Why is it that some stories ending up having prequels where the author already written a novel or book in the future? Why do authors sometimes choose to go back in the timeline to write about before after they have already written about the present? I would rather they just continue on in the timeline instead of double back to give more background to the novel's history. Kind of Like Lord of Rings Movies, after the first trilogy the next few movies went back to before the fall of Sauron.
Lets go with Star Wars, George Lucas wanted to show Jedis in their prime rather than just trainees and old people fights. It just adds a bit more depth to the universe the story is based in. How the current situation came to be and why.
The Hobbit is long~ after the fall of Sauron and before the Lord of the Rings.. just saying. as for prequels and why they go back, well.. idk, depends on which novel you're talking about. It may be that the author wants to do it, or maybe the fans wanted such a thing.. It's not bad actually if it's done right.. Just pray that it doesn't fuck up the original story (I'm looking at you star wars) *Jar Jar Binks is the true Sith Lord, all worship him!!
there are two reasons i can think of to expand the world of the fiction and to showcase the world before the MC made an impact, this shows us how the world doesn't just revolve around the MC to help understand the motivations of characters, this could be for showing off anyone from the fictions world
If we are going by that the "The Hobbit" is a prequel to "The Lord of the Rings". For Tolkien's works there are books detailing events throughout the worlds history. Another example would be "The Godfather" the second movie in the trilogy chronologically took place before the first one. Besides although we know Sauron will lose we also knew how the Hobbit was going to end because Bilbo had the ring at the start of LOTR so we knew his previous quest was successful not to mention the whole movie was a flash back anyways from right at the start of LOTR from when Gandalf came in for the party. So in this instance the prequels aren't entirey new material to flesh out the world it's events that have been already fleshed out being turned into a film from a book. So long as it is done well that's great.
I guess I just dislike going backwards I like to know the future not double back to the past when I already know what happens next. Also ty for the answers this has been a struggle for me for quite sometime to understand why that is.
I don't know many novels like that and even If I knew I probably won't read the prequel for most if I already read it's sequel. It can't be too long actually, dunno about the fall of Sauron but between The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings there should be about 60 years, I think.
Oh I see I never saw the movie or read the book yet its been on my to do list I guess I will check it out now. since it is kinda in between? Iguess.
Biggest mistake of his life....scratch that second biggest mistake of his life first was adding another nail to the coffin where he keeps his artistic integrity with his selling of the rights to Star Wars to Disney.
It can sometimes be easier. When writing, you always should have the backstory planned. Previous events, relationships, wars, anything that has happened before the current setting in a story should have moulded the current setting. You can't write a (decent) story if there is no backstory. Characters should be troubled by their past, or have experiences or events that create who they are today. They are very rarely a blank slate. Cities should have a reason why they are big, small, or destroyed. What happened before? It's much easier to write a story if you've already got these things planned out. Maybe there was a war 500 years ago in your current story that drastically changed the power balance in your world. You realise you want to know more about it, it was supposedly, an exciting event. You already have the established setting, and you probably have a few ideas about it, even if it's not completely fleshed out. You still have room to be creative within it, but you've already done a lot of framework. It makes things a lot easier. When you write about the future, or a sequel, you have less to work with. You have to think of new ideas
Saurons first defeat was in the Second Era. The LOTR trilogy was in the Third Era in about 3000 years in. Don't remember what year in the Second Era he was defeated in so we have roughly a 3000 year gap between the two wars. But the short version is just because something happened in the past doesn't mean it isn't interesting if you only watch for the outcome that ignores the bulk of the movie. The best part of it is the journey it you want to just get to point B from point A with no travel time invent teleportation because I would buy that in a heart beat.
I guess it's like you see step A then you see the results, then you see the process from step A to results, basicly it's just like others said
I guess I am wondering why the authors dont just start with the prequel why did they write about the future if they are going to end up writing backwards. If they start with the prequel then move on the next part I wouldnt really mind I just do not know why they write about the past after instead of just start there. Like people said though it might just be something that came to their mind after the fact so they went back to explain more.
Whether it's a sequel or prequel, it's just a continuation and a way to exploit something well established. One is easier while the other is harder. One probably has less chance of messing up while the other has more. Whether it's a character, city, clan or whatever, it's already established. The world is also modelled. It is like filling in the blanks rather than finish this sentence or equation. That aside, sometimes, there are just nothing more to write as a sequel. The story is as good as it can get. A sequel will only mess it up, unless it's the kind of sequel that doesn't use the original characters. A prequel somehow is more lenient. You can use the same characters or just the bad guys or just the world. Well, that's what I can muster up with a few minutes.
Some authors do prequels out of order just to give some context. There might be some character who's backstory is extremely important to the plot, but was glossed over since they aren't the all-important MC. Prequels are pretty much to help make sense of the story, or to help you connect the dots, and in the case of them being after the actual story: they just give you a revelation as to why something happened. Or it's just milking a dead cow for a few extra squirts of money, but hey, what do I know?
Sometimes when the book is being written, a really well done character that dies early or gets very little screen time and the authors or fans want more of him/her, the author will do a back-story on how that particular character got where he was. In some cases, it's to introduce some new plot-line to the ongoing scenario. Your not the only one who hates reading backwards, but sometimes theres this character you just fall in love with and want to see more of him/her being bad-ass or whatever your preference is, those usually are good way to wrap up a story as opposed to an end of the main story.
Because it gives the author vast opportunities to rake in money for future projects. Like in movies, sometimes prequels and sequels were made for the sake of money almost like strike while the pot is hot.
i understand why you would write prequels but damn i dont like reading them. I read the Mortal Instruments, and then i found the Infernal devices, the prequels to the original story. I was like, WTF?! Because i liked the ID better than the MI and i didnt even see much correlation between the two storylines. Some things overlapped, sure, but i feel they should have been independent stories. Prequels make me not wasn to read them because i would already know what happened at the end. I would know how things end up. If i read a prequel and i really like it, it would be ruined if i didnt like the ending of the original story. Like, " aw, how sweet a happy ending. ah, but the main character's baby will grow up to be an evil tyrant who kills thousands. damn, that sucks" Not always that extreme, but i have had that happen once or twice. Where i fall in love with a prequel but i read the original story first and the ending of it totally ruined the good feelings i had for the prequel. i get that prequels are there to detail an exciting event in the past or to balance things out and make the present situation more clear, but damn i sometimes get disappointed because i would feel the author should have started with the prequel and worked from there. Although, the Chronicles of Nick is pretty awesome and was more independent from what i understand. It was cool getting to know Nick's past better. Though maybe past is not the right term as the events in CON can still change the future. And the book Acheron was freaking amazing. But other than those and a few others, i dont like prequel-ish books.
Often, it's simply because the beginning is either boring, sucks ass or both boring and sucks ass at the same time. If they had started from the prequel, people would look and thought, "Meh, it's nothing special. Pretty boring." They will likely not have much of a following. If they start from the awesome part, people will thought, "Whoa! This is cool!" and they get instant fans. Then they can go back to the prequel and these die-hard fans will still watch and likely give them rave reviews because they're still blinded by the awesomeness of the previous movie. Some critics would be more subjective and say, "It's okay, but it doesn't compare to the previous one", but it's at least better than them saying, "Meh, boring shit!" Basically, you want the hot stuff to go first, so that more people will watch and become instant fans. If you put the boring stuff first, you will still get people watching, but none of the die hard fans, so when you do come out with the hot stuff, people will have no expectation of your work and will not bother going to watch. Please be reminded that SW 4,5,6 happened long before the Internet became what we now came to know. If people want to know if a movie is any good, they read the newspapers and entertainment magazines back then.