Who hates Prologues?

[evolution_rex]

The word "prologue" means something like "before the speech," or at least something along those general lines. So when a writer uses a prologue it seems to me they're admitting that what is there something that comes before the story, and most times I'd just as soon get straight to the story.

How can something be before the story? Doesn't, by writing it down, that make it part of the story and thus the beginning of the story?

 

[Steerpike]

How can something be before the story? Doesn't, by writing it down, that make it part of the story and thus the beginning of the story?

Not at all. My "story" consists of a certain arc of events, characters, etc. All of the elements that go into making a story. As a hypothetical, I could write something completely unrelated and wholly irrelevant and slap it into a prologue, and by your definition that would become part of the story. That doesn't make sense. There has to be a line somewhere, and that line can't be the mere fact that it was written down and put in front of chapter 1. If we adopt that viewpoint, I could add two pages to the beginning of my epic fantasy about the time my cat Molly got lost and I drove around the neighborhood with fliers. Hey, now it's written down and in a prologue so it must be part of the story...no, it's actually nothing to do with the story at all

An extreme example, but it demonstrates that just because something is written down it doesn't necessarily become part of the story. Prologues are generally more related to the story, but they're often a poor starting point (which is why they get stuck in 'prologue' and not chapter 1), and they often seem to be included because the author thinks she has to have to because she hasn't considered, or lacks the skill, to effectively transmit the same information to the reader within the work proper.

There are exceptions, of course. People have written effective prologues. I don't think anyone has ever written a necessary one, and the bad ones outweigh the good, particularly when it comes to new writers.

 

[evolution_rex]

Not at all. My "story" consists of a certain arc of events, characters, etc. All of the elements that go into making a story. As a hypothetical, I could write something completely unrelated and wholly irrelevant and slap it into a prologue, and by your definition that would become part of the story. That doesn't make sense. There has to be a line somewhere, and that line can't be the mere fact that it was written down and put in front of chapter 1. If we adopt that viewpoint, I could add two pages to the beginning of my epic fantasy about the time my cat Molly got lost and I drove around the neighborhood with fliers. Hey, now it's written down and in a prologue so it must be part of the story...no, it's actually nothing to do with the story at all

If it's thematically or symbolically related to the rest of the story I'd argue that it can still be 'part' of the story. but if you're going to write a short story at the beginning of the novel, then it's not a prologue either, it's just a short story.

 

[Steerpike]

If it's thematically or symbolically related to the rest of the story I'd argue that it can still be 'part' of the story. but if you're going to write a short story at the beginning of the novel, then it's not a prologue either, it's just a short story.

Yes. You said above "Doesn't, by writing it down, that make it part of the story and thus the beginning of the story?" I'm just pointing out that can't be true. Likewise, you could call something a prologue that isn't part of the story, or more often perhaps not part of the story proper. Just because you've written it and labeled it as such doesn't mean it really belongs, or that it is the most effect way to convey information if it does belong.

 

[Russ]

1) In many cases, it is immediately apparent why the author add the prologue (i.e. as an infodump). That doesn't add to, but detracts from the story, and you don't have to read the whole prologue to see it is going that direction.
2) I've read books where the prologue sucked, but starting at chapter 1 the book was pretty good (often because the story starts in chapter 1, and the author even knows that which is why she put that material in a place called "chapter 1.").

.

Totally agree. I can quickly tell if a prologue is "one of those" prologues or something that might really add some value to the whole story.

 

[Steerpike]

Totally agree. I can quickly tell if a prologue is "one of those" prologues or something that might really add some value to the whole story.

Yes. I have read so much that at this point it isn't hard to do. And I have no qualms about skipping them. I'm not sure why people take it personally, but in the unlikely event I ever used a prologue I wouldn't be offended if people skipped it. I'm just not likely to ever use one

 

[X Equestris]

I hate prologues that dump history on you. On rare occasions, an author pulls it off well, but the majority of that prologue type are terribly dull and boring. If a prologue is truly necessary, I prefer ones along the lines of A Game of Thrones'

 

[skip.knox]

You can count me among those who are skeptical of prologues, especially in fantasy. If you want to put me instantly on a critical footing, start your story with a prologue. You can still win me over, but you are starting your at bat down in the count.

That having been said, I wrote a dozen different openings to my WiP and wound up with a prologue. Augh! How did it happen? How can I justify it?

The novel has goblins in it. A horde of them, but they don't come swooping into the story until several chapters later. The early chapters are all about the protagonist, who is something of a jerk, taking command of a Roman legion on the frontier. He faces an immediate challenge and the early chapters are about that challenge, plus the usual filling in about the world, the plot, the characters.

But it would be very easy for the reader to suppose this is a historical novel, since I pay a lot of attention to historical detail. Even with hints about magic, the reader might suppose it's a historical novel with just a touch of low fantasy.

What the prologue does is let the reader know, right up front, here be monsters. So, in the ensuing chapters, when I make oblique references to scouts who have not returned, and rumors among the local tribes, these points call back to something meaningful.

OK, by now I here you impatiently insisting I have not written a prologue, I've simply mis-numbered my chapters. I tried that. But here's the thing. There is a single human character in the opening (one of those scouts). He dies.

Chapter One should not begin with characters we are never going to see again. I entitled it Prologue, and it felt right.

In all the discussion of what constitutes a prologue, I'd like to add another possibility. It's how I think of the Prologue in my novel.

It's the establishing shot. It frames the up-coming story in a way that the close-ups of Chapter One cannot, and should not.

All of this is ex post facto justification. I wrote the prologue, realized it was a prologue, then was so mystified, I spent a fair amount of time trying to figure out what had just happened. The above represents my conclusions. I fully intend never to write another prologue. IMO, prologues, like adverbs, should be used only when unavoidable.

 

[Russ]

This, like the GOT prologue is one of the ways a prologue can be used effectively. These goblins are an initiating event, they are critical to the plot arc of the story, and the reader knowing they exist increases tension.

The reader is thinking "Oh yeah I know Legate X is having this stupid problem with the legion, but the goblins are coming, I wonder when they are coming."

To give a related historical example, you could be doing a book about a roman general near the end of the Roman empire and you might chose to do a prologue depicting the barbarians crossing the frozen rhine. This is not world building, it is a key initiating event geographically isolated from the protagonist...but not for long!

The actions of the goblins are an initiating event the readers need to know about.

 

[skip.knox]

Agreed. (obviously!)

I certainly could have written it differently. I did, in fact. A bunch of times. But once I had that approach, it felt right, and none of my beta readers object, which is about all the validation I need.

At that point, rewriting it would be doing so simply to achieve the ideological goal of not having a prologue. Which would be pretty silly.

 

[Queshire]

I've never skipped a prologue. I hate the prologue as much as a I hate the period and the letter Q.

Hey! What's wrong with the letter Q? D=<

On prolouges... I've never had a problem with them. Using them as an introductory scene for the world as mentioned before is a neat job, and I often find myself starting to write prolouge-y bits to help establish what of the plot is in motion before my MCs show up, but that's mostly for my benefit. They may or may not stick around in the final product.

 

[Netardapope]

Blog post on exactly this:

Everything You Ever Wanted to Ask About Prologues but were Afraid to Know

Some prologues suck because some writers don't understand what prologues are for, and they write them anyway.

In epic fantasy, the world is a character with its own arc. It has its own reason for being in the story, it interacts with the characters, and most of all, it has to be changed at the end through the main characters’ actions. This last bit is one of the immutable and defining characteristics of epic fantasy.

If you're wondering if your story is high fantasy or epic fantasy, this is the delineation, right here. If your characters are in a magical fantasy realm and they go out and get in rollicking adventures but don't change anything in the larger scheme of things, it's high fantasy; if their exploits literally change the world, it's epic fantasy.

In epic fantasy, the prologue is a scene that introduces the world as a character. It introduces the world at the outset and tells us enough about it so that we can see how much it has changed at the end. A correctly written prologue, if skipped, should give some aspect of the world the same impact in Chapter One as if you'd suddenly dropped in a character that no one had ever heard of.

High fantasy and even most SF stories don't require prologues. Some writers put them in anyway, with no understanding of what they're supposed to accomplish; I have to wonder if they just think, "Well, it has to have one, so here goes." So sometimes we get nattering backstories, or ten-page info dumps, and sometimes unrelated scenes altogether.

Bad prologues lead to prologue hate. Write necessary prologues.

I see what you mean, prologues do have a function depending on what genre you're in. I guess it's kind of like those things that people write in because they want to have one, like a blind tradition.

P.S.: Sorry I haven't been on this thread for a while. I've been busy and very sick

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

 

[Netardapope]

I definitely skip prologues at times. I've also put books back on the shelves and not bought them when it came down to a choice between one that has a prologue and another that doesn't. This is because I often find I don't enjoy prologues. I know some who read them, and others who skip them, and because of the latter people often say you shouldn't put anything important in the prologue. But if you don't have anything important in there you may as well just remove it.

I can agree with you there, but I find that that was a problem with older books. I think modern prologues learned their lesson for the most part (many exceptions of course) but all in all, I think most are good know.

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

 

[Netardapope]

All of the information about what the world was like before could be provided through a variety of mechanisms within the narrative proper, so I don't view it as strictly necessary. It's a stylistic choice the author can make as to how to provide it, but I can't think of a scenario where the only way to accomplish goal X is to use a prologue.

I see where you're coming from, but I feel a prologue tends to give a "purer" intro to the world, since it doesn't tend to have the perspective of the main character. So in that sense, I do see them as more effective in introducing the world.

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

 

[Netardapope]

To me, a prologue is just another part of the story. That means that every word has to have a reason to exist. But that also means that I find the term 'prologue' to be useless. I think people see the word prologue and all they think is that it's part of the story that you can skip. And to me, if you believe the reader can skip that part, then it's not worth writing it in there. If you want the beginning of your story to take place on a battlefield millions of years before the rest of the story, then why can't that just be the first chapter? Because it doesn't revolve around the main character? I don't get it.

But I've never really had any trouble reading prologues. Even if it's a redundant prologue I still for the most part don't mind reading through it. The writer wrote it and so that means, to me, that it's suppose to be read.


EDIT: That's all referring to prologues when it's written in a more narrative form. If it's written something like you see at the beginning of Star Wars, then frankly it doesn't belong as a first chapter or prologue. That kind of stuff is pointless in a novel unless you absolutely cannot find a plausible way to write the exposition within the story.

I think that there is a difference between the prologue and the first chapter. In one sense, it makes it less jarring to skip from a very old time period to the present one, because it presents itself as being autonomous from the main story in a way. maybe it's just me, but if chapter 2 takes place a 1000 Years after chapter 1, I'd be confused. It'd make me stop reading to see if I understood properly, thus taking me out of the story It has to do with pacing in my opinion.

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

 

[Incanus]

I’ve never understood why some readers have a problem with prologues. It’s just an issue of formatting, or a tool. Formats and tools can be misused, but that’s not an inherent fault of the technique.

How much difference is there between eating a meal while sitting on a chair, and eating the same meal while sitting on a couch? The meal tastes the same, has the same nutritional content, either way.

You’ll eat green eggs and ham on a plane, but not on a train? I can’t imagine why.

The book I’m reading at the moment has a 77-page, 5 chapter prologue. It’s not world-building stuff, it’s crucial, dramatic story events. It can’t be folded in elsewhere, but it could have just been called Part 1 or something. Wouldn’t have made the slightest difference to me. A rose by any other name…

 

[DragonOfTheAerie]

I’ve never understood why some readers have a problem with prologues. It’s just an issue of formatting, or a tool. Formats and tools can be misused, but that’s not an inherent fault of the technique.

How much difference is there between eating a meal while sitting on a chair, and eating the same meal while sitting on a couch? The meal tastes the same, has the same nutritional content, either way.

You’ll eat green eggs and ham on a plane, but not on a train? I can’t imagine why.

The book I’m reading at the moment has a 77-page, 5 chapter prologue. It’s not world-building stuff, it’s crucial, dramatic story events. It can’t be folded in elsewhere, but it could have just been called Part 1 or something. Wouldn’t have made the slightest difference to me. A rose by any other name…

That's just it though for some of us, lol. If there's no necessity of calling it a prologue, don't call it a prologue, sometimes the pointlessness alone can be bothersome

 

[skip.knox]

>I’ve never understood why some readers have a problem with prologues.

I think it happens like this, Incanus. A great many prologues are poorly done. So are Chapter Ones or Chapter Twelves. But "prologue" has a specific name. It's harder to claim nobody needs a Chapter Twelve. In other words, people are reacting to bad writing. "Prologue" is easy to identify and is encountered more often than Chapter Twelves.

The other part is this. People who teach writing, who write books that teach writing, who write blogs about writing about writing, need "lessons" they can offer. The bloggers and tweeters, in particular, need something brief (if not always pithy). Something that nestles comfortably into bullet points.

Enter: Avoid Prologues

Brief enough even to fit on a Powerpoint slide. Credibility is gained because so much evidence can be presented. There are no end of awful Prologues ready to hand for the aspiring workshop teacher. The advice gets repeated and amplified in the IEO (Internet Echo Chamber) et voilà, we have collective wisdom.

It's so easily modified. It should read "Avoid Bad Prologues". But, of course, that throws an intolerable burden onto the shoulders of the teacher/adviser/critic, for now they need to be able to say how to write well.

Well, I've finished off my bottle of cynicism. Tasty as always, though a little bitter.

 

[mulierrex]

I like prologues. Well, some of them. The ones that make the most sense to me personally and I enjoy reading are the ones that explain the plot or give background on what the main characters are going to be doing. For example, a prologue that takes place some time before the main story, and sets the course of the main plot in motion. For an actual example: while the Hobbit didn't have a prologue, it could've, I suppose, have been about the dwarves. That way I wouldn't have been confused for the first 30% of the book wondering why they're even going on the journey, lol.

However, I think even prologues that are just throwaway info-dumps are interesting -- though that's probably because I have this strange obsession with worldbuilding. So I don't know how useful my opinion is here

And while this isn't related to prologues, I really loves novels that have maps in the beginning pages... I'm constantly going back to check them during reading.

 

[Incanus]

Great insight, Skip. Thanks for that. I agree.

The one writing class I took at a community college in the 90's never brought up prologues that I can remember. Nor did any of the 30-40 writing books I've read.

I guess this is something relatively new then.

I'll stick with getting to the heart of the matter: bad writing.

A Ben Franklin quote seems apropos: "There never was a good knife made of bad steel."