Prologues

[Jewel101]

How many of you read prologues?

[azbikergirl]

I generally do, but not always, so I put yes.

[Thekherham]

Yes, I read prologues, but then I read anything.
(Hey, I'd read Stephen King's grocery list if he were to publish it)

[scribbler1382]

To me, this is like asking "do you read chapter 17?". If it wasn't supposed to be read, it wouldn't be in the book. Of course, I like to watch movies from the first opening credit to the last closing credit...doesn't everyone? :)

[James D. Macdonald]

I notice that the answers "sometimes," "depends on the author," and "occassionally I go back after I've finished the book" aren't among the given choices.

[Jewel101]

I'm sorry, it was my first poll and I wasn't thinking very well

[gina]

I generally always do. It's a part of the book, and you never know if some little fact you need to know later on is in the prologue.

[loquax]

IMO books start at chapter 1. Nuff sed.

[Zolah]

You've paid for it - why on earth would you NOT read it? Not reading the prologue just because it's a prologue is like not reading chapter five because it's chapter five. I mean, unless you found it boring once you started, in which case there's not likely to be much hope for the rest of the story anyway.

I usually use my prologues as a hook, rather than as an info-dump (why would anyone deliberately write an info dump, especially in the very first section of a book?). The only reason that I call it a prologue instead of Chapter One is that it usually takes place at some other time or place than the first chapter. I don't see why that would put anyone off.

[mistri]

My answer would've been most of the time. The exceptions are when it's clearly overlong and boring background history -- excerpts of books from the book's past, for example.

Think I'll go and tick yes.

[Saanen]

Sometimes. But even when I do, I generally find I could have skipped it without missing anything.

[kristie911]

I usually use my prologues as a hook, rather than as an info-dump The only reason that I call it a prologue instead of Chapter One is that it usually takes place at some other time or place than the first chapter.

Exactly what I was going to say!

[maestrowork]

Sometimes. I usually scan the prologue, and if I see that it's just an info dump or is not part of the story, I'd skip it and start with chapter 1. And 90% of the time, I won't miss a thing if I skip the prologue.

[AdamH]

The author took the time to write it, I'll take the time to read it.

[maestrowork]

You've paid for it - why on earth would you NOT read it?

Exactly... because I paid for it, I do whatever I want. And if I don't want to waste my time reading the prologue, then I don't. If I don't want to read Chapter 17 which is a big info dump chapter, then I won't.

I think that's the problem with a lot of writers, that they think just because they write something, everybody should read everything they write. The reality is, you can't control what your readers/consumers do or not do. To a lot of people, "prologue" means "it's really not part of the story." Therefore, a lot of people don't read it.

[maestrowork]

The author took the time to write it, I'll take the time to read it.

If the writer took time to write a phone book, would you read the whole thing?

[scribbler1382]

If the writer took time to write a phone book, would you read the whole thing?

If I was stupid enough to pay for it, yeah I would.

[loquax]

It's my experience that SF novels (maybe Crichton?) have very scientific prologues that give you some insight into the thinking behind the main plot elements of that story. They're true prologues, and also the kind I don't read.
Prologues should be introductions to the story - something along the lines of "Hello, I hope you like this, here's a little more info in case you want it". Often I don't want it. If an author puts vital plot information into an introduction then that's their fault. I wouldn't go and tell an important part of the story on the inside dust-cover, nor in the appendix or even in one of the footnotes. They're the kind of things the author shouldn't expect you to read. If they want you to know something, they should put it somewhere between where their story starts and finishes.

[maestrowork]

If I was stupid enough to pay for it, yeah I would.

I pay for magazines all the time. I don't read every article, advertisement, masthead, filler, letter to editor, etc. I know some people do -- just don't expect everyone does.

[clotje]

It's my experience that SF novels (maybe Crichton?) have very scientific prologues that give you some insight into the thinking behind the main plot elements of that story. They're true prologues, and also the kind I don't read.
Prologues should be introductions to the story - something along the lines of "Hello, I hope you like this, here's a little more info in case you want it". Often I don't want it. If an author puts vital plot information into an introduction then that's their fault. I wouldn't go and tell an important part of the story on the inside dust-cover, nor in the appendix or even in one of the footnotes. They're the kind of things the author shouldn't expect you to read. If they want you to know something, they should put it somewhere between where their story starts and finishes.

All very good and well but what if a prologue starts with something that happens twenty odd years ago? You can't really start chapter one with 1985 and chapter two with 2005, can you?

I always read prologues myself, I don't see why I should skip them. I wouldn't skip the last chapter either, would I?
Just my two cents.

[Cabinscribe]

I always read prologues. If I didn't, I would be afraid I would miss something.

[maestrowork]

You can't really start chapter one with 1985 and chapter two with 2005, can you?

Sure you can, if it's part of the story. Nobody said the main story has to be in the same time period...

[scribbler1382]

I pay for magazines all the time. I don't read every article, advertisement, masthead, filler, letter to editor, etc. I know some people do -- just don't expect everyone does.

I don't really see how you can compare a magazine (a collection of related items) to a novel (a single entity). If we were talking about a collection of short stories, I'd be right with you. But we're not.

Now, most of this may stem from a collection of authors who are wrongly or poorly using prologues. So just let me clarify that if I was reading a prologue and it revealed itself to be nothing more than an infodump, I'd probably stop and go on to Chapter One. Taking that further, if I bought another book by that author and it also had a prologue, I might be tempted to skip it, based on his past performance. But I certainly wouldn't extrapolate that to all prologues by all authors.

Let me also say that despite my personal take on this, if even a small percentage of the public has a penchant for skipping prologues, it would definitely make me think twice about including one. But then that begs another question: when do the habits of the public overstep an author's vision?

Now look what you did, Ray. I had this all figured out and you went and made me think. :)

[loquax]

Prologues are fantastc for what they are. Just because I don't read them doesn't mean they are worthless. I'm sure if I was a LOTR nut I would read "concerning hobbits", which is a kind of prologue.

And if the first part of your story is a quick paragraph from twenty years ago, it wouldn't hurt to put "twenty years later" at the start of the next. Even if it was a prologue you would still do it, else nobody would know. HP4 starts with a scene from an omniscient POV (where the rest is close third), describing things that happened decades ago. But it's not a prologue... it's important plot. Therefore it gets a chapter of its own.

[veinglory]

I read them but I don't like them. If a prologue is worth reading--it may as well ber chapter 1.

[scarletpeaches]

I said yes, otherwise it's like saying "I won't read chapter five just because..." Some people may say "What if it's boring?" Well that would be my own fault for buying the book. Chapter thirty is just as likely to be a bad chapter as the prologue (which should be the hook of the book anyway). I usually flick through the start of the book before buying it and if the prologue looked bad, chances are I wouldn't buy it. But if you skip it you could miss something essential to the story.

[Sharon Mock]

I suppose I've come across enough good prologues that I haven't developed the habit of automatically skipping them. If the prologue is just an infodump, I'm not likely to continue with the book.

Good writers write good prologues.

[aruna]

The last prologue I didn't read was The Time Traveler's Wife". I couldn't believe the stupidity if this prologue - and yes, I did skim it. The two protagonists, the TT and his wife, both describe "What it feels like" (his time travelling). Well, honestly, I do't care one bit at this point! I don't even know THAT he time travels (apart from through tht title). I don't know them, I don't know the story, why should I care at all "what it feels like"? The author could easily have worked "what it feels like" into the story.

My WIP has a prologue. It's just over a page long, so I couldn't give it a whole chapter. It simply descibes the finding of a baby by a child, and hints at how she came to be abandoned. Yes, the info is important to the story, but since after that I leap to the girl's sixth birthday party, I could hardly begin chapter one with it. I also think that a baby being found is dramatic enough to hold people's attention.

[maestrowork]

I don't really see how you can compare a magazine (a collection of related items) to a novel (a single entity). If we were talking about a collection of short stories, I'd be right with you. But we're not.

I'm not comparing magazines to novels. I'm speaking to the point that "if I pay for it, I should read it, even if it's a phone book" in a previous post.


Let me also say that despite my personal take on this, if even a small percentage of the public has a penchant for skipping prologues, it would definitely make me think twice about including one. But then that begs another question: when do the habits of the public overstep an author's vision?

You should never comprimise your author's integrity. However, you do have to think outside of the writer's box sometimes. Publishing is a business, and you have to think about your readers. If, say, 10% of your readers are not going to read your prologue, then you need to think what you should put in the prologue and whether you need it at all. Some writers would say, "Too bad, your loss." Some writers would turn the prologue into Chapter 1. Some would take what's the prologue and sprinkle pieces of it throughout the book.

[maestrowork]

My WIP has a prologue. It's just over a page long, so I couldn't give it a whole chapter. It simply descibes the finding of a baby by a child, and hints at how she came to be abandoned. Yes, the info is important to the story, but since after that I leap to the girl's sixth birthday party, I could hardly begin chapter one with it. I also think that a baby being found is dramatic enough to hold people's attention.

Why don't you think it could make a good one-page chapter One?

I still don't understand why it has to be a prologue because there is a time lapse. Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone opens with Chapter One: The Boy Who Lived. Then in Chapter Two she fast-forwards many years. That makes sense to me, because Chapter One is very much part of the story, and important.

[Bartel]

I usually use my prologues as a hook, rather than as an info-dump (why would anyone deliberately write an info dump, especially in the very first section of a book?). The only reason that I call it a prologue instead of Chapter One is that it usually takes place at some other time or place than the first chapter. I don't see why that would put anyone off.

I'm much the same way. Personally, I think a prologue can be very effective and intriguing. I've really never thought about it being in any way seperate from the rest of a book. I don't read 'Concerning Hobbits', however, but I don't consider that a prologue. Tolkien worked very hard to create a believable world in Lord of the Rings and Concerning Hobbits, I suspect, was there strictly to provide information to those wishing for a fuller understanding of it, much like the appendix. For my own practices, I have a couple of mystery novels with prologues detailing the crimes that set up the story then start the investigation in chapter 1. Like Zolah mentioned, they're hooks. As to the time skippage, I also thought about Harry Potter. It certainly can be done, that's been proven. Of course, one could also argue that the first chapter of The Sorcerer's Stone was a prologue under a different name. Maybe I'm just woefully inexperienced or naive, but my perception of a prologue is the relating of an event occuring before the main story begins that helps set the stage for everything else. If you'll indulge me for a moment I'll search my bookshelf for a couple examples. On would be Stephen King's 'Salem's Lot'. This prologue introduces two mysterious characters, referred to only as 'the man' and 'the boy', with some connection to the town of Salem's Lot. Can this be skipped without hurting the main story? Probably. Does that devalue the prologue? I doubt it. To use the aforementioned Michael Chrichton and his novel 'Jurassic Park', the prologue involves a horribly injured man rushed to a small clinic, where the doctor's only clue to what has happened to him is the word 'raptor'. Again, this scene can probably be skipped without detracting too much from the main story, but that doesn't change the fact that it's a good scene that introduces the initial questions the reader will want to explore. Well, you did ask our opinions.

[aruna]

Why don't you think it could make a good one-page chapter One?

.

I suppose it could. But all the other chapters are 8 - 10 pages so it is just odd. Actually, it began as a chapter one in an early draft but I cut the rest of it (plus three following chapters!) later.
I just like a consistency in the structure of my books. See, it has four Parts: Part One where the MC is 6, Part Two where she is 12, Part Three where she is 19, and Part Four where she is 49. Each part tells the storu of that portion of her life, and the events that happened then; they belong together. If i'd kept the original chapters I could have had another, short, cluster, for the baby-age - but now, sticking the prologue into Part One just makes it feel odd. It doesn't belong there.

[ChunkyC]

As far as chapter length goes, didn't someone mention in another thread that Stephen King's Misery has a chapter that is one word long?

Personally, I wouldn't worry at all about the precise length of a chapter. What counts is that it is a chapter. Whether it's one paragraph or thirty pages long is pretty much irrelevant so long as it is coherent and works as that particular 'unit' of the story. Therefore, making a one page prologue Chapter One so that readers won't tend to skip over it is perfectly fine.

As a side note, I like books where the chapter lengths vary widely. There's something very artificial about chapters that are all the same length. I can't see how a story would just naturally end up that way, to me it seems it would have to be forced.

As for reading prologues, I read the copyright info, the ISBN ... okay, so that's not illuminating, except where it reveals my obsessive nature. *grin*

In my own current work, I've decided to divvy the story up into five parts, and place my prologue after it says PART ONE. I'll decide if I even want to use chapter numbers later. I'm thinking I will only for the sake of submitting. If I ever sell the damn thing, I'm sure the publisher will have lots of suggestions for the final 'fit-and-finish.'

[maestrowork]

I just like a consistency in the structure of my books. See, it has four Parts: Part One where the MC is 6, Part Two where she is 12, Part Three where she is 19, and Part Four where she is 49...

If that's your structure, then I'd think a short prologue (when she is a baby) would make sense. You do have to think, given the reality of readership, if the story would make sense if someone skip the prologue. Or if you think your potential readers would read everything, including prologues, then the point is moot.

[AnneMarble]

I generally do start to read them, but if they get dull, I might give up and make sure Chapter One is more interesting. If not, I find another book. ;)

[James D. Macdonald]

If, say, 10% of your readers are not going to read your prologue, then you need to think what you should put in the prologue and whether you need it at all. Some writers would say, "Too bad, your loss." Some writers would turn the prologue into Chapter 1. Some would take what's the prologue and sprinkle pieces of it throughout the book.

The real numbers are that 60-70% of your readers are going to skip the prologue. Follow your own artistic vision, of course, but be aware of the fact.

Now, do I write prologues? Sure, sometimes. What they generally are is a short story with the same characters in the same world, that doesn't really fit in the main arc of the novel, but still isn't totally detached. Extra richness for those who read 'em.

[Sharon Mock]

What about prologues that aren't marked "Prologue"? Do prologue-haters automatically skip forward until they hit the words "Chapter One"? Do they read through and then feel cheated when they realize they've been duped? Or is it only the labeling of "Prologue" that's the problem?

What about books without numbered chapters? Prologue-neutral writers want to know!

On a more serious note, the successful prologues that I've come across have all been short, dramatic sequences of events that would otherwise need to be told through backfill. Guy Gavriel Kay comes immediately to mind. And though you don't need to read his prologues, if you do, you'll know what the story is about that much sooner. (Though if I recall correctly, he hasn't had prologues in his last two projects.)

[maestrowork]

What about prologues that aren't marked "Prologue"? Do prologue-haters automatically skip forward until they hit the words "Chapter One"? Do they read through and then feel cheated when they realize they've been duped? Or is it only the labeling of "Prologue" that's the problem?


Maybe you need to ask, is the first thing the readers read (prologue, first chapter, whatever) is gripping enough for them to read on...

[aruna]

If I didn't have a prologue I'd have to work the same information somewhere into chapter one or two - but not dramatised, as it is in the prologue, but as plain information (Mira had been found abandoned as a baby on the banks of the Lamaha Canal...) Now THAT is an info dump! Telling not showing!
I think it's fie the way it is. It seems the problem is only over the word prologue. Maybe I'll just leave it out.

[Sharon Mock]

For all my defense of prologues, I don't actually use one in my WIP. I occasionally contemplate adding one, but it would be unnecessary and throw the structure subtly out of balance, so, no.

I had "prologue" and "epilogue" in my previous manuscript, but had it ever reached the eyes of agent or publisher I have no doubt they'd have been relabeled Chapter 1 and Chapter 12.

[LightShadow]

I always read them, not because I like them, but because I bought the whole book, so I read the whole book. Simple as that.

[Jewel101]

Thank You all for your opinions and thoughts. I find the different views interesting

[Liam Jackson]

I can only recall reading one book in which the prologue seemed out of place. It wasn't a part of the story, though there was some relavence to theme, nor was it an info dump. Perhaps it could be considered foreshadowing. I'm just not sure what the heck he was shooting for. The helluva it all is that it was the best written portion of the entire story. It was as if he had poured this massive amount of energy into six pages of dettached opening, and afterward, cruised all the way to The End.

[fallenangelwriter]

I always read prologues, becausew they are part of the story.


why use a prologue rather than Chapter one? well, to me, a prologue tells the reader "don't get comfortable" I expect chapter one to give me the main character and often his basic situation in life, usually in the same time period as the rest of the story. I've read many good prologues which were from the vilains point of view, written in a different style from the rest of the book, or otherwise differentiated.

for instance, many fantasy books show th evil overlord's plot in the prologue and then cut to the hero for chapter one. while this device is somewhat overuse,d it's still a good reason for a prologue; if the villain were in chapter one, I'd be unsettled by the sudden shift in chapter 2.

[ANNIE]

what does it matter if it's labled chapter one or prologue? The begining of the book is still the same. It's the first words the author puts down on paper.

[RumBucuresti]

If the subject of the book is something I find interesting I like a good prologue, I also don't mind a huge info-dump packed prologue SO THERE!

[RubyRoo]

It has to be really interesting from the beginning, but thts the same with the first chapter of books with out prolougues! Sometimes prolouges are a bit random so if I dont like a prolouge I might skip to the first chapter to see if I like the book.

[victoriastrauss]

How many of you read prologues?To me, this is a weird question. Why wouldn't you read a prologue? It's the beginning of the book. You might as well ask, "How many of you read Chapter 1?"

- Victoria

[inanna]

Okay, I just got finished with a semi-rant over in the other prologue thread, so I thought I would come here and vote. I'm feeling a little defensive about this idea of skipping prologues because, well, I have one, and I kind of like it. As a prologue.

There are reasons I didn't title it Chapter 1 (none of them among the "I'm so pretentious I want to have a prologue" variety). It is a single night, a single event, that takes place when my MC is 6 years old, and puts her on a path that picks up 12 years later in Chapter 1.

The reason I think (I hope) it's not dull enough to warrant skipping? It's mostly scene, with very little exposition and almost no flat-out info dumping, and in fact is there to raise more questions than it answers. I could go on, but this is starting to sound ranty :box::)

Thank you everyone, for allowing me to justify my prologue for a bit ;) One of these days, I'll get around to posting it in the Share Your Work forum. I'd love some feedback on it--this is an excellent group of writers.

[carley]

I just read this book that had the strangest prolouge ever. Call Waiting, by Dianne Blacklock, was the book. The prologue was actually part of a chapter (word for word) that occured later in the book. And it kind of gave away the story.

I always read the prolouges. I figure since the author feels it's important, then it is important to me. I just didn't understand the necessity of Call Waiting's prologue.

[cwfgal]

To me, this is a weird question. Why wouldn't you read a prologue? It's the beginning of the book. You might as well ask, "How many of you read Chapter 1?"

- Victoria

My thoughts exactly. Though perhaps I'm biased since my first three published novels all had prologues in them. Two were labeled as prologues because they contained important precipitating events that happened a long time before the main story. Without these events, the stories would make no sense. The third one was labeled as a prologue because it was told from the POV of a 5-year-old kid whereas the rest of the story was told from the POV of a grown woman. Again, viewing the first scene from the kid's POV was critical to the whole story but I didn't want readers to think the whole book would be told from that POV.

I've heard a number of writers spout the "no prologue" advice over the years but I have yet to meet any non-writing readers who say they don't read them (though I'm sure there may be a few).

Beth

[jules]

Why don't you think it could make a good one-page chapter One?

I still don't understand why it has to be a prologue because there is a time lapse. Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone opens with Chapter One: The Boy Who Lived. Then in Chapter Two she fast-forwards many years. That makes sense to me, because Chapter One is very much part of the story, and important.

You're begging the question: why would you assume that the Prologue isn't part of the story? Or isn't important? If it weren't either, then it shouldn't be in the book at all.

[Danger Jane]

My thoughts exactly. Though perhaps I'm biased since my first three published novels all had prologues in them. Two were labeled as prologues because they contained important precipitating events that happened a long time before the main story. Without these events, the stories would make no sense. The third one was labeled as a prologue because it was told from the POV of a 5-year-old kid whereas the rest of the story was told from the POV of a grown woman. Again, viewing the first scene from the kid's POV was critical to the whole story but I didn't want readers to think the whole book would be told from that POV.

I've heard a number of writers spout the "no prologue" advice over the years but I have yet to meet any non-writing readers who say they don't read them (though I'm sure there may be a few).

Beth

Mmhmm. My prologue is third-person and in a different time setting (future, not past) from the rest of my story. But I'm pretty sure it draws the reader in...because I've been told it does...and it isn't an infodump index of spaceship specifications for alien races X, Y, Z, and A9j. Or whatever.

[Linda Adams]

I think they get a bad rap because they are not always used well or correctly. I can think of one in an otherwise good book where its presence actually destroyed the suspense of the story--it gave away a huge spoiler that would have made the story a page turner. I do like the ones Clive Cussler does because I know it's going to fit into how the story plays out, but there's are some I've seen that make me wonder why it was necessary.

[jules]

The prologue was actually part of a chapter (word for word) that occured later in the book. And it kind of gave away the story.
[...]
I just didn't understand the necessity of Call Waiting's prologue.

Yeah, I hate that kind too. There's one in Michael Crichton's Prey. I think the idea is to increase suspense over a slow start by showing something nasty that happens later, but it just spoiled the suspense over parts later on in the book because you knew that the characters you saw in the prologue bit had to survive at least until you got back to there.

[cwfgal]

Ah, found this and thought I'd refresh it.

Beth

[SC Harrison]

Almost 90% read them? Thanks for bringing this back up.

[loquax]

I think this is one of those polls where the fact that everyone participating is a writer renders it too biased to answer the question "Do people read prologues?". You can't say you don't read them if your story has one.

[scribbler1382]

No where close to scientific, but I asked a couple people at work if they read prologues and they said yes. As a matter of fact, they sort of looked at me funny for even suggesting anyone wouldn't. For what it's worth, there it is.

[Rambling]

I read prologues after the story, if at all. If I do end up reading everything, my order tends to be something along the lines of: story, prologue, maps, appendices, author notes, back cover.

Although, to put this in perspective, I also skip:
- first chapters/parts if it's a slow start and the book is recommended.
- any section written in stream of consciousness style, poetry, song, screen-play format, a series of letters, or any block of writing in italics.
- battle and sex scenes.
- whole subplots in a 'different sets of people' story like a Tom Clancy.
- epigraphs

If it was good enough to add to my bookshelves, I may read more of it on subsequent reads, but I very rarely find that my reading experience was significantly lessened by my after-sales editing. On the other hand, I don't expect an author to *cater* for my reading style either.

[ChaosTitan]

Here's a question for those readers who say they prefer to skip a prologue (or read it later). Would you still read it if it wasn't labeled "Prologue?"

Example: The first "chapter" of my current WIP is not labeled "Prologue" or "Chapter One." The label is the location of the scene and the date. It sets up the results of a tragedy we have not witnessed, and ends with the death of the POV character (not the MC). The next scene begins Chapter One (where we meet our MC).

The opening scene itself is set in January. Chapter One rewinds to the previous May, and the action unfolds, leading us up to what happened in January.

So would you skip this not-really-a-prologue simply because it precedes Chapter One, or would the labeling trick you into reading it?

[katiemac]

Almost 90% read them? Thanks for bringing this back up.

Actually, if you look on page 2, you should find a post made by James D. Macdonald where he gives his numbers -- 60%-70% of readers skip prologues.

[T.L. Newberry]

Prologues aren't always necessary to read, but you won't know that until you do. In my novels, I usually always use a prologue, and then an epilogue. Used effectively, the prologue of one book leads off from the epilogue of the previous in the series. Although I haven't read any books that have done that so far, this is one of the many examples of how prologues (and epilogues, for that matter) should be read.

[SeanDSchaffer]

I don't read every prologue. If I'm reading something for the fun of it, such as a work of fiction, I will read a prologue to find out the backstory.

However, if a prologue has nothing to do with the story itself, I generally won't read it. For instance, if the prologue is a list of the author's qualifications, I don't generally enjoy it too much. I don't buy novels to read the author's resume. I buy them to read the stories within.

But like I said, if the prologue is story-related, I most likely will read it.

[zeprosnepsid]

If the writer took time to write a phone book, would you read the whole thing?

I know this post is pretty old, but reading this thread it struck me. Some very old, very famous books have sections that are the equivalent of a phone book. One is the Bible and it's the best selling book of all time (so-and-so is the son of so-and-so from this-place, his son is...). The other is The Iliad which has survived almost 3000 years. (so-and-so is from this-place, his father was so-and-so, etc...). So don't knock the phone book!

But neither of these books have prologues =)

[SeanDSchaffer]

I know this post is pretty old, but reading this thread it struck me. Some very old, very famous books have sections that are the equivalent of a phone book. One is the Bible and it's the best selling book of all time (so-and-so is the son of so-and-so from this-place, his son is...). The other is The Iliad which has survived almost 3000 years. (so-and-so is from this-place, his father was so-and-so, etc...). So don't knock the phone book!

But neither of these books have prologues =)


Actually, the original KJV Bible (Circa 1611 A.D.) does have a prologue. It is an extremely long (11 pages), tedious read called 'The Translators to the Reader.' The print in this prologue is so tiny (point size 8) that I can hardly see it, let alone read it. Also, some of the paragraphs (heck, some of the sentences) are entire pages in length. All that said, it is not a fun read.

[SC Harrison]

Actually, if you look on page 2, you should find a post made by James D. Macdonald where he gives his numbers -- 60%-70% of readers skip prologues.

I was referring to the poll taken on this thread. With one yes and four different no categories to choose from, 90% voted yes. I would never question Uncle Jim's information (I hate losing an argument), but I still want to hear a definitive answer from aquisition editors and/or real marketing surveys.

[illiterwrite]

The real numbers are that 60-70% of your readers are going to skip the prologue.

Where do these percentages come from?

[maestrowork]

I have read prologues, and I'd say 9 out of 10 were unnecessary or they didn't add anything to the book and I found them kind of a waste of time, so eventually I stop reading them. The other 10% -- I thought they were misused. They should have been Chapter 1 instead of prologue.

[SC Harrison]

I don't want to be "that guy" who keeps harping on a subject until the Mods are forced to hose him down, but...

There are some very highly respected (and justifiably so) writers who post on these threads. Sometimes there's a fine line between personal preference and experienced guidance, and it's not always easy for us new people to discern the difference.

There may be a few people who have viewed this thread who are contemplating a radical change in the beginning structure of their ms, mainly because somebody they respect has shown a preference, one way or the other. If this change is not generated by the needs of the story, the result could be detrimental.

[crosseyed reader]

I'm one of those weirdos who actually enjoy Prologues. To me, they're like the big toe that needs to stick out separately from the rest of the book for a valid reason. It may be to set up the tone of the book, or to give the reader insights into a character so we understand why they are the way they are.

Calling them infodumps is so unkind. I'll admit that there are a number of works that handle prologues indelicately, and those authors should be made to stand in the corner with no beer. But for the most part, I honor the reasons why the author felt it necessary to make this part of their book stand out from the rest. Just my warped opinion.

[Uneducated[Waste]]

Simply put - if the Author didn't want you to read it, it WOULDN'T BE BETWEEN THE COVERS. They spent their time and effort writing and giving it to you, and some of you are actually unsuccessful enough to bitterly complain about "info-dumps"?

Has Steven King written more than you? Yes.
Does everyone know Steven King's name? Yes.
What was your name, again? -----?

Yeah. Thanks. ^.~;

----------------
And Yoda says:
Dully noted, was your opinion - young padawan. Try harder you must, to succeed with legitimate reason.
------------------

The Prologue is to bolster the writer's understanding of the beginning of the book, as the Epilogue is to contemplate what's in the future -- after the book is finished. Possibly a new edition to the series . . .

Prologue:
+ An introduction or preface, especially a poem recited to introduce a play.
+ An introduction or introductory chapter, as to a novel.
+ An introductory act, event, or period.

Epilogue: A short addition or concluding section at the end of a literary work, often dealing with the future of its characters. Also called afterword.

[loquax]

^^^ Lemme guess... your WIP has a prologue.

Oh, and welcome to the boards. I'm sure many of the unsuccessful writers here would love to hear your opinions regarding the good side of infodumps.

[brokenfingers]

As with everything else in writing, I don't think there is any rigid rule concerning prologues. It's a matter of structure.

If the story needs it, the writer'll put it in. If the story doesn't need it and the writer puts it in anyway, then I'm sure they'll find out - either from an editor, beta reader or the buying public - that it didn't work.

I'm curious though as to where this "60 - 70% don't read prologues" figure came from and if it applies to all genres or what.

I personally asked 21 people I know if they read the prologuies in a book (and got some weird looks in the process.) All of them said yes. According to those statistics, at least 12 should have said no.

Fantasy and horror are well known for their use of prologues - fantasies especially.

Fantasies often are not just a story about a guy, his girlfriend and/or wife, his mom and dad, his job etc. They're often wide in scope, epic, dealing with peoples, worlds, societies and often involving timelines of thousands of years. It's endemic to the genre.

Often the inciting incident is way removed from the starting point of the story.

The beginning of the story, the first chapter, sets the tone for the rest of the book. It delineates a covenant between the author and the reader, shows them the style and tells them what to expect and what type of book they're about to envelop themselves in.

So the author is forced to put that inciting incident in a prologue to let the reader know - this is crucial information or the story is at heart about THIS, but the story will not be told to you in this way. You'll see how I'm going to unravel it for you in Chapter 1.

Also prologues are great for creating dramatic irony. For those who don't know - that's when the reader knows something the characters in the strory don't (like in a horror movie when you know the killer is in the closet and the heroine doesn't) and is very effective at creating tension and suspense.

Once this crucial conflict is established in a prologue, the author can then proceed to show the protagonist in their everyday ordinary world and not have to rush into the main conflict of the story. The reader feels the tension and knows that while they're seeing the protag seemingly happy in their normal life, bad news is coming and his world's about to be crushed.

It helps the writer introduce a lower level of conflict in the beginning that builds or leads to the MAIN one and propels the reader on to see the initial meeting of protag and MAIN conflict.

Anyways, these are just my thoughts on the whole prologue deal. If it works for the way you have your story structured - great, use it. If your story is structured so it doesn't need it - great, then don't use it.

I don't believe in saying: Don't write one - it's wrong!!

Another thing is that writers often don't regard books the same way the general public does. If they did, not only would DaVinci Code not be one of the best-selling books of all time, but I suspect a lot of the bestsellers would die a horrible death.

Just something to keep in mind when reading other writer's thoughts on how they think a book should be written...

[L.Jones]

There are some very highly respected (and justifiably so) writers who post on these threads. .

Popping in with tongue in cheek to say - Most of my friends and acquaintances are writers and most of them with loads of publishing credits and I can't think of a one of them who would consider themselves "highly respected". Maybe that says more about my taste in friends than the state of writers but I doubt it.

If someone changes the entire structure of a novel based on a post on a bb, that's not respect, that's just sad.

Write what the book needs. Cut everything you can. If it needs a prologue keep it, if not, cut it.

annie
Luanne Jones
Heathen Girls (available everywhere now)
(and no, I just went back and checked and my current book doesn't have a prologue even though I thought it did but some things I've written has one though I have no proof that anyone read it)

[SC Harrison]

Popping in with tongue in cheek to say - Most of my friends and acquaintances are writers and most of them with loads of publishing credits and I can't think of a one of them who would consider themselves "highly respected". Maybe that says more about my taste in friends than the state of writers but I doubt it.



I didn't say you should allow them to babysit your kids :) , I was referring to the respect they have earned (here) by sharing their knowledge of writing and publishing. This thread has drawn 1,382 views (hey there!) in the short time it's been up, and I'm sure some people have at least contemplated making some changes based on the opinions posted here.

[L.Jones]

I didn't say you should allow them to babysit your kids :) , I was referring to the respect they have earned (here) by sharing their knowledge of writing and publishing. This thread has drawn 1,382 views (hey there!) in the short time it's been up, and I'm sure some people have at least contemplated making some changes based on the opinions posted here.

Oh, no, never let writers around children!

Fair point about the influence. Someone was sitting on the fence, probably, and thought -well, what the heck kill the prologue.

Of course I don't think a book was ever made WORSE by cutting something out.

annie
Luanne Jones
Heathen Girls (Available everywhere - I just saw a copy at Kroger and made a scene - now)

[Sage]

And sitting on the fence, as they were, they might have come to that conclusion themselves eventually. Or read other writers' opinions on why a prologue might work, looked at their own, & decided whether theirs does. Yay, for discussion!

[SC Harrison]

And sitting on the fence, as they were, they might have come to that conclusion themselves eventually. Or read other writers' opinions on why a prologue might work, looked at their own, & decided whether theirs does. Yay, for discussion!

I agree totally. It's the writers who (like me) have written a prologue that they felt was a good way to set the stage for their story, and then they see things like this:

I've never seen a useful prologue yet. If I need a history lesson, it's because the author is too lazy or inept to weave the information into the story properly.

Most readers skip prologues.

If the story will make any sense whatsoever without a prologue, I would say leave it out!

60%-70% of readers skip prologues.

You don't even have to be sitting on the fence for this to make you fall over. Although it still needs some trimming, I am going to post the prologue to a SF project I'm attempting in the SYW forum. Okay, it's there. Well? Go look!

[Perks]

If an author has bothered to write a prologue and I have bothered to put out cash to read said book, I want all the words I paid for.

This poll shows what I've thought all along about the myth of "Nobody Reads Prologues." It's nonsense propagated by some wacky need to slap rules on an essentially alchemical process, i.e. what makes a good book good. This is just silly and will not give anyone any 'insider info' on what not to do when penning a novel.

Of course, a prologue needs to be good, just as the rest of the book needs to be good. At the end of the prologue/chapter/book/series, you must simply be able to answer one question in the affirmative: did you like it?

Then it's money and time well spent.

[Puddle Jumper]

I put yes. To me it's the beginning of the story and where the author intended the reader to begin.

[Kevin Yarbrough]

I read them. Like everyone else has said they are part of the story, usually.

Now, as for my WIP I started off with a bang but when I let some Betas read it they all told me the same thing. You need a prologue. I had told them what was going to happen and they said the first chapter made more sense when I explained it to them so they told me to add a prologue. I went back, added one that takes place almost 150 years earlier, and gives hints of what is happening and drops hints about things that will happen. The outcome? They thought it worked better. They were able to go into chapter one with more understanding then they had previously and it made the story flow more easily.

If done right they can work, and do.