Changing POVs, unless you are writing with an omniscient narrator, should be done with a new chapter. Call it a chapter, not a prologue. In my opinion, a prologue is typically a bit more in depth than a one page scene which precedes the story.
I disagree about the new chapter for a new POV thing. I think a scene break is enough of a distinction. Do you have a reason for saying it should be a new chapter?
Just out of curiosity, does anybody know what to call those little introductions that sometimes start novels these days? They don't have a title of any kind, and usually only run about a page or page and a half in length? They often appear in books that are written in First Person, and often contain a bit of philosophy, or 'preliminary remarks' made by the character (not the author.) I have no idea what to call them.
If you are going to change back and forth within the same scene, you only need a new paragraph. But in this case @Kitti said: So she's changing scene and POV. A new chapter or a new scene is an arbitrary choice as long as you designate the change either with '###' or a new chapter. Editor's blog: Mastering scene transitions If the scene stays the same and just the POV changes, all that's needed is a new paragraph. So while you can change scenes within a chapter, you need to do something formal to show you've changed scenes. Changing POV within the same scene is a different animal. Clearly there you don't need a new chapter.
Tell "never change POV within a paragraph" to the many authors who have done it. Or to Virginia Woolf, who changed within a single sentence Honestly, as with italics, or any other of the myriad questions to these kinds of subjects, it's all a matter of what you can do and do well. If you can pull off a mid-paragraph POV shift, then great. If you don't have the skill to do it well, then you're better off making the shift at scene or chapter breaks where it doesn't take any special skill to do it.
"Should be" doesn't equal "never don't". I take it back in order to avoid a useless discussion. As for changing POV within a paragraph, some people also neglect to change paragraphs for a new speaker. If you want to go by the philosophy that one can throw the grammar book out, be my guest. I don't think because you can find one or two popular authors who chose to break a basic rule, one should assume the rules are useless.
Just for clarity, though, because your first two posts seemed a bit contradictory to me: Changing POV at a chapter break - pretty much everyone agrees it's fine; Changing POV within a chapter, with a clear scene break - pretty much everyone agrees it's fine; Changing POV within a scene, without a formal break - some controversy on this; Changing POV within a paragraph/sentence - should be reserved for true experts or best sellers?
The rule isn't a useless one. It sets forth the easiest course of action, particularly for beginners. Ultimately, it comes down to what you're capable of. A writer shouldn't feel constrained by the so-called rules. I've read a fair number of works that play with POV shifts. It's not just one or two authors, though if you're looking at popular, commercial fiction (as opposed to literary fiction) you're less likely to see it. EDIT: And my comment was directed to the bolded quote from the blog, that says never do it.
Yes. Not a problem, just needs a new paragraph. The OP example was about changing POVs and the scene. Should be reserved for writers who are doing it for a reason. Should not be done because someone thinks grammar rules are meaningless.
POV shift isn't really a grammar issue to me. In any event, I don't think anyone who knows what they're doing says rules or guidelines are meaningless and that's why they don't follow them. They're doing something because it is true to their vision of the story and they think it is effective. There's no use getting defensive because of a preference in one direction over another, the only thing that matters is whether the writing works.
Well, it's controversial b/c I don't think it should be done! ; ) Again, all standard disclaimers apply - if someone knows what they're doing and decides to do it for a reason, okay, fine. But for me, for the standard genre writer? I think we should have a scene break when we change POVs.
Being defensive has nothing to do with it. How many people in this forum fit your description of knowing how to write well but choosing to do something that can make them look illiterate? How can any of us help each other if every time one points out 'rules' (for lack of a better name) someone chimes in to discount said rules? The choice of using the italicized thought convention is not analogous to choosing to use or not use basic grammar. (When a new paragraph is needed is grammar by the way. I'm surprised you don't know that.)
Ok. Well thank you all for taking the time to share your various insights to my OP. Perhaps the rest may be useful to other people too.
Why would one "have" to include a prologue? What is making you ask this that you feel it's somehow compulsory? And, did you do a search for the term "prologue" here in our forum, because, jinkies.....
I don't know, for the back story? And no, I just posted a new thread. I will remember to search the forums next time. Sorry. :/
If you are planning on trying to get your work commercially published, understand that not only are prologues not required, there is a real bias against them in the industry at present, probably due to overuse and misuse. Of course, there are plenty of perfectly useful prologues out there. But these days, you'll probably not find too many that are actually called "prologues". They're often called something else, or, as in Elizabeth Kostova's The Swan Thieves, not called anything at all. Backstory is a great example of what you should not do with a prologue.
^-- This right here. This is the #1 reason to NOT write a prologue. A prologue can exist for many reasons, but it should never be this one.
Should I just use chapter 1 to introduce the main character? Or if not, where should I put the back story, if anywhere? What would a prologue be used for then, if not a backstory?
Most prologue debates on writing forums seem to have two camps. Those who think prologues should be avoided at all costs and those who think prologues are useful in some stories. No-one argues that you have to have a prologue. Pretty much everyone agrees that prologues which are just info dumps are a temptation to be avoided.
Okay, so how would I explain the history of a character or the history of an event that happened, say, 50 years prior?
You tend to try and keep this to a minimum at the start of a story. Most readers aren't interested in the history of a person they've never heard of and most backstory isn't vital for readers to understand right away, so can be drip-fed through dialogue, character thoughts etc as necessary and as is convenient to the flow of the story. If there is a specific scene that occurred some time before the main story that is important for readers to know straight away, then It could be argued that is story rather backstory. At that point there is an arguement that it could be a prologue, but even then it's safest to present it as a real time scene from the point of view of a character. Not as a historical summary.
Most of your mc's history is stuff YOU need to know as the writer, but the reader does not need to know. And whatever the reader does need to know to completely understand the story and the character should be provided in the course of the story at the moment the reader needs to know it. There are a number of ways to introduce your mc. I generally prefer to begin chapter one with my mc in the middle of a dilemma, crisis, problem or decision point of some kind. I want something that is going to pull the reader in right away. In the novel I am pitching right now, I open with my narrating character livid over the fact that his son has bullied another boy. He is so angry he's ready to beat the boy, but knows he can't do that. He struggles for control and slowly eases back from the brink. Hope this helps.
Clearly you don't need prologue, since most novels don't have them. I agree that a prologue just for backstory is a bad idea as well. I often skip prologues when they are included because they are poorly done, or full of boring backstory, or what have you. Figure out where your actual story starts and make that Chapter 1.
The backstory is the backstory of how a character is "born", as he is not born naturally, but through someone "playing God". Also, it introduces two of the main characters. I'll try to put this in somewhere else, but the story, in my mind, seems incomplete without the backstory. :/
