Prologues: Yay or Nay

[Leonidas]

Some people I know like prologues, some people hate them, and others just skip over them. What's your opinion on them? Do you find them obnoxious and weak? I've been told that a writer should never use a prologue, as it's often just an info-dump of backstory that would be better off explained in the novel itself rather than in a prologue before the novel begins. However, I think that, when they're pulled off well, they can be very interesting and they often make me want to read the novel that much more, so I can figure them out.

[Emily J]

I don't think there are any absolute rules when it comes to writing. I am, however, getting quite sick of the following statements:

Never use adverbs!

Don't use the passive voice!

Prologues are the devil!! (ok that might be an exaggeration)

I think it's much safer to say:

Don't rely on adverbs for all descriptions, use them sparingly (and use interesting ones)

Don't use the passive voice if the active voice is more effective (which it usually is)

Boring, exposition-filled prologues are the devil!! (not such an exaggeration)

That being said, a prologue is form only. To hate prologues to me feels as arbitrary as hating all chapter 4s. There are good prologues and there are bad prologues. Perhaps they are over-used, perhaps they can serve as crutchs for weak writers but please don't blame prologues worldwide!

[tchann]

I always read the prologues. The author theoretically wrote it for a reason, and I can't claim to understand the book fully if I don't read it! But I can understand how prologues can be vastly abused by a lazy author who couldn't be bothered to work the setting information into their story in the first place.

In a similar vein, I'm currently reading a non-fiction diary of a woman who lived a hundred years ago. The subject matter fascinates me, and it apparently fascinated the translator as well, for the introduction is over fifty pages long! I slogged through it out of respect, but came away with the feeling she was just summarizing everything I was about to read. It left a sour taste and made me wish I'd just skipped it.

Right now my WIP has a prologue. I worried over having it as a prologue, versus Chapter 1, for months. I thought to myself, if I took it out entirely, would the story still make sense? Could I work the information in to the rest of the story? And I realized I really, really, REALLY couldn't, and so it stays. At least, for now. :)

[Down the well]

That being said, a prologue is form only. To hate prologues to me feels as arbitrary as hating all chapter 4s. There are good prologues and there are bad prologues. Perhaps they are over-used, perhaps they can serve as crutchs for weak writers but please don't blame prologues worldwide!

Well said, EmilyJ.

While I do slap my hand every time it wants to start typing the word "prologue" at the beginning of a WIP, I do actually like reading most of them. I've also been known to read with enthusiasm: introductions, acknowledgement pages, dedications, author bios, publication date, and the name of the typeset used. Can't really help myself. If it's between the covers, I'll probably read it.

[polymath]

Frontmatter or backmatter detailing information about a book's production, like typefaces used, papers used, coverstock, bindery techniques, manufacturing machinery and processes, etc., is labeled a colophon.

Introduction, Foreword, Preface, Prologue, Prelude, Interlude, Epilogue, Afterword, Coda, name it, they have narrative purposes based on methods. Appreciating their purposes is a large part of using one or more effectively. Hanging a title on one that is actually another is a large part of the misconceptions and miscues and misunderstandings they create for readers. The main difference between each is who's reporting what in what narrative voice.

Introduction, author or editor's prefatory introduction detailing information helpful to understanding the main action in an expository voice.
Foreword, author or editor's prefatory commentary on background of a main action or subject in an expository voice.
Preface, author's prefatory commentary introducing relevant information helpful to understanding the main action in a narrative reporting voice.
Prologue, narrator expressing prefatory commentary relevant to the main action in a narrative voice.
Prelude, narrator reporting a preliminary action leading to the main action in the voice of the main narrative, often viewpoint character reported action, conversation, sensation, and perception and cognition.
Epilogue, narrator expressing postfacto commentary relevant to the main action in a narrative voice.
Afterword, author or editor postfacto reporting relevant commentary in an expository voice.
Coda, author or editor reporting, rounding out, concluding, or summarzing commentary that has its own related interest.

Many prologues labeled as such are actually preludes. Genuine prologues are uncommonly set off as such. The "It was the best of times; it was the worst of times," opening of Charles Dickens' A Tale of Two Cities is an unremarked prologue run into the first chapter opening. Donna Tart's The Secret History opening prologue-labeled chapter is actually a prelude, albeit a nonlinear timeline prelude. The preface-labeled chapter of Kurt Vonnegut's The Breakfast of Champions opens as a foreword, transitions into a preface, then prologue, then prelude before the main action begins in chapter one. The novel ending is in an epilogue, albeit in a viewpoint character reported voice. Later editions of Ray Bradbury's Farenheit 451 included codas about the novel's influences on culture and discussions about censorship.

[tchann]

Thank you, polymath, for that extremely enlightening post! I quite honestly never realized there were significant differences between all those different terms. With all that in mind, perhaps the beginning of my WIP should be labeled a Prelude, rather than a Prologue. :)

[polymath]

I agree, preludes by and large are more palatable for readers because they are in the vein of the main action. The purpose and effect of a prologue can be determined by its word roots, pro- first, -logue discourse. Essentially a narrator discourse addressed to narratees, the purpose and effect on readers is building rapport with the narrator as readers' surrogate, perhaps creating some measure of desirable remote narrative distance. Prologues tell readers right up front the narrator is the narrative point of view.

Preludes have the purpose and effect of building rapport with a viewpoint character, a setting, an idea, and/or an event for readers' surrogate in covert narrator narratives, for closer narrative distance. Though not labeled as such, and preceded by a foreword labeled as a prologue, the opening chapter of Tom Clancy's The Sum of All Fears is a prelude reporting an object as central character, a lost nuclear warhead, a setting time, place, and situation, an idea, and an event related and leading into the main action of nuclear terrorism, and in the voice of the main action. The novel has an afterword too, accurately labeled as such.

[Ishta]

So, are the "prologues" in many novels misnamed?

Since I started writing my YA paranormal, I've been paying special attention to the beginnings of similar novels, and I've noticed an unusually high percentage of "prologues". Maybe because the backstory and characterization are almost never very action-y, and a prologue set deep in the action, while often leaving the reader confused about time and place and character, promises good action later?

[polymath]

So, are the "prologues" in many novels misnamed?

Many of the prologues I've read in my opinion are. I take it on a case by case basis though. Part of the delight I get from reading frontmatter and backmatter, dedications, acknowledgments, copyright notices, indices, appendices, and table of contents included, comes from testing their purposes and effects, their usefulness at least.

[Quill]

Thank you, polymath for yet more extremely elucidating posts. What a pleasure to read you.

I don't consider prologues to be front matter, but rather, part of the story, in fact the beginning.

Are they officially and by definition front matter?

[Emily J]

I'm confused, I thought preludes involved... umm... orchestras?

All the other terms I am familiar with.

If I get published I'm bringing back frontispiece! Oh yeah!

[polymath]

I don't consider prologues to be front matter, but rather, part of the story, in fact the beginning.

Are they officially and by definition front matter?

Depends. Marshall Lee's Bookmaking doesn't include prologues in frontmatter. A preface or foreword labeled as a prologue could be though. I'd discuss relabeling with an author but not put my foot down. I would try to get away with lowercase roman numeral page numbering for those kinds of prologue pages though. A good and genuine prologue does begin a story, traditionally for backstory exposition, conventionally for narrator introductions and messages. I'd number those pages with conventional numerals starting with 1.

[Leonidas]

I never expected this topic to get so many replies!

And they're so interesting, people's opinions on prologues (or rather preludes). I never knew that there were so many differences between so many ways to begin a story.

Preludes have the purpose and effect of building rapport with a viewpoint character, a setting, an idea, and/or an event for readers' surrogate in covert narrator narratives, for closer narrative distance. Though not labeled as such, and preceded by a foreword labeled as a prologue, the opening chapter of Tom Clancy's The Sum of All Fears is a prelude reporting an object as central character, a lost nuclear warhead, a setting time, place, and situation, an idea, and an event related and leading into the main action of nuclear terrorism, and in the voice of the main action. The novel has an afterword too, accurately labeled as such.

Maybe it's because I'm a writer, but this is the exact reason why I enjoy reading prologues preludes (have to break myself of that habit now that I know it's wrong) as much as I do. They're just as important as the rest of the novel, maybe even moreso, because if you skip over the prelude there's the chance that you'll be confused by the characters and the situation. If anything, I don't quite understand why people would not read them, especially if theoretically (as someone else stated earlier on) they must have a purpose in the novel.

[polymath]

I'm confused, I thought preludes involved... umm... orchestras?

All the other terms I am familiar with.

If I get published I'm bringing back frontispiece! Oh yeah!

Overture? a classic movie term, involved orchestras. The lexicons of music and literature are not very far removed to any significant degree of separation. Webster's first entry for prelude; "an introductory performance, action, or event preceding and preparing for the principal or a more important matter."

Go frontispieces! say book designers and illustrators.

[Emily J]

I was only aware of prelude and interlude in musical compositions.

[The OED (I loves it sooo) gives one definition of a prelude as "an introductory piece of music, often preceding a fugue or forming the first piece of a suite or beginning an act of an opera"]

But I was raised in a house where if you did not play three musical instruments you weren't fed.

Wow, that makes my parents sound terrible... oh well!

And, strangely enough, some of my sheet music has a preface :)