Feedback Wanted
A prologue has to earn its keep very quickly. If it’s doing real work, fine. If it’s only there because the book wants to borrow some tension from later on, I start to wobble.
That opening has to be more than a promise that things will get interesting once the reader has done a bit of unpaid lifting. Sometimes the cleanest choice is to begin where the story actually starts, even if that means trusting the book a little less theatrically.
Curious how other writers decide when a prologue is necessary, and when it’s just a nervous habit in a nicer coat.
That opening has to be more than a promise that things will get interesting once the reader has done a bit of unpaid lifting. Sometimes the cleanest choice is to begin where the story actually starts, even if that means trusting the book a little less theatrically.
Curious how other writers decide when a prologue is necessary, and when it’s just a nervous habit in a nicer coat.
I’m wary of the idea that a prologue has to justify itself by speed alone. Some books need a bit of distance before the main story can breathe. The problem is usually when it behaves like a trailer. If it changes the reader’s understanding of what follows, or gives a necessary frame, it has a job. If it’s just atmospheric scaffolding, I’d rather not have it.
A lot of prologues are doing the job the first chapter should have done, which is usually a clue. If the “real” story can’t survive without a preface of doom, that’s a structural problem, not a formatting one.
The only time I’m interested is when the opening genuinely changes the reader’s frame of reference. Otherwise it’s often just a polite way of hiding the fact the book is starting in the wrong place.
The only time I’m interested is when the opening genuinely changes the reader’s frame of reference. Otherwise it’s often just a polite way of hiding the fact the book is starting in the wrong place.