The usage of Prologues and Epilogues, yay or nay?

[DAgent]

So, this might be a subject that irks some people. Before Covid19 reared it's ugly head, I was attending a creative writing course, and one of the other people there raised the issue of prologues and how she felt it was lazy to use them and that it was better to just write that material into the first chapter. Now I can see where she was coming from, but it did occur to me, what if you are using the prologue to provide important information about a character that, while important to the story, doesn't fit in the story and might feel shoe horned in if it's just put into chapter whatever?

So for example, lets say your prologue shows a solider in a war zone suffering a horrible injury or torture at the hands of the enemy that affects him for the rest of his life, but the rest of the story takes place in his civilian life, and while still suffering from the trauma as it's something he never mentions to anyone else so no one knows why he's acting the way he is, it still informs the reader early on why he is the way he is.

And outside of that, just in general what do people think of Prologues, Epilogues and maybe even Intermissions sections between chapters? I'm damned if I can think of any examples of that last one though

 

[Phyrebrat]

I'm happy with prologues and epilogues, although there seems to be a general consensus (here on Chrons at least) that they do not go down well with publishers or agents. I can't verify that one way or another, but I do recall reading an interview with an agent who had said, publishers can tell when you've just tacked on the prologue as part of chapter one.

The way I understand it, prologues, work not as an info opportunity to give the reader backstory, but a more thematic approach to the following narrative.

As far as epilogues go, I'm a huge fan. I suspect however that is because I'm a huge horror reader and so often an epilogue goes hand in hand with an "they all lived happily ever after...or did they" etc

 

[Kerrybuchanan]

There’s been a very recent thread about this very same question that triggered some interesting answers.


Thread 'Prologues/Epilogues: For or Against?'
Prologues/Epilogues: For or Against?

 

[K.S. Crooks]

I like a prologue for setting the stage for what your fantasy world/situation is like. To give the reader a bit of context to the character's world. An epilogue I like for showing a farther time or place away from where the story ends. For both situations it's good for showing something that will affect the main characters, however it occurs away from them.

 

[BlueDragonSapphire]

So, this might be a subject that irks some people. Before Covid19 reared it's ugly head, I was attending a creative writing course, and one of the other people there raised the issue of prologues and how she felt it was lazy to use them and that it was better to just write that material into the first chapter. Now I can see where she was coming from, but it did occur to me, what if you are using the prologue to provide important information about a character that, while important to the story, doesn't fit in the story and might feel shoe horned in if it's just put into chapter whatever?

So for example, lets say your prologue shows a solider in a war zone suffering a horrible injury or torture at the hands of the enemy that affects him for the rest of his life, but the rest of the story takes place in his civilian life, and while still suffering from the trauma as it's something he never mentions to anyone else so no one knows why he's acting the way he is, it still informs the reader early on why he is the way he is.

And outside of that, just in general what do people think of Prologues, Epilogues and maybe even Intermissions sections between chapters? I'm damned if I can think of any examples of that last one though

I personally like it when books have prologues and epilogues, it's nice to get straight-up information on the story or characters, and using an epilogue can be an easier and more satisfying ending for both reader and writer. I'm currently writing a book series and in the first one, I use a prologue, without it, I would have to figure out where to put all the background information throughout the book which can be difficult for story/flow reasons and doesn't give the reader the full rundown of what they need/want to know.
I also plan on using an epilogue on my last book because I want a small time jump.
But do what you feel is easiest/best for you and your story.
I hope this helps!

 

[Astro Pen]

I dislike them. A book is crafting an illusion, taking people somewhere in an immersive process. Prologues and epilogues feel like a frame or bookends boxing the story in a conspicuous manner. It is no longer free standing, instead it becomes a part of a self conscious package delivered by the author and reminding one of their presence. That you are not there, merely having a story related to you.
Also there is a particular kind of quasi epilogue that is elastoplast for sloppy plotting. It was endemic in 60'sand 70's detective series. When everyone is back at the office and someone says something like:
"But one thing I don't understand Dave. How did you know that there was a gun in Miss Montague's kitchen drawer?"
"Ah well the kid in the drugstore remembered that she ......

 

[Montero]

I'm not keen on prologues as I want to get on with the story.
I like epilogues as it ties off what happens to people after the drama ends.
So three days later the heroes are all on a river boat, saying "damn that battle hurt, glad we've got hot baths and whisky" or the like.
I like a wind-down and to know a little bit of what happens next.

I am actually rather fond of a book by Andrea K Host called "Gratuitous Epilogue" - it follows a tense sf trilogy and is one big, fat, happy, what happened next. There are a few problems, but they are more social than attacking monsters.

 

[JunkMonkey]

I don't like them either. They feel like the teaser sections of TV shows - that bit before the opening credits that always ends in a minor OMG! moment - there to keep the audience hanging on through the credits and any adverts before... oh just get in there and tell the bloody story!

 

[paranoid marvin]

If they're done well they can add to the story, if poorly then they detract.

Especially in a set of books, and especially if there has been some time gap since reading the last book, a prologue to help to refresh the memory on what has gone before may help. In the case of George R.R.Martin's next, I fear it will be a necessity.

 

[Montero]

I don't count a "previously" as a prologue.

 

[Overread]

I think they can be a very powerful tool when used well and a very poor tool when used poorly. In my experience the best kind are those that are setting a scene for the setting or otherwise establishing information perhaps in the past about the core character(s) in the book that happens way before the first chapter.

Something that's important, but which you don't want to build the first chapter and the "story" about, but which helps the first parts get going. Fantasy and sci-fi often can't get past the fact that they have a lot of information to convey to the reader and use of prologues can really help that happen. Yes its an evil "info dump", but its a necessary one to establish the setting; perhaps even to let the setting be something that isn't built upon commonly used tropes and themes.


What I've found annoying is when the prologue is used to introduce a character or characters from the past who are in a point of adventure/interest but who never appear again in the story. Perhaps describing a knights last valiant fight against a dragon before the story itself focuses on their great great granddaughter in a political thriller set in an age where dragons are gone. Basically where the prologue goes one way and establishes a relationship with the reader with characters who then vanish. To me that is annoying and an example of where it doesn't work. It's captured my interest with one story and then swapped it for something else.



I think with Epilogues there's only one risk and that's almost more for the author than the reader. That is when the epilogue covers a huge swath of time to complete the story, but then the author wants to go back and write about stuff after that in a sequel. A good example is Robin Hobb's Farseer Trilogy which ends with a short epilogue of the lead character going on a wander around his world in a few short snippets of info. Info that sort of gets ret-conned within the opening pages of her next series - Rainwald Traders. It makes a difference when your lead character casually describes sailing up a river which you then establish in the next book is a river of acid that basically melts regular boats and would be anything but a casual trip.
At the same time its one or two sentences at the end of the story, whilst it breaks immersion its such a tiny detail and break that it, in the end, has no meaning in that case. But it is an example of how it can leave the author in a weaker position to continue a story or setting, at times.

At the same time an epilogue can be a great way to end a complex story with a summary of the "boring bits". You don't need to really spend 10 chapters talking about rebuilding the Kingdom after the war, about characters settling down and all such things. But perhaps you want to give some sense that life continued after the last battle. Of the rebuilding, of the restoration and of things becoming "normal". So instead of dulling the edge of the story with a long winded series of chapters, you end things on a nice note with a summary.




Personally I think, done right, they work well. There is potential to mess things up with both, especially the prologue.

 

[Wayne Mack]

I'm neither for nor against. As a reader, I only expect a prologue or epilogue to be interesting to read.

 

[Phyrebrat]

I think there seems to be confusion as to what a prologue is. To confirm, it’s not a way to info-dump backstory. It has to justify itself thematically, too.

 

[JunkMonkey]

Somewhere in my guddle of a hard drive I have a half-finished book which has a prologue... an introduction, a preface, a forward... etc. and has an epilogue... a glossary, appendixes, an index.... My plan was to write a whole book full of this stuff all cross-referencing back and forth with footnotes footnotes to footnotes etc. and omit the actual story at the centre of it all - I will admit I had just read David Mammet's Wilson: A Consideration of the Sources and was not responsible for my own actions.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

It depends on the book and the story. I've used what might be called prologues, I guess, in the Green Lion books, without labelling them as such (I called them Chapter 0). No epilogues, though. The sequel trilogy has neither prologues nor epilogues, as I saw no need for them in the story I was telling there.

The Queen's Necklace has both a prologue and an epilogue. The prologue came about because my editor wanted me to include some information about some of the characters that happened about 30 years before the rest of the action. I don't remember why I used an epilogue (It was a long time ago) but it might have been for symmetry. I did have some loose ends to clean up and there was a gap of a couple of months, but it could just as well have been just another chapter.

When I started the WIP there were some events that occurred about twenty years before the main action, and so I thought that I would be writing an honest-to-goodness prologue for the first book, but when the planned prologue turned out to be several chapters long, I realized that it had to be something else. So I divided that first volume, The Hidden Stars into two parts. There is no such chronological gap in the following books (at least so far), so I've not done that again—although come to think of it there just might be use for an epilogue when I get to the final volume.

So, yes, as I said, in my opinion it depends on the book and the story. That's what I have to say as a writer.

As a reader, I do tend to be wary of a totally action-packed prologue, because I wonder if it is there to provide a hook because the first few (or even several) chapters are going to be slow and boring, and the prologue is there to tease my interest. If it's an ebook and I am reading a sample, and I get to the first chapter and my fears look to be justified, there is a good chance I will stop right there and not buy the book.

 

[Fiberglass Cyborg]

My two cents: Prologues are best suited to stories that are long, leisurely and expansive. There should be a disconnect between them and the first few chapters. It helps if some or all of the major element (characters, setting, time period, scale, style, narrator etc) are different- it's like starting off to one side. I like a prologue to be intriguing, atmospheric, and to hint at plot or worldbuilding elements which only become relevant much later on in the story. It's less of an "infodump" than a fleeting glimpse beyond the viewpoint of the main story. I dislike it when an ordinary opening chapter is called a "prologue" for no other reason than "this is fantasy, there has to be a prologue"

That's the typical modern prologue, anyway. Shakespeare's prologues are a different thing altogether: "Gather round, I'll tell you a tale..." As is Tolkien's to The Lord of the Rings, which is a combined "Previously on..." and ethnographic appendix. The Shakespearean approach is rare but not unheard today. I can't think of anything quite like the "Prologue Concerning Hobbits"- maybe you have to be Tolkien to pull it off! There's also the framing-narrative prologue, which comes paired with a framing-narrative epilogue. Nowadays, there tend to be snippets of the framing narrative througout the rest of the book too.

Epilogue are either much rarer or much less memorable. I get the impression that most authors just stick epilogue-style material in a regularly-numbered final chapter or two. I like it when a long novel doesn't just "fall off a cliff" at the end: to me that undercuts the climax of the story. I want to see the consequences of the events of the plot. If I care enough about the characters, I'll happily read several such chapters. But calling the aftermath an "epilogue" makes it feel a bit grey and faded. Sometimes that's the desired effect, of course.

 

[AllanR]

You just described exactly what I'm doing!

 

[AllanR]

Doh posted before quote and can't put quote in edit

Prologues are best suited to stories that are long, leisurely and expansive. There should be a disconnect between them and the first few chapters. It helps if some or all of the major element (characters, setting, time period, scale, style, narrator etc) are different- it's like starting off to one side. I like a prologue to be intriguing, atmospheric, and to hint at plot or worldbuilding elements which only become relevant much later on in the story. It's less of an "infodump" than a fleeting glimpse beyond the viewpoint of the main story.