I have a sort-of-a prologue that suddenly appeared in the second re-write of my WiP. I did a terrible mistake of expanding the very first paragraph of my story, which I was ready to dismiss in the first place, and left it there simply for the sake of implementing the info later on, throughout the story. Main problem is, I found out my MC needed more back story. I wanted to write more about his relationship with his family. MY MISTAKE! I was unable to place this info anywhere else in the text (the story is very linear, extremely linear for my own usual writing style, so back-story naturally came before the events, instead of some reminiscence or whatever). My previous concept of chapters fell apart, because any symmetry I wanted to achieve is lost with the first chapter being twice as long as any other, and encompassing the longest time period (three months, while the rest of the 16 chapters are spread over 2 days!) Now, I thought about pulling out this first part of the first chapter and call it a "Prologue". I don't like it, but it may be reasonable. On the other hand, I can just not call it anyway - print it with no numbers or titles, and placing the "Chapter 1" after it. Or, I may call it "Chapter 0" or something... A dilemma. Any ideas?
I think the first thing to do is to sort out the above - does the MC need more back story or do you just want to write more about the family thing? If the MC absolutely does need back story, then you have to recognize that a prologue isn't a simple way to include it. That's not what prologues are for. You should be able to find the appropriate places (note the plural) within the main story to include the back story - if you can't, it most likely means the reader doesn't need to know it - ie, there's no place within the main story that it's relevant.
I get your point. But it's a bit more complicated than that: let's just say there are moments in the main story-line that are too vague if left as they are, and I feel a back-story can give the reader something to reflect on. There was a single paragraph at the beginning of the first draft that I felt was redundant (or just out of place, forced at the top of the page) - but instead of getting rid of it, I've expanded on it. Now, most of the back-story found its place in this new part of the text. Very bad decision on my part. Anyways, nevermind just wanted to say that it's a terrible idea to put too much in your introduction - save it for later in the text and incorporate it if you can. I have nothing against prologues, and that whole thing about how anything sticking out of the text is a terrible sin and should be burned before it blinds the reader or something - I just don't buy into that stuff.
It really isn't. If you really mean vague, that's a problem in the writing at that point in the story. If you mean unclear, that isn't necessarily a problem. You can use local context to make it a bit clearer, or you can suggest enough back story at that point in the story to bring the reader closer to understanding. Or, you can let the reader wonder, and let explanations bleed in later. In any case, a prologue is not the way to deal with this matter. Dishing out a heavy platter of background loads the reader down with information that is not yet needed, and it also reduces opportunities for mystery and tension. Prologues themselves are of debatable value, but the prologue of background information is never a good idea. It's also the type of prologue novice writers eagerly produce.
Oh yes it is. Maybe the best example I can think of would be McEwan's Black Dogs: there is an introduction (not labeled as a prologue, but having the same function) where the narrator gives some info on his childhood in order to "explain" why he felt a connection with his mother- and father-in-law (whose story he retells in the "main" portion of the text). From a writer's point of view this may seem artificial, because you read it as a post-script, but a casual reader needn't notice it, because he reads it linearly. So, if by "prologue" you mean: info-dump that can be, with some effort, incorporated in the main body of the story, then I agree with you. But if prologue is an actual interaction, a scene, or a part of history which comes "before" in narrative, and is contextualized by further character interactions/actions, then I think it can be put to good use.
I would go even further than that. I think many novice writers tend to think that is the primary purpose of a prologue (judging by the various discussions I've seen on these forums).
I believe that you should give the chance to the reader to make up his mind by himself. By this I mean that it's better when you have some sphere to imagine. Otherwise, reading becomes boring. That's it.
When i write if i feel it needs a prologue i will put it in but if it does not need a prologue then i won't put one in.
I'm the same, I'm not new to the idea of writing but have only just started putting time and effort in. IMO a prologue works better when it's short and sweet, just enough to set the scene on why the story is taking place for instance or, introduce an important character which the reader will later think back to at the end of reading and go "Ah right I get it now."
I've just finished reading 'The Twelve' by Justin Cronin. Really enjoyed it. Waiting with anticipation for the third book. Any way, Justin Cronin used a prologue- this was used to update the reader on what happened in his first book - just in case they hadn't read it - very considerate of him, I thought. This makes sense to me but why do other writers use prologues when there is no need to. There's no need to update the reader on past evens because there aren't any. This is their first book. So why do insist on starting with a prologue whats the point?
Some say it is indeed pointless and shouldn't be done. Yet published works include prologues all the time. So who knows? Maybe it's just a stylistic preference or taste.
Yeah, you actually don't need one. I have read quite a few books that don't have a prolouge & I don't think I will be adding one to my novel - each to their own I guess. If you want to add one, you can - if you feel a story needs one, add it. If not - there's no point lol
You're right that most stories don't need one. Occasionally, however, they are useful and appropriate, such as the example you mention. If there is a story that is highly dependent on some kind of significant previous event and it is really vital to get a glimpse into the relationships and lives of the characters, yet the story really takes place much later, sometimes it's more efficient to just give the reader that info at the beginning, rather than later on with flashbacks and reminiscences. If it becomes necessary to put in too many flashbacks or explanations, then it might be better to put those in as a prologue, to get the required info to the reader without disrupting the flow of the story. Again, though, this is more the exception than the rule.
I've actually just thought - my novel does have a prologue haha its a dream sequence which could just be written into the first chapter to be fair, but I think I decided to add it as a prologue...
Sometimes a prologue is necessary, sometimes it isn't. If it is, use it; if it isn't, don't. But don't, for heaven's sake, get this mindset that prologues are totally unnecessary and always bad and should never, ever be used except by crappy writers. I found this article which, IMHO, describes nicely the role of the prologue and when to use one: Where to Begin? When, Where and How to Write a Prologue
A prologue is 90% of the times a commercial trick to make people buy a book even if they haven't read the earlier chapters. Personally i believe it to be utterly useless but some people like it.
I have a prologue in my current novel because it felt right to have one. The prologue describes events that too place when the protagonist was 4 years old, these events are important for the reader to understand why certain things are happening in chapter one. Guess what I am trying to say is, a prologue might be important to the story and I think if it is important then the story would call for it. I have no idea why I made it a prologue, it just felt right.
How could it possibly do that? What earlier chapters? The prologue comes at the beginning of the book, before the main chapters. And frankly, if it's good enough to make the reader buy the book, how could it possibly be a bad idea? This doesn't make sense.
I always hate prologues and in fact the book itself must be a source of understanding books and if anybody lengthily write prologues he is not a good writer. Dostoevsky does not have to give a prologue since the reader gets so much immersed in his nooks that he kind of starts comprehending everything in the book.
Chances are it would be better as part of the first chapter. I've done two novels that, in first draft, I started with prologues. Both times I went back and made the prologue Chapter One.
Too often, with beginning writers, they see a lot of information that they can't figure how to get to the reader in the body of the story so they do an info dump prologue. Later, with more experience, they learn that rarely is the prologue necessary and the info can readily be included in the first chapter - or the entire prologue turns into the first chap. Sometimes, however, the prologue really does have a valid place at the front of the book. Maybe not full chapter, 8 or 12 pages long but it does work. The big issue, of course, falls back to that old saw, "You have to learn the rules before you can successfully break them." Note the emphasis on 'successfully'.
