I often hear many agents, authors, editors or readers don’t like prologues. But why is that so? I know a lot of (German) bestseller which used a prologue and were sold. Why do some people have this “prologue-phobia”?
-
Basic Writing questions is not a crit forum. All crits belong in Share Your Work
Prologue-phobia - but why?
- Thread starter Phoenix_Writer
- Start date
- Status
From a writing standpoint, I suspect it's because some people will skip prologues. The argument I've seen before is that it's often not required information to understand the main plot and if it IS required then you should just call it Chapter 1 instead, which... Eh, I disagree, but I understand the logic.
I read a book called "The Fifty First Pages by Jeff Gerke and he said something similar. Something about how some editors either find them cliche or that readers skip them. I love prologues, it is an easy way to get hooked if it is done right. My own WIP has a prologue and everyone I've shown seems to be fine with it. It's just a matter of preference I think.
This has been a frequent topic of discussion here--why not read some of those threads before starting a new one? Did you try searching "prologues"?
Because many are badly done and are just as boring as a microwave oven instruction manual.
-cb
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2013
- Messages
- 11,739
- Reaction score
- 10,558
- Location
- In my head
- Website
- thewanderingquille.blogspot.com
I think part of the problem with prologues is that often, they don't involve the main characters or are used to establish something that could be scattered into the story. A prologue isn't generally necessary, and many people do just skip them. Sending agents and editors stories with prologues is giving them more reason to say no because they don't have the main story and character to engage and connect with right off the bat. I personally read prologues, but I view them with a wary eye and refuse to let myself get attached to any characters in them because I don't know yet if any of them matter to the story. Like Lissibith said, if the information in a prologue is important exactly as is, just make it chapter 1.
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2011
- Messages
- 23,128
- Reaction score
- 10,899
- Location
- Where faults collide
- Website
- doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
A high percentage of trade-published novels have prologues (the number I've heard is about a third), so obviously they aren't anathema to agents, editors or readers. However, a high percentage of trade-published novels don't have them as well. They aren't always needed or desirable.
I think they get a bad rap for a few reasons:
1. Writers working on (or subbing) their first-ever novel frequently feel they must have a prologue (and a lengthy one at that) to provide backstory and context up front, rather than introducing these things gradually as the story unfolds.
2. In some genres (SF and F are examples of this), prologues have historically been used to provide long world-building tracts that read like a passage from Genesis from the Bible, or maybe a dry history book rather than a scene with characters and conflict. In the beginning, the Gods (or the Galactic Overlord) did X, Y, and Z... This approach to prologues has gone out of fashion for the most part in these genres, but some people subbing their first novel don't know this because they haven't actually read anything published in the past decade or two in their preferred genre.
3. Sometimes writers try things that feel gimmicky in their prologues, like showing the end of the story first, or showing a murder from the pov of the killer, or introducing a throw-away character who will die at the end of the prologue. Sometimes this works very well, but not always.
4. Often the prologue is related in a very different voice or viewpoint from the rest of the novel. This isn't wrong, but for an agent or editor (or reader) who is scanning a few opening pages to see if the writing style and premise are a fit for them might be misled or put off by a prologue that is very different from what the rest of the story will be like.
One suggestion I've seen for prologues is to write your novel first, starting with chapter 1 (where the story begins). After you've written the first, and possibly second, draft, put it down for a bit and come back to it. If you (and critiquing partners) think it needs a context-building scene at the beginning, then go ahead and write the prologue.
Another thing to think about is, if you are in a genre with lots of world building, is to write one of those history book type prologues for yourself to use as a reference, but attempt to fit the world building into the story as it unfolds without interrupting flow of violating character viewpoint. Most readers don't pick up a novel to receive a history lesson about a universe they are not (yet) invested in.
Last edited:
This is a really good point. I never thought of this. My own WIP goes from a third person POV to a first person, where it is going to stay. This is making me reconsider.
There's an FAQ about this.
In addition to almost 100 threads about why or why not to have a prologue, etc.
I think prologues and epilogues have their uses and their place in writing. IMO it really comes down to how the author wants to tell the story.
For example, a prologue can set up the context for a story - a group of friends sitting around a camp fire, and one member tells a story (and sets up the general mood and expectations).
After the story is told, an epilogue wraps things up... some of the people around the fire doubt the truth of the story, then something is done or seen that makes everyone realize it was all true.
They can also be like bookends. In my WIP the first and last chapters are told from the antagonist's POV. The first chapter (prologue, but not called that) provides the motivation of why the antagonist does something that sets the story in motion. The last chapter (epilogue, but again not called that) shows the outcome of events from the antagonist's POV (we already have the protagonist's POV in the second to last chapter).
My point is that prologues and epilogues are tools we can use - and just like every tool, we should be judicious in how we use it.
As always... just my opinion - your mileage may vary.
For example, a prologue can set up the context for a story - a group of friends sitting around a camp fire, and one member tells a story (and sets up the general mood and expectations).
After the story is told, an epilogue wraps things up... some of the people around the fire doubt the truth of the story, then something is done or seen that makes everyone realize it was all true.
They can also be like bookends. In my WIP the first and last chapters are told from the antagonist's POV. The first chapter (prologue, but not called that) provides the motivation of why the antagonist does something that sets the story in motion. The last chapter (epilogue, but again not called that) shows the outcome of events from the antagonist's POV (we already have the protagonist's POV in the second to last chapter).
My point is that prologues and epilogues are tools we can use - and just like every tool, we should be judicious in how we use it.
As always... just my opinion - your mileage may vary.
I think it's personal preference. The Prince of Tides has a very lengthy prologue that is filled with gobs of back story, but it's great. It goes on and on and I'm sure some readers probably hate it, but some readers will appreciate it. I also love the prologue for Girl on the Train(I have not read this book, only what is offered on sneak peak at amazon), it isn't labeled as a prologue, but it is, it's a quick blurb that happens before the start of the story(a prologue in my opinion), anyways, it's super short, but effective and peaks curiosity.
I personally like prologues, they are little snippets of information that can really add to a story. But here's the thing, if I'm told "don't do this" then that is exactly what I want to do. I think writing should be unique and we all shouldn't sound the same, and we def should not be following rules. Take all of those silly rules with a grain of salt, use them as guidelines sure but you do not have to obey them. If your story requires a prologue, then write a prologue. It doesn't mean you can't edit it, or cut it later. Just write it, get it out of your system.
I respect those who hate prologues, however I don't respect being told NOT to use them. It's your story. Do what you want. I have no idea why there is a phobia....I see prologues in many many novels.
I personally like prologues, they are little snippets of information that can really add to a story. But here's the thing, if I'm told "don't do this" then that is exactly what I want to do. I think writing should be unique and we all shouldn't sound the same, and we def should not be following rules. Take all of those silly rules with a grain of salt, use them as guidelines sure but you do not have to obey them. If your story requires a prologue, then write a prologue. It doesn't mean you can't edit it, or cut it later. Just write it, get it out of your system.
I respect those who hate prologues, however I don't respect being told NOT to use them. It's your story. Do what you want. I have no idea why there is a phobia....I see prologues in many many novels.
I don't have a problem with prologues, if they aren't an excuse for an infodump and if the author resists the urge to write as if scripting a movie trailer to be voiced by Morgan Freeman.
This mostly sums up my opinion as a reader. I don't mind a prologue if it's short, say 10 pages at most. Longer than than, I just get annoyed because I get invested only to find out it's not what the book's about or who's in it.
I couldn't sell my novel until I added a prologue.
I really don't understand why people advise against them, as they are extremely common in fiction. And any reader who skips a prologue - it was put there, rightly or wrongly, for a reason by the author - has a very strange way of reading. It makes as much sense as skipping chapter three of every book you read.
If a prologue is the most appropriate way to begin a story, readers won't notice and will not care.
I really don't understand why people advise against them, as they are extremely common in fiction. And any reader who skips a prologue - it was put there, rightly or wrongly, for a reason by the author - has a very strange way of reading. It makes as much sense as skipping chapter three of every book you read.
If a prologue is the most appropriate way to begin a story, readers won't notice and will not care.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 14,734
- Reaction score
- 24,754
- Location
- Massachusetts
- Website
- elizabethbonesteel.com
This.
But I think screenscope has hit on the real issue with the "If" in that last sentence. Prologues tend to provoke shudders in some circles because improper use is not uncommon, especially in writers without a lot of experience.
One example is backstory. A lot of inexperienced writers have trouble letting go of the idea that the reader needs to know just as much about the backstory of their characters/universe as they do, so we get the history textbook right at the start, before we're invested in anything at all. The truth is it's almost never necessary for the reader to have that level of detail up front.
So I don't think it's "argh, prologues are BAD" so much as it is "argh, prologues are so often misused; please think long and hard before using one." If your story needs a prologue, write one.
I've been an avid reader since I learned to read. After wading through a couple of boggy prologues, I skipped them altogether. Then, one day I was punished for my cavalier ways. I came to the end of a book I had particulary enjoyed - I think it was a Joyce Carole Oates novel - and I was confused. Going back to the prologue I had disdained, I discovered, not only the reason for my confusion, but that if I'd read those few pages, the book would have been an entirely different experience. Now I do not skip prologues, but if they bore me, I put down the book.
BTW, I've never read another JCO.
I have written one prologue. I thought it was needed because it walks through an event around which the novel is based, but takes place three years before the rest of story begins. I called it Chapter 1 and began Chapter 2 with "Three years later . . ."
BTW, I've never read another JCO.
I have written one prologue. I thought it was needed because it walks through an event around which the novel is based, but takes place three years before the rest of story begins. I called it Chapter 1 and began Chapter 2 with "Three years later . . ."
It is also to be remembered that published novels with prologues have passed muster with editors. Most of the problems I have seen with prologues involve critiquing of unpublished manuscripts.
caw
caw
I think this is why as well. Prologues, show don't tell, filter words, all of those 'rules' are not rules, they are repeated because so often they are hallmarks of writing that has a lot of room to improve.
With prologues I think it's often because we have this wonderful backstory we think the reader has to know. And they don't, so the prologue isn't needed. And if it isn't needed, it's likely to bore the reader.
If you write well and you understand the reader doesn't need that backstory, and you believe the prologue works, then write one. I see enough prologues in YA that suggests not all publishers turn their noses up at them.
Also, write one but don't be afraid to kill your darling if, when you are finished you realize it doesn't belong.
I didn't want to start a new thread for this but I want to follow up on this thread with a question of my own. So in the book I'm writing, the prologue really isn't very long, maybe a page or two, I don't even know if "prologue" is the right word for something that short. However, what I've done with it is I've created a scene from the past of the main character that explains a characteristic that is not immediate known or realized by other characters in the book but is learned later. It's the 'reason for the existence of the characteristic'. Is this something that can work?
Difficult to say without seeing an example of it. Once you reach 50 posts, consider posting a portion of your prologue in the relevant SYW section below. And remember, offering critiques of others' SYW pieces is a great way to work toward your 50.
Yeah pretty much. I think I can count on one hand the number of prologues where I've thought, dang, that was good.
The rest fall between "okay" and "did you have to? really?"
For new writers, and unpublished mss, I am super wary of them. I think prologue-denial is probably a big part of any sff writer's learning curve (ie realising that conveying worldbuilding is damn hard and working out how to do it without an infodump prologue). If you get through that learning curve, generally know what you're doing and how to construct a story, then they tend to turn out a bit different.
Are you sure it's the ONLY way to relate this characteristic to the reader? *nudges you* Really? Would the characteristic have more punch if we as the readers learned it at the same time as the other characters? Or could you reveal it in some other, more creative way? Go on and challenge yourself. Perhaps the prologue is the best way, and perhaps it's not.
- Status