Historical Fictionistas discussion

I recently saw a debate (not a new topic) about whether readers like/dislike prologues. This was on a site for writers. What do readers feel about this topic? Will they put down a book if they open it up and find a prologue?

It depends on what it is. if it is something that happened years before the story, sure. To me a prologue is something that is relevant to the story but not something that propels it.

Some writers use prologues as a preview of a scene that will appear later in the book because the scene is more exciting than the opening. The solution is to write an exciting opening scene. Don't write a prologue of a scene that will appear later. It ruins the suspense.

Shomeret wrote: "Some writers use prologues as a preview of a scene that will appear later in the book because the scene is more exciting than the opening. The solution is to write an exciting opening scene. Don'..."

I agree with that!

I used it in my novel about slavery.
Since my protagonist was for slavery in the beginning of my novel, 1850's, I felt it was important to have some historical context for my readers.

I'm okay with prologues for the most part, but it really depends on how it's used. I agree with Shomeret in that the prologue shouldn't be used to rehash a later scene.

I agree also. A prologue should give a short view into something that happened before the story starts, but is relevant to the plot. One example that comes to mind is Simon Scarrow's Under the Eagle. The prologue deals with Julius Caesar burying a cart full of gold in a swamp. Chapter One then starts 96 years later, but the prologue's event is tied to the plot. I found it quite intriguing.

When I read a novel set in a relatively obscure time/place [like all mine are], I appreciate a short prologue bringing me up to speed on the historical aspects so the author doesn't need to do a bunch of info dumps to get the reader up to speed. Then those already knowledgeable can skip the prologue and those who want all those juicy political details can enjoy them. Please don't give us a scene that's going to occur later - that's for the back cover.
Maggie Anton

Maggie wrote: "When I read a novel set in a relatively obscure time/place [like all mine are], I appreciate a short prologue bringing me up to speed on the historical aspects so the author doesn't need to do a bu..."

I don't want to go off topic too much, but Maggie, I think our books are set in the same time period (AD 5th century) and yes, a prologue does help to curb info dump with previous historical aspects or setups, and can even act as a teaser for me as in the Scarrow book. BTW, my doctor has read your books (I have a real cool doctor who was an English minor and loves to read). :-)
Cynthia Ripley Miller

I never even considered this before! It certainly depends on the book, but I think that a well done prologue can be an integral part of a book...one which I typically appreciate.

My prologue was an article from the newspaper (this one fictional, others used at opening pages of a section were genuine) about a murder (or suicide?). Then the book started and you knew why the girl was sitting in church plotting another church member's demise. It was a beta reader who suggested the prologue and I think it worked out well. I generally am fine with prologues in books.

The first draft of my debut novel had a prologue but during the editing process it was removed as my editor and I realized that the first chapter was powerful and descriptive enough to stand on its own. Working on my second novel, I started what would be considered a prologue but it has turned into a chapter to give the reader an idea of where the protagonist is years in the future. The remaining story tells how he got to that point. So far, test readers have approved of this approach.

I don't use prologues, but I think they are necessary in some books.

I agree with previous comments that a prologue shouldn't be a taster for a later passage in a book and thus in any way spoil the build up of suspense. Suspense encourages the reader to keep turning the pages! Rather, I think that if a prologue is used, it ought to be something that the reader can bear in mind and that starts to make sense as the story progresses, enlightening it in some, subtle way. I think the opening chapter of a book should grip the reader on its own merit though I appreciate that's not always easy to achieve. Sometimes it's easy to give up on a book when a little perseverance would bring its own rewards.

I don't mind them, if they exist for a purpose.

Put it down... no. Skip it? Probably.

But then I did something inventive with my prologue. I expanded my prologue and made a free book. That way, people can read it and decide if they want to continue, or just skip it entirely for the core book.

I don't quite understand the need to rule always or never. Some readers undoubtedly hate prologues, just as some hate first-person or present-tense narrative. Others don't mind.

The real question is: why write X as a prologue rather than chapter 1? There are reasons. The information may be vital but not part of the main story. The first of my Legends novels, which are set in a time or place not familiar to most Western readers, includes a page and a half introducing the background for the whole series. It's not part of the story; instead it taps a bunch of culturally familiar buttons to orient the reader.

The second book in the series originally had a prologue, too, but when it grew to 15 pages, I decided it was vital to the story and renamed it chapter 1.

The third book has a prologue, again two pages, to signal that this character is not the main character. The action occurs before the main plot begins, but it adds tension: the reader learns something the heroine does not yet know. In that sense, it adds to the suspense, because the reader has to wonder when—and how—the other characters will discover the truth.

So the question is not whether to prologue but why. Does it raise the conflict? Does it do something you can't do otherwise? Or is it backstory that you might just as well convey in chapter 5—or never?

I like a prologue if it is brief & interesting; however, most of the time I skip them. I regard them as providing background, but a long one turns me off. Just lately, I picked up a book with pages of prologue, I sighed and moved on to another book.

I like a prologue to some novels, particularly if there is an element of mystery in it. I wonder if a prologue that can be re-written as "Chapter 1" was ever a prologue in the first place? I think a good prologue needs to be related to the story, but a little bit detached from it as well. The example Cynthia quotes from Under the Eagle is a good example. Just what bearing does it have on the invasion later of 43AD? Stick with it reader, and all will be revealed - and if it isn't then the reader is entitled to feel cheated.

I'm battling with this idea at present, as I have considered a prologue for a series of books, starting at the end of the series and looking back without giving anything away except the name of the main character and mentioning a couple of events. I'll be blunt and admit that it is an unashamed marketing ploy. If someone brings up the book on Amazon and pings the "look inside" arrow, then I hope that prologue will spark their interest. Its a bit of a balancing act, to whet their appetite without giving too much of the story away. So far I have only tried it out on members of two reading groups, but it has been well received.

Should I even write a prologue for a series of books, rather than just for the first in the series? This is an experiment, and I will be prepared to drop it if it seems out of place at some future time. But the advice of one experienced author was quite clear. "If it seems right to you, do it!"