- This topic has 11 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated May 8, 2013 at 4:43 pm by
.
-
Posts
-
So I took Holly Lisle’s “How to Write a Series” and I learned that she haaaatteees prologues, which really surprised me. I was discussing with another writer’s community and they felt similarly. Some people actually skip prologues when they read books that have them. Some people read them but find them to be useless.
I’m surprised, as I’ve never found a prologue to be useless. I’m writing a novel right now that starts with a prologue that sets up the major conflict of the book. I’m doing it kind of in a “Law and Order” kind of way–there is a death that opens the reader up to one of the major problems in the world of the novel. I think that those kind of prologues are cool and interesting, but now I’m wondering if they aren’t the way to go?
What do other people think about prologues? Am I the only one who likes them?
The thing about prologues is that they are often abused. I personally am one of those that skim prologues. If it doesn’t have a hook, I’m not going to read it. Similarly, it creates more work, because not only does your prologue need to have a decent hook, but there needs to be another hook in Chapter 1.
I’ve read one prologue that I actually liked. Most of the time, i don’t enjoy them.
But I do think in certain cases, a prologue is fine. I actually have a prologue in a contemporary military romance I just finished editing. So, I’ll never say a prologue is unnecessary. But it’s a very rare thing.
I also think this comes from the number of bad prologues out there. I’ve read several that I wish I’d skipped. One, in a Romance, told me all the secrets about the hero. I still enjoyed the book, but feel I would have enjoyed it so much more if the author had allowed me to learn these secrets WITH the heroine rather than giving me the information in the first pages.
Other time, often in fantasy novels, the prologue is used to explain all the world-building. These are often rather static and, frankly, boring. Again, it’s fun to discover the world as the story unfolds rather than all up front as if in a text book.
I think this is the main danger with a prologue — it can give away too much of the story. Stories are best when they unfold through the action. As a reader, I want to experience the story, not have it explained in some info-dump at the beginning.
But all these bad prologues doesn’t mean that prologues that avoid these pit-falls can’t be good. It’s like so much in writing. When done well, they’re great. When done poorly, it’s … well, bad.
My personal treatment of prologues is that I DO skip them when reading. I cut to the place marked ‘chapter 1’ and start reading. If I can follow the story, I save the prologue for reading at the END of the book. If I can’t follow the story starting in chapter 1, I go back and read the prologue.
This way, my experience isn’t spoiled by a prologue that might well give away more than I want at the beginning.
–June
JuneDrexler wrote:I also think this comes from the number of bad prologues out there. I’ve read several that I wish I’d skipped. One, in a Romance, told me all the secrets about the hero. I still enjoyed the book, but feel I would have enjoyed it so much more if the author had allowed me to learn these secrets WITH the heroine rather than giving me the information in the first pages.Other time, often in fantasy novels, the prologue is used to explain all the world-building. These are often rather static and, frankly, boring. Again, it’s fun to discover the world as the story unfolds rather than all up front as if in a text book.
I think this is the main danger with a prologue — it can give away too much of the story. Stories are best when they unfold through the action. As a reader, I want to experience the story, not have it explained in some info-dump at the beginning.
But all these bad prologues doesn’t mean that prologues that avoid these pit-falls can’t be good. It’s like so much in writing. When done well, they’re great. When done poorly, it’s … well, bad.
My personal treatment of prologues is that I DO skip them when reading. I cut to the place marked ‘chapter 1’ and start reading. If I can follow the story, I save the prologue for reading at the END of the book. If I can’t follow the story starting in chapter 1, I go back and read the prologue.
This way, my experience isn’t spoiled by a prologue that might well give away more than I want at the beginning.
–June
I agree with all of this. I won’t dismiss a book because it has a prologue, though I’ve had conversations with people who do. I do think that prologues should be rare, and used only in times of great need… like the color yellow, or the emergency stop at a nuclear plant.
For many years, my primary reading was in Fantasy and SF, and in only one memorable instance did I find the prologue necessary. In Valerie Grisold-Ford’s Not Your Father’s Horseman. The prologue was of a scene which set up certain specific things in the book which could not have fit in the book in any other way, even as backstory woven in (it’s my belief it would have taken more wordage to explain the circumstances in the prologue than it did just to have the prologue).
As a rule, I’ll read up to the first paragraph of a prologue. The vast majority I’ve come across in Fantasy and SF have been summaries of events in previous books. I’ve also seen History Lessons covering information which is largely unrelated to the story’s current events as prologues. As a rule, I’ll skip over them if they seem to be heading down these paths, then read them the second or third time I read the book.
Personally, since I find the vast majority of prologues pointless (it’s info which could have been sprinkled in as backstory or wasn’t really necessary at all), I have yet to find a reason to write one myself, and I’ve made efforts to find a way to include information I would put in one in the story elsewhere some other way.
Ashe Elton Parker
"Just love me, fear me, do as I say, and I will be your slave." ~ David Bowie as Jareth in Labyrinth
~*~
Member since 1998.
~*~I like well-done prologues, which are usually a way to introduce information that the reader needs to enjoy the story, but which is not directly related to the events that are happening with the POV character. I like them far better than I like the stories which ‘skip’ the prologue in favor of a first chapter that is only set up for the story in the rest of the book. These are annoying because they often introduce characters and situations you think you are going to be reading about, only to have it change completely a few pages later.
Yes, some people don’t read prologues. Some people read the ends of mystery books first. Some people won’t read science fiction. Some people won’t read nonfiction. Some people just won’t read.
You’ll find huge groups for all of them; just don’t write for the people who aren’t your audience. The only time this differs is if your publisher or agent decides differently. Then you get to decide how much you are willing to change for publication.
I don’t hate them, but I’ve seen prologues that gave a way a huge plot point or wasn’t worth spending the time on. In a mystery I read, the prologue showed an unknown person finding the body (it was in omni POV), and then the main character came on the scene (in first person) to find the body — essentially it repeated the same event twice. I still don’t get why that prologue was even there.
I like Clive Cussler’s prologues because they make me wonder how they are going to fit in with the overall story. He usually has his modern day character find a historical shipwreck, and the prologues show the events of the shipwreck.
Though I’m on another writer’s board and when the subject comes up, the writer is told “Get rid of the prologue.” That I disagree with because there too many people focused on, “It’s a rule. You can’t do it.” Yes, it is something that is on the agent’s top 10 list of what they hate to see on a sub. So that would make me think long and hard about if wanted to do a prologue on a first submission. But I’d still do one if I thought the story needed, and I’d make sure it was the best possible. I think that’s the part we lose when people arbitrarily say, “Don’t do it” because then no one tries to stretch themselves.
All of these perspectives are so interesting. I had no idea that prologues were so controversial! I feel like I see them all the time and I’ve always read every one that I’ve encountered! (I’m such a conformist….)
I think I’ll write the one that I have and then decide if it’s appropriate during the editing process. Lord knows, if I have 99 problems, the prologue ain’t a one…but I’m still interested in the various views.
Does this mean that people hate epilogues, too?
KCWise wrote:All of these perspectives are so interesting. I had no idea that prologues were so controversial! I feel like I see them all the time and I’ve always read every one that I’ve encountered! (I’m such a conformist….)I think I’ll write the one that I have and then decide if it’s appropriate during the editing process. Lord knows, if I have 99 problems, the prologue ain’t a one…but I’m still interested in the various views.
Does this mean that people hate epilogues, too?
Epilogues are a slightly different beast. Often, it’s a look at the characters’ lives later, after the book ends. By the end of the book, I’m invested in the characters and I want that glimpse into their lives. It’s kinda like checking in with a friend. Interestingly enough, the book I just wrote my prologue for also has a epilogue.
I’m sure there are people irritated by epilogues, but at that point, it’s easier to just put the book down, because you’re at the end, as opposed to prologues, where you still have a whole book left to read.
Bottom line with prologues: If you cut it, and your story still reads fine without it, then it’s probably not necessary. Explaining the world isn’t a good enough reason to keep a prologue. It needs to have a hook that ties into the basic concept of the story and provides some element you can’t get from the rest of the story but still furthers the story.
I was surprised when I first read — here on FM, actually — that people skipped prologues. I’ve always read them, and never thought much about it one way or the other. However, last year I did come across a prologue which bored me to tears and almost made me rethink reading a book. (I should have listened to my instincts. I found other organizational problems with the book and gave up about a third of the way in because I just couldn’t get invested in the characters or the action.)
If you want one, you think you need it, and it adds to the book as a whole, write it.
I started as a reader who read everything in a book, possibly to the point of spending time fact checking the back cover blurb. And I committed my share of prologues early on. And then I ran across enough bad prologues that I became violently anti-prologue.
Now, I think I’m in a more moderate place. Sometimes I read prologues; often I skip them and go back if something seems like a deus ex machina. Oho, I think; was this set up in that prologue that I didn’t read? Sometimes it was.
I still rankle when I read or hear “certain genres expect prologues.” (Yes, I’m looking at Brandon Sanderson.) I don’t think that’s true, although I think the converse (that certain genres loathe prologues) might be true. Yes, a prologue is twice the chance to lose readers, but in my more sane moments I realize that as writers we are not shying away from challenges.
I generally expect the events of the prologue to be related to the main story but separate in time or space or character in some way, something that enhances the reader’s understanding or enjoyment but would not necessarily be obvious to a character.
Prologues as history lesson or world-building bore me, and might cause me to put the book down. When it’s more than three paragraphs, I want a story in my prologue.
Like everything else in a book, part of it is a question of authorial deftness and confidence. If I, as Joe Reader, think you know what you’re doing, I’ll ride along, trusting that it will all come together in a book. If you don’t know what you’re doing, an unnecessary prologue is a symptom, not the cause of the problem.
Great at theory, terrible at practice.
I treat prologues the same way I treat the rest of a book. Which means I’ll read them – until they completely lose me or bore me to death.
Still, I know a lot of people avoid them. I also think Zette has a point – unless the prologue follows the same characters as the rest of the book, it is annoying to find it labelled “Chapter One”, then discover every other chapter is about completely different people.
I don’t believe in rules, so I would never say a writer should not have a prologue, or that they should include one for certain genres. But I do think it is useful to at least consider the techniques you could use if you decided a prologue might scare off too many of your readers. One tactic (and this sounds absurd, but I’ve seen at least some people whose eyes glaze over at the word ‘prologue’ react positively to this) is simply to change the label. Instead of typing “Prologue” as the header, type “Two Years Earlier” (or whatever applies). That alerts the reader this may not be the main story they’re going to be reading, without dragging in the dreaded “p-word”.
The other technique, of course, is to weave this backstory in flashbacks into your main story. I’ve seen that done badly, and done well. If it is easier for you, you can always write the prologue, then weave it in during revision. Note that I’m not saying this is always the right answer, or that it would work for you. I’m simply saying it is an alternative technique to consider, if you have earlier material you need to expose the reader to. And it does seem to me that by the time you introduce a flashback, if your story works at all, then your reader will care about what you’re telling them in a way they may not if you stick it all in a lump before the story begins.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.