Skip to main content

Prologues?

 


There seems to be varying opinions about prologues. Some readers hate them, won’t even read them. Why? It is part of the story. If the author had titled it “Chapter 1” instead of “Prologue” they would have read it without question. I guess it is because people feel that if it is a prologue, it is not really part of the story and they don’t want to waste their time on preliminaries. I am sure those same people would not read the “Acknowledgements” or the “Forward” or the “Afterword” either.

I can understand being anxious to get to the story. Something made you interested enough to buy or to checkout or to borrow this book. You want to get to the meat. But the prologue (if there is one) is part of the story. It often tells us something about a character or a situation that we may need to know later. It may be there to set the emotional stage for the story. It is a gem, a kernel of information. Then again, I have read some prologues that were not all that enlightening or useful to the story. That just comes down to bad writing. You should not put anything in the story that doesn’t need to be there.

If the writer is doing their job, the prologue can set the hook of the reader’s interest. In The Book Thief by Markus Zusak, the prologue is narrated by Death who tells us of the three times he met the main character. This gives us information about the character and feel of the story, but it also foreshadows what is to come. In Game of Thrones by George R. R. Martin, the prologue paints a chilling scene that foreshadow later events and then what happens in the first chapter is a natural result. Could these stories have survived without the prologues? I suppose so, with some added exposition, but that would have made the stories weaker, not stronger. More exposition means telling, not showing.

If you are a writer and you want to add a prologue, by all means do so. But, like anything else you put into a story, you have to ask yourself if it really makes the story better. If it does not; don’t do it.

Star Liner

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Trip Home

  My wife and I recently returned from a trip to New York to visit my son and his wife. What follows is an excerpt of my notes from that trip. Departure day. So we and the kids (adult kids) leave by 5:30 AM. These “kids” are night owls. They rarely wake before 10:00 if they don’t have to, so we appreciate the sacrifice. Daughter-in-Law (DIL) drove us the 30 minutes to the train station. Hugs and good-byes for her (we love DIL. DIL is an irresistible force). Son navigates us a route to the platform with fewer stairs than the way we came. We get a ticket and get on the train headed for the big city and Grand Central Station. I soon realize that this train is not an express train like the one we took coming out. Instead of taking a little over an hour like we did before, this one would take a little over an hour and a half. We stop at places with names like Cold Springs and Peekskill (on this trip we saw a lot of place names that ended in “kill” including Kaatskill, i.e. Catskill, and
2 comments
Read more

That 70's Decade

  Can a decade become a caricature? My teen years were in the 1970’s and none of us who lived through the 70’s thought our decade was going to be a figure of fun. When you are a part of it, you don’t realize what people are going to make fun of later. I think there are two reasons why people snicker when the 70’s are mentioned: clothing styles and Disco. Both things could be called extensions of trends that started in the 60’s. When the hippy styles of the 60’s became more formalized for the dance floor, the result was (in hindsight) rather bizarre. They did not seem bizarre at the time. People following present fashion trends never understand that they are wearing something that will be laughed at in ten years. Yes, I did have a pair of bell-bottom blue jeans (are they making a comeback?) The mere mention of the 1970’s conjures up someone in a ridiculous pose wearing a disco suit. We who lived through the 70’s just went about our normal life. There were quite a lot of things that ha
Post a Comment
Read more

Tyranny of the Masses

  I was listening to Benjamin Netanyahu on the radio. He was justifying his change in the law that removed power from the Israeli Supreme Court, saying that it was the will of the people. Majority rules. This made me think of “Tyranny of the masses,” a concept that notes: just because a majority of people are for something, that doesn’t make it right. I am sure you can think of historical examples where the people of a country supported a policy that was demonstrably wrong. When everything is completely governed by majority rule, the rights of the minority can be subverted by the majority. The framers of our American Constitution knew this, and tried to put in some checks and balances into our system of government. This was to guard against all forms of tyranny whether from a dictator, or from tyranny of the masses. One of those checks is that we have a representative government. The people themselves don’t pass laws, but instead elect representatives at the federal and local level t
Post a Comment
Read more