Help! I’m being pursued by an angry prologue!

[kaku]

As an avid reader, I’ve never been a great fan of prologues. Too often, I’ve found authors using them as a crutch to provide info dumps. At other times, they burden their readers with having to remembering information that isn’t relevant until the reader is half way through the novel. I’ve always felt the reader would be better served if the information was provided in the context of the story.

Now I find myself faced with a dilemma: people whose opinions I respect have suggested that my WIP should have a prologue.


I’m hoping you, my peers, would favor me by sharing your thoughts on prologues. Do you feel they serve a useful purpose? If so, what kind of information can be considered appropriate in a prologue? How long should one consider making a prologue?



Thank you in advance for taking the time to respond.



Regards,



Kaku Kindly

[E.G. Gammon]

I remember someone saying on here a while ago that if the stuff found in a prologue is important enough that the reader should read it, it should be called Chapter One. I never read prologues....

[Liam Jackson]

I think such devices can serve a useful purpose. Stage-setting, back story, introducing keys that give readers the "Oh yeah!" moments, later in the book.

I also think prologues make for convenient dump sites and are easily abused, as you pointed out.

Each story has different needs. Yours may benefit from a prologue. My first novel didn't, and as much as I liked the way it read, I axed it before the printer ink dried. What story ingredient would your prologue supply, that couldn't be added in a chapter?

Edited note: As a general rule, I support EG's comment. Though I always read the prologues, I consider them just another chapter without the number.

[brinkett]

Now I find myself faced with a dilemma: people whose opinions I respect have suggested that my WIP should have a prologue.

Have you asked them why they think you should have a prologue? You might be able to fix whatever's bothering them without a prologue, but you have to understand what the problem is first. As UJ once said, beta readers can usually tell you what's wrong, but not how to fix it.


I’m hoping you, my peers, would favor me by sharing your thoughts on prologues. Do you feel they serve a useful purpose? If so, what kind of information can be considered appropriate in a prologue? How long should one consider making a prologue?

It depends on the purpose of the prologue. Sometimes a prologue is necessary (and can't be chapter one) if it's written from the POV of someone who isn't a character in the book, for example. Prologues that bug me are those that very well could have been labelled chapter one, or those that dump a ton of info that isn't necessary to understand chapter one, or two, or...

[Susan Gable]

Now I find myself faced with a dilemma: people whose opinions I respect have suggested that my WIP should have a prologue.


I’m hoping you, my peers, would favor me by sharing your thoughts on prologues. Do you feel they serve a useful purpose? If so, what kind of information can be considered appropriate in a prologue? How long should one consider making a prologue?

Kaku Kindly

Use how you feel about prologues as a reader to guide yourself if you do write one. Sometimes the story DOES need one. I'm not a huge fan of them myself, but I did use one in my book from last May. I wanted to show the heroine giving birth because the fact that she actually gave birth to this child was a critical part of this story - because you see, the child isn't hers. :)

Chapter one, and the main story, opened almost four years later. Hence why the birth wasn't chapter one, it was a prologue.

You know, you can write a prologue and then later change your mind and chop it back out. :) Write it (or write several <G>) and see if it works or not. Only you and your story can decide for sure.

A prologue can be the sign of a lazy writer. But it doesn't HAVE to be. :) Let your instincts as a reader guide you. (Oh, I hope that doesn't sound too much like "Use the Force, Luke." lol!)

Susan G.

[Jamesaritchie]

As an avid reader, I’ve never been a great fan of prologues. Too often, I’ve found authors using them as a crutch to provide info dumps. At other times, they burden their readers with having to remembering information that isn’t relevant until the reader is half way through the novel. I’ve always felt the reader would be better served if the information was provided in the context of the story.

Now I find myself faced with a dilemma: people whose opinions I respect have suggested that my WIP should have a prologue.


I’m hoping you, my peers, would favor me by sharing your thoughts on prologues. Do you feel they serve a useful purpose? If so, what kind of information can be considered appropriate in a prologue? How long should one consider making a prologue?



Thank you in advance for taking the time to respond.



Regards,



Kaku Kindly

I seldom use prologues, but when one is need, it's needed. If a prologue contains the information it should, and is written as a prologue, rather than as a substitute for chapter one, any reader who skips it is going to be missing valuable information, whether they know it or not. And they'll never know unless they read it.

Some extremely good novels have been written with extremely good and valuable prologues attached. Not all stories need prologues, but some do.

A prologue is a tool, just like any other. If you need this particular tool, then you should use it.

[maestrowork]

My thought is that if the prologue is important, it should have been Chapter One. The only time when I think a real prologue is necessary is when you have to delve in a significant backstory that you just can't integrate into your main story, or non-story-related information (like the history of the world) that would make reading the story more interesting.

[RGame]

If I had never come to this forum, I never would have realized that the simplest things could put off readers. People who never read prologues. Never would have occurred to me in a million years. At another forum I saw people complaining about POVs. "More than four POVs and I stop reading." Again, never would have occurred to me in a million years.

[sunandshadow]

At other times, they burden their readers with having to remembering information that isn’t relevant until the reader is half way through the novel.

Have you considered that maybe this creates suspense? That the author wants the reader to spend the first half of the book wondering how this piece fits into a seemingly unrelated puzzle? Or, it could help soften the shock if the book is one of those which changes focus halfway through by signalling what the true focus is going to be? I have seen some very effective prologues which form the first part of a fairy-tale frame for a more realistic story, or provide a historical context for a story to take place in, like the establishing pan of the landscape in a movie.

The only time a prologue annoyed me is when I really liked the viewpoint character and setting in one and wanted to read about them, but the rest of the book was set years later with a different viewpoint character.

[VOTE_BOT]

.

[maestrowork]

Have you considered that maybe this creates suspense? That the author wants the reader to spend the first half of the book wondering how this piece fits into a seemingly unrelated puzzle?

Then it should be Chapter One. Some people (or many a lot of people, me included) do not read prologues.

For example, in the Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown used a prologue and an epilogue, which should have been Chapter One and the last chapter. I fail to understand why he made them pro/epi-logues. I don't think he understands what they mean.

[RGame]

Why not just pretend the words at the top of the page say "Chapter One" instead of "Prologue?"

Is this the Monk board or something? :)

[sunandshadow]

Writers wouldn't put prologues if they didn't intend them to be read as part of the book. Why would you potentially damage your reading experience by not reading everything the writer presents to you, in the right order?

[maestrowork]

Because you just can't tell the readers what to read and what not to read. That's the reality, folks.

Many readers read everything, even down to the ISBN barcode! But many readers don't read: the copyright page, the dedication, the foreword, the acknowledgement, the prologue, the epilogue... They open the book and go directly to Chapter One -- to them, that's where the story begins.

[Lenora Rose]

Then it should be Chapter One. Some people (or many a lot of people, me included) do not read prologues.

For example, in the Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown used a prologue and an epilogue, which should have been Chapter One and the last chapter. I fail to understand why he made them pro/epi-logues. I don't think he understands what they mean.

There are also readers who would feel betrayed if Chapter One turned out to be 20 years before the rest of the story, or from a different POV. Calling the opening a Prologue is a way to signal that either the POV, or the time, or something, is not the one used in the rest of the book, and to keep that reader from feeling betrayed. There are other ways to do this, but really, Pro- and Epilogues are the easiest.

I wish desperately that people would not abuse prologues by making dry and infodumpy ones, or ones that ultimately don't connect. However, I'm also willing to forgive even a dry infodumpy cruddy horrid prologue (Even if it turns out to be information unnecessary to the reader), if Chapter one starts as a book ought, in a way I would enver forgive a chapter One of the same kind -- because at least I've been forewarned. Although I'd wonder what the editor was thinking not to trim it, (or if the editor tried and the author wrote STET!!!! all over it, just what the author was thinking).

Dan Brown, from what i've been told, messed up most of his writerly stuff. He got the propulsion of Story and Plot right, But nobody yet has recommended his structure or style as exemplary examples.

[Susan Gable]

There are also readers who would feel betrayed if Chapter One turned out to be 20 years before the rest of the story, or from a different POV. Calling the opening a Prologue is a way to signal that either the POV, or the time, or something, is not the one used in the rest of the book, and to keep that reader from feeling betrayed. There are other ways to do this, but really, Pro- and Epilogues are the easiest.
.

Amen, Lenora Rose! Preach it! <G> Obviously I'm of the same opinion when it comes to Prologues - they signal something DIFFERENT from the rest of the story, which is why in the example I gave from my own work, I didn't make it part of Chapter One. Because the rest of the story took place 4 years in the future.

Ray, please tell us what you feel the definitions of prologue & epilogue are. And explain to me why I was wrong to use a prologue in my book. We may never agree <G> (and that's OKAY!) but I'd like to hear your logic. (If your logic is just that some people may not have read the prologue because I called it a prologue instead of chapter one, then I won't agree with that. <G> I'd say, well, then, that reader missed out on something I intended for them to experience.)

Susan G.

[maestrowork]

Susan, my feeling is, there's a place and time for prologues. Like you said, if something is important to the story, and it happened 4 years before the main story starts, and you want to get it out of the way first (without sinking into a long flashback), then yeah, put it in a prologue and be done with it.

The reality is, there are going to be readers who jump to Chapter One immediately. We writers might hope, wish, pray, beg all we want that the readers will read everything, but ultimately, some readers will skip prologues.

Personally, I'd like to keep the flashback to the minimum, or work it into the main story. But I understand sometimes it's just easier to lump the whole thing and put it in a prologue. But if the prologue is SO important and interesting, why not make it part of the main story, even though the timeline/POV is off? Just put it in a separate chapter. Nobody would notice. ;)

Also, if you keep the backstory from the readers until later time, you can build suspense that way: Who are these people? How did it get to be this way?

[rich]

After reading a book and discover a prologue, how could any reader say that they never read the prologue? That's ludicrous...and a bit pretentious.

[Susan Gable]

Personally, I'd like to keep the flashback to the minimum, or work it into the main story. But I understand sometimes it's just easier to lump the whole thing and put it in a prologue. But if the prologue is SO important and interesting, why not make it part of the main story, even though the timeline/POV is off? Just put it in a separate chapter. Nobody would notice. ;)

Also, if you keep the backstory from the readers until later time, you can build suspense that way: Who are these people? How did it get to be this way?

:) Ray, darling, it's not a flashback if it happens first in the story and shows up first in the book. <G> (See, that's one of my big bugaboos - I'm a very sequential person. I HATE flashbacks. The only flash-backy thing that I love right now is the tv show LOST, and I tolerate that because IT WORKS! <G> But my husband walked in on the show one day, and he hard time following it because he didn't know how the writers were telling the story with the flashbacks.)

And I'd notice. lol. But see, this is the wonderful about writing. I can be right AND you can also be right. <G> Because there is no one-size-fits-all set of "rules" for how to do this right, despite what some writers may want, and despite what they may tell other writers. <G> (Personally, besides being sequential, I'm a huge fan of rules, so it took me some adjusting to be able to say this! <G>)

Susan G.

[rich]

Prologue: on that note, my last post was in agreement, (or disagreement) with my nature, and that rich, after rereading his last post, finds that he's still at peace with the world--barring any unforeseen unforeseenity.

[Thekherham]

I don't do prologues... at least I haven't yet.
I start at Chapter I and go to The End.

When I do read a book that has a prologue, I do read it... but that's mainly because I read just about everything in a book. (O.k., I don't read the index.)

[brokenfingers]

As JAR said, prologues are but one of many tools a writer has at their disposal.

Sometimes prologues don't work or are irrelevant - but I've found those to be in the minority. Many stories I've read would be hopelessly skewed without knowing the information the prologue contained.

I'm curious though how someone can read a book and not read the prologue. It is, after all, a part of the story and when done right it can be a very effective part of a story. To me, that's like saying: I never read the fifth chapter.

Hmmm, I don't know - maybe it's me but I think that going into a story without reading the prologue is like going into a cave with only two batteries in your flashlight instead of the required three. But that's just me.

It might be a genre thing too. I think prologues are most rampant in the fantasy field - which would make sense since many cliche fantasies include a prophecy and deal with events that sometimes span thousands of years.

Anyways, my point is that I've seen prologues used very effectively in many genres and they definitely affected the way the story took shape for the reader.

If it works, use it - if it doesn't, don't. If it's integral to your story - by all means put it in, and if a reader doesn't read it and so misses out on the full reading experience you've provided for them - then it's their loss.

[maestrowork]

Susan, in your case, the prologue may work because the timeline moves forward. It just so happens that between your prologue and your main story there is a big time gap (say, 4 years have passed). I still wonder, though, other than the 4-year gap, is there a reason why the prologue is not part of the main story? I mean, if P happens 4 years ago, and M starts now, but you need to know P to understand something about M... Then it's all about structure. Meaning, if you integrate P into your M, then your P would naturally become F (flashback). ;) It all depends on how your organize your book. ;)

In my book, I thought about putting the "flashback" as a prologue because the rest of the story happens in real time. I decided against it. Was it a good or bad decision? I don't know. Impact-wise, however, I thought the way I organized it (without using a prologue) created better suspense. :Shrug:

I agree -- do what works. For me, prologue doesn't quite work, so as a writer, I try to avoid it if I can.

[Lenora Rose]

Well, so far, truth be known, every story I've written where early drafts have had a prologue has ended up with the prologue cut or integrated, so I'm not saying it's impossible to make it a flashback, or come out in the course of events, or the like. Nor am I saying it's better.

But I try to imagine Steven Brust's Agyar without the prologue and epilogue. Because the story, including the pro- and epilogues, is typed as it progresses by the PoV character(s), we know when and how each page is typed out, and even at exactly what point the papers are laid down on the desk in the order in which they currently sit. The opening and closing can't be moved. Can't be named chapters 1 and <final>, because they make a very specific frame that is clearly outside the main story, and without which, just as clearly, the whole main story has a bit of a different tone.

[Tish Davidson]

In some mysteries that are based on an old event but that involve an new investigation of it, the author does something like a prologue, but doesn't call it that/ For example they may start with the heading 1978 and then write 2 or 3 pages about what lead up to the murder or about a character at that time. Then they start with Chapter 1 telling the reader that it is 20 years later with a time reference in the first paragraph or two. This avoids the problem of people skipping something labeled Prologue, but it serves the same function. Generally I am only in favor of using a prologue if you have looked long and hard at your story and determined that the material in the prologue does not belong in the body of the story but is in some way essential to it.

[KTC]

I would never think of NOT reading the prologue. I couln't imagine not reading it. How bizarre?! I always liked the prologue myself. I think that as long as it is relevent to the story but not of the story it fits. It's like a light at the beginning of the tunnel.

[Christine N.]

I have written one prolouge, and one epilogue. In different books. In one book, the prologue shows you a scene that lends you an insight into why a person is doing the things he is doing. He is not the MC of the book, or rather, not the POV character, but it is an important thing the audience needs to know. Or, at least I think it is. It's all of a page long, maybe a page and a half. Not long enough to be a chapter, and it doesn't fit with the first chapter.

The epilogue I wrote is in the book being currently published. Again, not a long thing, a page, maybe two. And it shows that happens well after the book ends, but also gives a glimpse into what the MC's life is after all the stuff happened to her in the book.

I don't usually use them, but in these two instances I felt that it was something readers deserved.

[write4details]

Of course, there is a place for prologues...that's why they exist.
They are different from chapters. For one thing, they are very short. They might not even fit in with the plot of the book at all, but be some evocation of something whose significance turns up later, or merely places the story in a perspective.
If somebody doesn't like them, they will naturally not use them, but some people do and there is no reason not to use them. Epilogues, either.

[fallenangelwriter]

In my mind, the amin purpose of a calling something "prologue" is to signal that it won't be closely tied to the immediately following part of the story.

generally, i start with chapter one, but if chapter one is in a vastly different time, place, or viewpoint character, i call it "prologue".

[CJWilkes]

I remember someone saying on here a while ago that if the stuff found in a prologue is important enough that the reader should read it, it should be called Chapter One. I never read prologues....

Ditto!... However, I read all prologues and tell myself that it is chapter one. I don't see the purpose of a prologue. In my OP, It is a fancy wancy way to add another chapter without a number......if that makes any sence :) Good luck and have fun!

[AncientEagle]

Personally, I never read any Chapter 1. I go straight to Chapter 2. If the author has important beginning information, I think he or she should have put it in a prologue, not a Chapter 1. After all, I'm the reader. Don't I know better than the writer how he or she should have organized the book?

I may also stop reading final chapters and go straight to the epilogue - or curse bitterly if there isn't one.

[Joni Holderman]

I think such devices can serve a useful purpose. Stage-setting, back story, introducing keys that give readers the "Oh yeah!" moments, later in the book.

I also think prologues make for convenient dump sites and are easily abused, as you pointed out.

Each story has different needs. Yours may benefit from a prologue. My first novel didn't, and as much as I liked the way it read, I axed it before the printer ink dried. What story ingredient would your prologue supply, that couldn't be added in a chapter?

Edited note: As a general rule, I support EG's comment. Though I always read the prologues, I consider them just another chapter without the number.

I always read the prologue, often in the book store before purchasing. If it's boring, an info dump, or poorly written, I skip the rest of the book.

[maestrowork]

The truth is I do read prologues if I know they exist (sometimes I flip directly to Chapter 1, thus miss the prologue) but I seldom like them. The last two books I read had prologues, and I thought they were poorly done. One was short enough that it wasn't a big deal, but it leapt "forward" in time and described certain things from the POV characters, without introducing us to the characters first (which happened in Chapter 1). I still don't understand the purpose of that prologue.

[sunandshadow]

Personally, I never read any Chapter 1. I go straight to Chapter 2. If the author has important beginning information, I think he or she should have put it in a prologue, not a Chapter 1. After all, I'm the reader. Don't I know better than the writer how he or she should have organized the book?

I may also stop reading final chapters and go straight to the epilogue - or curse bitterly if there isn't one.

+1 Funny :Clap:

[pepperlandgirl]

Personally, I never read any Chapter 1. I go straight to Chapter 2. If the author has important beginning information, I think he or she should have put it in a prologue, not a Chapter 1. After all, I'm the reader. Don't I know better than the writer how he or she should have organized the book?

I may also stop reading final chapters and go straight to the epilogue - or curse bitterly if there isn't one.

Wow, I thought I was the only one! I'll confess, sometimes I'll jump right to the last chapter. other times, I'll read the chapters out of order. You know, 2,8, 3, 5, 9, 4, 10, 15, 21, 6, etc. I really wish more authors would accommodate my need, no right, as a reader to read the book anyway I feel is best. Sometimes I swear the only thing standing between me and a good story is the author who thinks he/she knows how best to tell the story. It's highly annoying.

[Jamesaritchie]

Ditto!... However, I read all prologues and tell myself that it is chapter one. I don't see the purpose of a prologue. In my OP, It is a fancy wancy way to add another chapter without a number......if that makes any sence :) Good luck and have fun!

If a prologue is just another way of adding another chapter without a number, it isn't a prologue at all. I think prologues that are written just as if they are chapter one are what give prologues a bad name.

A proper prologue is pre-story, and takes place far enough back in time that using it as chapter one doesn't make ense. It's setup that makes the story quick and easy to understand.

[Liam Jackson]

I do the same thing, Joni. If there's no prologue, I test 3-4 pages, then make a decision.

[jules]

It seems there really isn't much concensus even on what a prologue is, let alone when it is that including one is a good idea. :(

From what James said above, it sounds as though he would disagree with me calling the prologue and epilogue in one of my current projects by those names -- they occur maybe a few weeks before the main story begins (a story which lasts for a few months overall) and a few weeks after it ends. They are both from the POV of the antagonist, whereas all of the remainder of the story is from the POV of the two protagonists (divided into 3 parts, POV switching only between those parts). The prologue serves to inform the reader of what is going to happen, and therefore raises tension in the first chapter while the main protagonist deals with some minor problems and we learn who he is. The epilogue shows the effects of the protagonists' actions on the antagonist (and the empire of which he ends the story the ruler) and strongly hint that there's another story to be told about these characters...

Do you think that's reasonable for prologue or epilogue, or should I just put them in the main body and set them off from the rest of the text in some other way? Set in italic perhaps? I think there needs to be _some_ hint that these parts are different from the rest.

[maestrowork]

My writing instructor told me the "whatever happens to these people" kind of epilogue is unnecessary and amateurish. I agree to some extent. I think they work in movies: "James J. Braddock lived a full life with his wife..." type of end notes before the credits roll serve as the sweet closing to a satisfying story -- work VERY well for those "feel good" movies... but in books, I'd say, let the story end without tagging on a tail...leave the readers some room for imagination! I wrote an epilogue like that for my book, but eventually decided to cut that epilogue. It's a judgment call, really. Some people use it to set up a sequel -- again, to a discerning reader that might be too much... like a bait.

And yes, some writers misuse prologues and epilogues (Dan Brown again?), giving them a bad name.

[brinkett]

It sounds to me like the prologue/epilogue thing is a personal preference issue. Some people read them; some don't. I don't believe in hard and fast rules in fiction that always apply. I've read prologues I like, and prologues I don't. I personally hate open-ended books when there won't be a sequel, so I'd much prefer a "this is what happened to these people" epilogue than nothing at all. I think it's important that we not mistake personal preferences for the way things should always be done (or not done).

[tjwriter]

I scan any prologue. If it doesn't feel like a dry piece of poo, I read it. Otherwise I skip it. Most information can be gleaned from the "real" text, and rarely do I find the need to go back and read the prologue. It really is a personal preference as to whether one wants to read it. If the author feels it should be there, then so be it.

*Pardon my bluntness, it really shines when I have not yet been to bed.

[maestrowork]

Or think of it this way: if the prologue is what a potential buyer reads first, and it's a dry piece of poo, and it has little to do with the main story... you are making it easier for the person to put your book back on the shelf.

Or, if your put something really interesting in the prologue, then open your Chapter One with a ho-hum "ordinary world," you also risk to lose the potential buyer who doesn't read prologues.

The Kite Runner has a very short prologue. It's well-written and reflective, hinting at what has yet to come. If you skip it, no big loss. If you read it, it sets up a tone and context (without giving you pertinent info that you HAVE to know). I think that prologue is extremely well done -- it makes a potential reader WANT to buy the book.

[write4details]

I am truly amazed at how many people on a writer's forum admit that they buy a book then skip over part of what the writer wrote because it doesn't have a number on it. Incredible.

[samgail]

I read everything. Now that as a grownup with a full life I no longer have time- I cut back on cereal boxes and the pamphlet warning you abut toxic shock syndrome but I have never skipped a prologue just because it was at the beginning and was not chapter "1" . It can actually be quite amusing to come back to it when I am done and read it-gasp-again.
Sam

[Rose]

Caveat: I write non-fiction magazine articles...

...but feel compelled to chime in. I'm sitting here reading one of my articles that came out today (I'm EXHILIRATED because this magazine, Northwest Runner, is sold at my local Barnes & Noble), and right off the bat my story confused me. Why? Because this 1,500-word article starts with a one-paragraph "prologue," and the published version does not have the extra line space between the first and second paragraphs to cue the reader. Sigh.

For anyone who's interested about why I used the "prologue": It's a first person account of a half marathon, and the first paragraph recounts an incident that happened at mile 8.4 (the summit of the hill). Then it launches into race history and the tale of my pain before winding up with a boozy ending.

[E.G. Gammon]

I am truly amazed at how many people on a writer's forum admit that they buy a book then skip over part of what the writer wrote because it doesn't have a number on it. Incredible.

We are not just readers; we're writers, too. We barely have the TIME to read, so when we do, we want it to be good and prologues are most often flashbacks/things that took place in the past (that usually come up later in the book, anyway - or they do in good books so we know how the flashback is relevant to the story), info dump (which no one likes to read), or a "media res" moment - starting in the middle of the action (in that case it will eventually come up anyway). I just don't understand why a prologue, if SO important to the story, can't be Chapter 1. I want to open a novel and start the story; I don't want to have to read a whole chapter before the story even begins.

(And great comment Ray: "Or think of it this way: if the prologue is what a potential buyer reads first, and it's a dry piece of poo, and it has little to do with the main story... you are making it easier for the person to put your book back on the shelf. Or, if your put something really interesting in the prologue, then open your Chapter One with a ho-hum "ordinary world," you also risk to lose the potential buyer who doesn't read prologues.")

[Jamesaritchie]

I just don't understand why a prologue, if SO important to the story, can't be Chapter 1. I want to open a novel and start the story; I don't want to have to read a whole chapter before the story even begins.


First, if the prologue is written properly, it will be three or four pages long, at most. Not at all chapter length,

Second, a properly written prologue can't substitue for chapter one because if it did, chapter two would make no sense. You can't use chapter one as pre-story. That would really make a reader put the book back on the shelf in a hurry.

And who said a prologue has to be dry? Dry writing isn't a prologue, it's just bad writing. A good prologue is every bit as exciting, every bit as much of a hook to the reader, as is the opening of chapter one. More so, if it's written well enough.

Opening the book and starting the story is a good thing. But some stories start before chapter one. Some stories, in fact, start hundreds of years before chapter one.

And some readers are waaayyy too enamored with in media res. This isn't always the best way to start, and it's sometimes the worst possible way.

Funny how no one seems to mind prologues in movies, and a great many movies have them for a whole variety of reasons. So do endless TV shows. Probaly most TV shows. Maybe viewers just don't realize they're watching a prologue.

[E.G. Gammon]

First, if the prologue is written properly, it will be three or four pages long, at most. Not at all chapter length,

Second, a properly written prologue can't substitue for chapter one because if it did, chapter two would make no sense. You can't use chapter one as pre-story. That would really make a reader put the book back on the shelf in a hurry.

And who said a prologue has to be dry? Dry writing isn't a prologue, it's just bad writing. A good prologue is every bit as exciting, every bit as much of a hook to the reader, as is the opening of chapter one. More so, if it's written well enough.

Opening the book and starting the story is a good thing. But some stories start before chapter one. Some stories, in fact, start hundreds of years before chapter one.

And some readers are waaayyy too enamored with in media res. This isn't always the best way to start, and it's sometimes the worst possible way.

Funny how no one seems to mind prologues in movies, and a great many movies have them for a whole variety of reasons. So do endless TV shows. Probaly most TV shows. Maybe viewers just don't realize they're watching a prologue.

Would you mind giving some examples of books where a prologue works? And what about some examples of movies and TV shows?

(^ I hope that didn't come off wrong. I would really like to know...)

[AncientEagle]

Wow, I thought I was the only one! I'll confess, sometimes I'll jump right to the last chapter. other times, I'll read the chapters out of order. You know, 2,8, 3, 5, 9, 4, 10, 15, 21, 6, etc. I really wish more authors would accommodate my need, no right, as a reader to read the book anyway I feel is best. Sometimes I swear the only thing standing between me and a good story is the author who thinks he/she knows how best to tell the story. It's highly annoying.

At last! A kindred soul! We should start a club and require writers to have their books published in chapter-sized (or prologue-sized) segments so each of us can arrange it to our own refined taste. You can be president of the club. I'll be whatever position requires no work or thought. I'll just read.

[oswann]

First, if the prologue is written properly, it will be three or four pages long, at most. Not at all chapter length,

Second, a properly written prologue can't substitue for chapter one because if it did, chapter two would make no sense. You can't use chapter one as pre-story. That would really make a reader put the book back on the shelf in a hurry.

And who said a prologue has to be dry? Dry writing isn't a prologue, it's just bad writing. A good prologue is every bit as exciting, every bit as much of a hook to the reader, as is the opening of chapter one. More so, if it's written well enough.

Opening the book and starting the story is a good thing. But some stories start before chapter one. Some stories, in fact, start hundreds of years before chapter one.

And some readers are waaayyy too enamored with in media res. This isn't always the best way to start, and it's sometimes the worst possible way.

Funny how no one seems to mind prologues in movies, and a great many movies have them for a whole variety of reasons. So do endless TV shows. Probaly most TV shows. Maybe viewers just don't realize they're watching a prologue.



I have read a number of prologues which are actually epilogues put at the start of the book. They make no sense until you have finished the book and link it up with the end. Denis Lehane does this well at the beginning of Gone, Baby Gone.

Os.

[Lenora Rose]

Would you mind giving some examples of books where a prologue works? And what about some examples of movies and TV shows?

(^ I hope that didn't come off wrong. I would really like to know...)

I'm away from my book collection, so I can't answer the first, but I can make a start on the latter:

Any and every movie where there's a starting scene of 2-5 minutes, then a jump-cut with a note saying, "Ten Years later", has a prologue.

Sadly, Van Helsing is the only one jumping to my mind this second. Though it is a bad movie for many reasons, I submit that the fact that it has a prologue is not one of those many.

I would also suggest that Buffy the Vampire Slayer episodes that start with one of her prophetic dreams start with a prologue, though that series does all kind of different framing devices, voice-overs, et al., depending on the episode (A good one for Prologue-like prophecy is also one of the most popular - Hush)