Epilog question

[SeverinR]

The end of my book a prominent character dies.

I wrote the funeral as an epilog.
I feel it is an interesting read.
The reason I put it in the epilog is in case the reader doesn't care about the funeral.
Personally, I have skipped prologs and epilogs that didn't interest me.

Or is there some other way to offer an optional chapter?


side question:
“The true power of a bard is to draw energy from a crowd, returning it back them in an emotional and meaningful way,”

words of wisdom from a music lover.

Is there a more eligant way of saying this? (He is a highborn noble. (highborn-meaning they have power, rather then a cousin twice removed from the King. Low born noble has little or no power or rules an insignificant province.)

 

[ScipioSmith]

I've never considered prologues or epilogues as optional, and I'm a bit puzzled by the attitude to be honest.

As for your question, I can't see why people wouldn't care, especially if its a character they care about being buried/cremated/whatever the funeral customs of your world are.

 

[SeverinR]

Really?
I think only one book in the last four had a prolog, and only one in ten had a epilog.
Unless you are saying the first chapter is the prolog, and last chapter is the epilog.

The most recent prolog I skipped involved the history of the country in which the story takes place,
I have read six books before this one, dealing with the history of the country, I didn't need to read it again.

 

[Digital_Fey]

Agree with Scipio, if the character is important enough - and the funeral is interesting enough - then readers would care. Whether you make it a separate epilogue or not, the important thing is to write only what's necessary and relevant to the story and its conclusion.

As for your second question, it's a beautiful quote, and I wouldn't try to rephrase it to sound more 'noble'. A pompous tone would ruin it.

 

[Lord Darkstorm]

Back years ago, when series were a minority, unlike the almost exclusive majority today, the prolog was used as the cliff notes cram of what happened in the previous novels that anyone who had read the previous novels would promptly skip. The idea was that the author did not have to spend a great number of words filling in the reader on all that had already happened in the other books. If you were to buy the omnibus versions of them they drop the prolog of the other books, since it is assumed you will read the books in order. So, prologs, in the form that some of use are used to, can be skipped. I, and any other reader, will expect the rest of the story to contain all we need to know to enjoy the story without ever having read the prolog.

Epilogs are after the story, things that add that extra bit that while you don't need it, helps show some glimpse of what happens after the end. So if the main character dies, and the funeral happens after the story, then it is probably best as an epilog. I usually read an epilog, while I skip any prolog that is dull and boring.

 

[SeverinR]

For the quote,
Didn't a famous artist have a quote similar to this?

 

[ScipioSmith]

Epilogs are after the story, things that add that extra bit that while you don't need it, helps show some glimpse of what happens after the end.

While that may be true for some, it isn't universal. The last book I read had an epilogue in which the evil empress raised the most badass hero in the series from the dead and compelled him to obey her will, which I'd say will be pretty necessary to know in upcoming books.

Besides, and this was my original point, what's the point of reading a book if you aren't going to read all of it; at least the first time around?

 

[Lord Darkstorm]

Just because an author determine what they believe a readers should do, doesn't mean they have to do it, or even will do it. I personally feel that an epilog should show up at the end of the story, be it trilogy, cycle, or finished by another author because the original died before finishing. Do they still put them at the end of a book that is book 3 of 15...yes, is it right...well, the publisher let them get away with it, but I still doubt if that is really right.

The definition that applies to writing:

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

So, if the author is putting in an epilog at the end of a book, but not the end of the story, then I'd say they are wrong. I'm sure someone will disagree.

 

[Benjamin Clayborne]

I'm sure someone will disagree.

Robert Jordan and George R. R. Martin disagree, among others. ;-)

I mean it may be "logically" wrong, but does it hurt the story somehow? Does it cause you physical or mental distress to read something if it has the word "epilogue" at the beginning of it, but isn't actually at the end of the whole story? These days epilogues are used as a bookend, even if it's the middle of a multi-volume work. That may not be what they were originally for, but so what? What is the actual problem? I don't think any significant number of readers really care whether it says "Epilogue" or "Chapter 49" at the top.

 

[Elder the Dwarf]

I think an afterword is a good to think about it. You can definitely use it to build into the next book, and I prefer when all the books have epilogues, it is just as a scene that doesn't fit in with the main section of the story, in my opinion. Take it as a p.s. or as a way to wrap up what has happened in that book. I wouldn't say they are required, but I like them. And to answer the OP that does sound like a good epilogue.

 

[Lord Darkstorm]

I mentioned Robert Jordan, who did like to put epilogs at the end of a book, which was clearly not the end of the story. A bit like reading someones eulogy prior to them dying. Might not be wrong, but you start to change the actual meaning of the word. Does it hurt anything? Does modifying the definition of a word to mean something other than it is hurt anything? Only for those who get annoyed with those who change the meaning of word for the sake of doing so, not for any good reason.

Just because someone does it, really doesn't make it correct.

 

[Benjamin Clayborne]

The usage of a word can only be "correct" in respect to a particular authority. There is no centrally defining authority of the English language; ergo "epilogue" means whatever people use it to mean. Now of course if you use a word to mean something that few people understand, you will cause confusion and dismay, such as calling a chapter "Epilogue" when it is not the end of the entire story, but rather the last chapter in a book.

So the question is, does calling X an "Epilogue" cause confusion and dismay, where X is "a chapter at the end of a book that deals with tangential characters or aftereffects, but may not be at the end of the entire story in a multi-volume work"? I don't think it does.

The word is evolving, and I don't think much loss of clarity is occurring. The difference between the traditional "epilogue" and the kind that RJ or GRRM make is not so great that it will cause problems if somebody expects one and gets the other.

 

[Elder the Dwarf]

You totally just gave me a flashback to 2nd grade and the book "Frindle"... I might be the only one that knows what I'm talking about though haha.

 

[TWErvin2]

The question is, what does the funeral add to the story? What is the point? Is there a need or a reason to set it off as opposed to another chapter? If it's an optional thing, then is it really relevant or necessary?

I know, a lot of questions, but you're the one who knows the full story, SeverinR--what's happened and why, and how the substance, style or content for the funeral section woudl be different, have merit, or maybe not be necessary.

 

[Lord Darkstorm]

Typically, the point of a prolog or epilog is that they are not usually told from the same pov character of the story. Since the pov character is dead, then having another chapter after from a different pov that had never before been used would be more confusing. Putting it in an epilog offsets it from the main story and allows for an alternate pov since the original character is unable to tell it (unless you wanted to use a spirit version of the character).

 

[mythique890]

I also tend to think of an epilogue as a sort of "P.S." at the end of the story. Like, "P.S., this is what we all did after that." To me it's for people who want to know more about what happens to the characters after a story ends. The Harry Potter epilogue is a good example. I heard a lot of people were mad about it, but I loved knowing what they went on to do, that my favorite couples got together, that Draco Malfoy was going bald, etc.

In a series, I think the epilogue has become more of a sneak peek of the conflicts that will arise in the next book that helps to hook readers.

I've seen a lot of funerals as epilogues. I think they can be important for the reader even if they don't directly advance the plot. If we really care about this character, we need to mourn, too.