Prologue or not to prologue, that is the question?

[Ginger Wizard]

Gingers checklist for writing a novel: -

Find idea's in your head.....they're in there somewhere, ah yes there you are. Check.
Join a helpful and insightful forum. Check.
Start writing your book. Erm, no check........

Hi everyone. My first actual thread, exciting eh!

Anyway, I have my idea ready to go and start writing. However, I feel the need to write a prologue to explain to the reader about the world and its past. This feels like I'm cheating a bit and I don't have confidence in my own writing. Surely a good writer can explain about the world and past within the story?

Some good authors use prologues though, so they must be useful.

Any thoughts or comments would be greatly appreciated.

[sashamerideth]

I am one of those that does not like prologues. I think that the history doesn't need to be understood up front, and can be woven throughout the beginning chapters. I am of the opinion that a prolog should be nice to read but not required to understand the story.

Sent from my Blade using Forum Runner

[Chilari]

Prologues irritate me for a number of reasons:

1. They tend to be written in a style different from the rest of the novel, or with a very different mood or atmosphere to the rest of the novel; historical prologues tend to be dry, and those looking at characters who aren't the protagonists tend to be overly vague and mysterious. Getting to the end of the prologue and starting chapter 1 tends to distrupt my reading experience as a result, far more than merely the end of a chapter ever does. The border between the prologue and the first chapter is often very jarring, as often it marks a change in mood, character, topic, setting and clarity. By comparison, the border between chapters often marks a change in only one or two of those things, generally character and/or setting, fairly rarely in mood, and almost never in the level of clarity with which the story is written. Chapter breaks have continuity of something - even if only in the last and first paragraphs, where maybe one character talks about another, and then the next chapter is about that other charatcer. After the prologue, there is almost never any measure of continuity of style, clarity and mood discernable within the first few pages of chapter 1, and rarely continuity of character or topic.

2. As Sasha said, they're frequently unnecessary. If they involve some mysterious plot, why not simply reveal the particulars of that to the readers as the characters discover them? If it's about history, you weave it into the society of the world you've set the story in - say if there's a war, people would think about wars in the past that have similar elements and compare them. In the real world, the topic of the Titanic has re-emerged, partly because this year is the 100th anniversary, and partly because of the tragedy with the Costa Concordia. People talk about historical events that have some link or relevance to modern events. Or if there was a change in power at some point in the past, surely there are people descended from those who were once in power still around, holding grudges against those now in power?

3. Sometimes people obsess about the prologue and shape their story around how the main plot ties into it. The story then becomes prologue-driven (which I consider a sub-type of plot-driven) rather than character-driven. Characters lose their agency; the writer reacts to the prologue in the way he or she writes events otherwise unconnected to it. Fortunately, this is not frequently the case with prologues in published stories, but I have seen it happen in unpublished works. But while most writers do not reach the extreme of building the story around the mystery or open-endedness of the prologue, often stories are weakened by the existence of the prologue, ignoring points one and two, because they are afforded an importance beyond other chapters, they are seen as the reason for everything happening, rather than merely the start of the story.

Having said that, there are exceptions. The prologue for Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, for example, establishes that Harry Potter is not normal long before he discovers it for himself; it introduces some of the characters he will later encounter; and it shows immediately that while the early part of the first chapter might appear to be directionless, there is an end point. The tone and writing style are consistent with the rest of the novel, there is continuity in character and place, and the information is not only relevant, but also very difficult to slip in casually later.

For me to like a prologue it needs to fit these criteria. Unfortunately, most do not.

[TWErvin2]

Prologues as a history lesson for the reader are unlikely to succeed.

How will the reader care if they lack context for what is being described? How will the remember and will they want to remember? There is a segment that enjoys that thing, but how big is that segment and when a reader browses a book (or even an editor or agent if you're going that route)?

If possible, work the necessary information into the context of the story, as it's needed. Maybe write the prologue, and keep track of what's necessary, but then work to incorporate the necessary information into the storyline. It'll make more sense to the reader, and they'll remember it. Let the reader discover the world and its past, and trust them to be sharp enough to pick it up.

[Benjamin Clayborne]

I have absolutely no problem with prologues per se. In my experience, prologues are not written badly, are not written in a different style from the rest of the book, do not infodump, and cannot simply be erased in favor of integrating what they contain into the main storyline.

A lot of people have very strong feelings against prologues, but don't let that sway you: If you can write a good prologue, nobody will actually mind reading it.

[Steerpike]

I vote against a prologue designed to explain to the reader about the world and its past. If that can't be relayed over the course of the actual story, then the reader probably doesn't need to know it.

[Lord Darkstorm]

If you can write a good prologue, nobody will actually mind reading it.

This is the problem with many prologs, they aren't well written, and too often self indulgent on the part of the writer.

[Butterfly]

I don't mind prologues, they are device at our disposal and if the story needs one, then it needs one and there's no avoiding it. I use them, but for me they have to be relevant to the immediate story, not set so many years in the past, but maybe only a few weeks or months, I want to see them raising the stakes for the main characters, and introduce the villains. The prologues that I don't like, and the ones that bore me are those that are used as info-dumps to set up the world (which we will see from the character's eyes as the writer takes us through the story) or for a history lesson on the culture written about, again we will learn it as the tale progresses, shown (and not told) from the character's eyes.

As for the writing of one - I don't think the best prologue can ever be written on day one of writing. It's taken me a while to find the right one for my story, and one that I am sort of happy with, and it took several drafts. It wasn't easy and not one resembled anything like the one that came before it, though each one made me think about it in a different way. Realistically, what I have now never entered my mind at the start. it's only from working out the details as I went along that it grew and developed and it is among one of the last things that I drafted out. (I'm still redrafting the main story and I have a long way to go). I'd say start by writing the story, get the first draft done and at the end of it you'll instinctively know if there is still a need for a prologue or not. Don't worry about it at this stage, get the main story down first, learn the craft and the rest will follow.

Alternatively, if you still want to go ahead with the info-dump - the history and world set-up - you could place it in an appendix at the back so if your readers want to read that information it is there for them without it putting them off and stalling the story right at the beginning.

[San Cidolfus]

People have raised a lot of good points against prologues, and not too many in favor of them. A prologue is just another tool in the writer's kit; it has its time and place for use, and using it when it's not needed just makes a mess of the job.
If your story is concise in its scope and fairly linear, there's really no need for a prologue. Just launch straight into the narrative and let come what may. You expressed concerns about introducing strange elements and having to get the reader up to speed. Have a little faith in your readers! Most fantasy readers are quick enough on their feet to pick things up as you introduce them. What's more important is the way in which you introduce what makes your fantasy world different. Simply explaining these things at the start is no fun at all. Let the reader discover them as the characters discover them. Don't lecture; SHOW.
That said, prologues can be important in the right narrative. Typically larger works with multiple plot arcs benefit most from a prologue, because prologues can foreshadow events that may not manifest immediately in the narrative but remain vital, even if their relevance isn't clear until later on. A good writer can use a prologue to introduce a plot element in a large story, then embark on the main narrative with only hints at what was introduced in the prologue, then later on have that plot element arrive on the scene with some real force and presence. Prologues can put ideas in the back of a reader's mind and allow for greater impact when those elements come to preeminence.
Of course, this all depends on whether or not the writer can pull it off. But that's always how it is.

[Benjamin Clayborne]

This is the problem with many prologs, they aren't well written, and too often self indulgent on the part of the writer.

Are there really a lot of good books with bad prologues? I don't think that's the case, which means that the problem is bad writing, not prologues.