting stuff at the beginning and calling it a prologue when it all could easily have been put in the body of the story, is often lazy writing. This is why I agree with James A. in that prologues and epiloques should be paired. They create a frame for your story. As such, they need to be done properly, and as mentioned upthread, should enrich and deepen the experience of reading the story between them.

As I said, it's been a long time ince I've had a book with a prologue anyway. I think the last one was from a series and the prologues tend to be a catch up on what has gone before. So no need to read them as I've read the previous books anyway.

If it is truly part of the story then call it chapter one because it isn't a prologue. It doesn't matter if there is a time jump or anything, if it is part of the story that's where it belongs.

My novel, if anyone wishes to be picky about meanings, does include a very short introductory event that acts as a hook to the story. It's not a prologue though as it is part of the story, so it sits at the beginning of chapter one.

Showing the author disrespect is giving the book half read to my daughter to rip up and scribble on. Which I have done, because the writing was truly awful. Showing the author disrespect is reading a short amount and never going back to it, because I don't, if I do not have time to finish reading a book in one or two sittings, it gets left and I will never return to it, because that would mean having to reread bits to remember what has happened so far. That is why I dive straight in to chapter one. If the novel has a prologue and I absolutely loved the book and I have the time, then and only then would I return and read the prologue.

Prologue material can go anywhere. I'd suggest putting it into the body of the story after your readers care about it.

Whether or not you personally skip prologues, it's demonstrably true that most readers skip them.

Chickenchargrill said:

If the novel has a prologue and I absolutely loved the book and I have the time, then and only then would I return and read the prologue.

Click to expand...

If I was the author of that book, I would be insulted. If I wanted the reader to read that part after the rest, I would have put it at the end, not the beginning. By reading it out of order, you lose any possibility of experiencing the story as the author intended. If a prologue is done well, the author wants the reader to go through the story with the information imparted in the prologue firmly embedded in their mind. Without that info, it's entirely possible to completely misinterpret the story.

With that said, of course everyone is free to read a book in any manner they want. You could also watch a movie by skipping the first scene, then going back and watching that scene after the movie is over. I just personally don't understand why anyone would want to.

Because the first scene of a film, is the first scene of a film. It's a different media.