To prologue or not to prologue?

This was why my first one happened 14 years previous. In the main story, we never see the MC and her siblings as children and for the most part, we never see them together. In the prologue, which is less that two book pages long, we get a glimpse into two minutes of them as children in one single scene that shows the individual personalities of each child - an indication of how and why they become the adults that they do.

 

I could. Or I could just drop the word prologue and go straight into the place and date.

Like you say, there are a number of different options. It's a shame a potential publisher/agent will dismiss a story based on that one word when changes can be made and options are available - if an author wants to use them.

 

I will usually skip a prologue of the author is using it as a page to tell me about something technical.

 

That's all any writer can reasonably ask for from the reader. Just give it a chance. The same chance you would give it, if it was Chapter One.

 

The technical aspect would be why I would definitely read a prologue.

 

Prologue- (pro-log) noun/verbish thing

Should eventually be renamed Chapter 0 (as that is basically what they are in terms of content and length). Effectively has the main job of explaining the backstory that is lightly touched upon by the main story that proceeds it. This is mainly a way to tell a brief form of history of the 'world', or discuss the past events of a character or scenario. While it can be helpful to the story-line in some ways. Instead write a prequel type novella covering all the complexity, instead of trying to capture it in a chapter length chunk.

Also I am going to try extra hard to start calling this Chapter 0, cause lets be honest it is kinda like a chapter before Chapter 1.

 

What I mean is, I once read a fiction book, (something along the lines of Congo/Timeline) where the author had a prologue-esqe piece at the beginning which told of the current technologies and how those were expected to advance in the coming years. In other words, he was saying that although the story was fiction, because of the way technology currently worked and was heading, there was no reason why the story couldn't one day "happen" in real life ...

It kinda had no bearing on the story or the characters, more of a vindication of what the author was writing.

 

Prequel.

I like that!

Prequel - Part One. New York, May, Eight Months Ago.

Prequel - Part Two. New Jersey, May, Eight Months Ago.

Chapter one - Present Day ...

 

I would actually call that a preface or an introduction—and these CAN be skipped. Or read afterwards.

The important thing to remember about a prologue is that is IS an important part of the story and DOES have impact on what happens in the story and can NOT be skipped. It contains something you (the reader) need to know beforehand—and will not have known if you didn't read it.

Length isn't really the issue. Some prologues are very short. Some are a complete chapter. What sets them apart is when/where/who the prologue contains. It differs in some aspect from the rest of the story, but it is essential.

 

What strikes me here is how much bending over backwards folks are doing trying to disguise their prologue, because they've been fed the notion that some people don't read prologues so you have to fool them into doing so. Chapter Zero. Prequel. Even not naming it at all.

This is so insane. It really is. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's not a robin. You are not wrong for wanting to write a prologue. Your job is to do it well. If folk decide ahead of time, before reading a single word, that your writing will be crap because you've included a prologue, I'm sorry. That really is their loss.

If I see the word 'vampire' in a blurb about a book, I will probably not read it. It may be a wonderful book, but I just don't like vampire stories. I've never read a vampire story I liked. I don't like horror stories either, and never read them. However, I'm not telling people they shouldn't write vampire stories or horror stories. The preference is mine, not theirs. Write what you want. Some will like it, some won't. That's part of the game.

If I was an agent, I'd tell people straight up not to send me horror stories. If I was an agent who also dislikes prologues and won't ever read them, I would tell people, "Don't send me anything with a prologue." Folk who write prologues or horror stories won't waste time submitting to me and will go elsewhere. Everybody wins.

 

I experienced the perverse effect of not labelling a prologue a prologue with my writing contest submission this past winter. I simply dated it, then headed the first chapter with "Section One, Chapter One," and the date 19 years later. And one of the judges was totally confused with the time jump. She (or he?) couldn't figure it out at all. But this answered the question, "Why not just call it Chapter 1?" Because it ain't Chapter 1, that's why.

I've decided to call a spade a spade and the prologue a prologue. Less confusing.

 

This is the exactly why you should write a prologue if you need one. I am definitely pro-prologue but as others have said it should make sense being there. If it doesn't provide essential information or isn't significantly different from the rest of the book then it shouldn't be there.

 

I bit the bullet and left it as is ...

I have a release day - time to throw this baby to the lions! (and for any spyware reading this, by "baby" I mean "book", not an actual baby!)

 

This is something I have been thinking too much about. Before I even started writing my WIP novel there was this little voice in me that said "Prologue! You need a prologue in this one! It cannot be complete any other way. This way or no way at all."

So I followed that voice but I don't know if I want to put a scene from a character's past or future in it. That seems too cliché. All I know is that I want one because this piece of writing will be incomplete without it (and epilogue) for that matter.

 

But if you don't know what's in the prologue, what about it makes it need a prologue?

 

I'm not sure it's just intuitive I suppose. The same way a band might make a song with certain arrangements because of their vision of it (ex. there needs to be a breakdown because I can't imagine it without one).

 

I always write a prologue. Every time. I find it helps me organize my thoughts as a writer, and helps me ease into the process of writing the actual content.

Then when I'm done I delete it.

A prologue is a way to dump a lot of info on the page that you think the reader has to know. It's been my experience that, for the most part, it really just contains things the author wants the reader to know. And, in my opinion, there are better ways to fit that information into a story.

 

Shakespeare would only do prologues to set scenes of vast sea wars or to explain the fate of the characters as pre-destined (Romeo & Juliet)

Would the reader understand the story without it? Is it necessary?

I think most readers may skip that part anyway so only include it if it wouldn't make sense without it

 

I've included a prologue in my WIP. I didn't to begin with but actually went back after deciding my beginning was just flat and boring, and totally rewrote the first few chapters. It's the only scene told from someone other than my MC's point of view and I feel it works well in my story to create immediate conflict but without adding to the actual plot as such.
I don't like prologues that are just used as a dump for lengthy character backstory or biography. That's just lazy in my opinion.

 

Well, I wrote my Prologue last, after several beta readers gave me feedback about my original prologue-less story. Turns out it needed one. Subsequent betas have not complained about its inclusion. Not one.

I worry when people think there is only one right way to deal with this issue. There isn't really—as all the successful novels out there that begin with prologues can attest.

If you use yours as a story beginning to get you going, then delete it later, that's fine. That's a method that works for you. But it doesn't work for everybody. And there isn't always a better way to fit information into the story.

Sometimes it's an event the reader needs to know about right at the start. And calling it Chapter One when this event happens way in the past, or in another place the reader won't visit again, or is told from the POV of somebody long dead, or whatever ...that just causes confusion when Chapter Two begins. Calling it a Prologue means the reader knows it will differ in some way from the way the rest of the story is told. That's all.

I really wish people would give OTHER people a chance to tell their stories without prejudice. If the prologue is bad/boring/unnecessary/an infodump/then put the book down and walk away. If it's not, keep reading. Simple. Chances are if a prologue is badly written, boring and unnecessary, the rest of the book isn't going to be so hot either.

 

In my case, I hadn't written a prologue. But the editor I'd hired pointed out that while my story was a historical novel about Cuba, my first chapter was about an Irish-American boy in New York in the 1990s (had to be that way since he was not only my historical narrator but played an important role in the "modern era" part of the story). She suggested a one-page prologue that foreshadowed what was to come. Needless to say, I was very pleased with the result.

But this was a prologue written to solve a very specific problem. So, my advice is to write a prologue if your story needs one (i.e. you have a specific reason for doing so), don't if it doesn't (i.e. you think you should always write one).

 

An editor ASKED you to write a prologue? Well so much for the theory that the publishing industry doesn't like them and you shouldn't write them.

 

Freelance editors are different from acquiring editors.

 

Yes, but they're hardly going to recommend adding something that will ensure the MS never gets looked at, though. Are they? Otherwise, their careers will be short.

 

Anyone can call themselves an editor so yeah, plenty of them will give poor recommendations!

In any case, this editor suggesting something means nothing at all about what the publishing industry likes.