Those who read books (at least sometimes) meet in some of them a “prologue”, “epilogue” or “preface” and “afterword” of the author. For many people, the difference between these pairs of concepts is not entirely clear, so we decided to write an article that will answer the question: what is the epilogue in literature? Of course, we will talk about the afterword and the preface.
Foreword and Afterword
Maybe we will say obvious things, but let the reader not be angry with us. So, when the author wrote a book, and its publisher asks to write a preface to it, then in the latter the writer can write whatever his heart desires.
For example, S. King in the preface to his essay "How to Write Books" dottedly recalled his childhood. Sometimes the author writes an afterword as well, and again he recalls not the events described in the book, but some, possibly technical or personal episodes, and perhaps reincarnates and recreates in his memory the sociocultural context that allowed the book to be born.
And if we ask ourselves: the epilogue in literature is what it is, then here is a completely different approach. The author cannot present personal experiences to the reader in the form of thoughts. When one speaks of an epilogue or prologue, they mean parts of a literary work, however, not too obligatory components.
Prologue and Epilogue
A novel (usually it contains a prologue and epilogue) is a complete story. But if for some reason the author decided that he needed a little prelude to the main story and the same final chord, then why not.
For example, “Crime and Punishment” by F. M. Dostoevsky is self-sufficient. The story ends with the recognition and fainting of Raskolnikov. But F. M. Dostoevsky wanted to show the further path of the hero (or heroes, if we also mean S. Marmeladov).
The instructive meaning of the epilogue in the novel of the Russian classic
The main question here is the epilogue in literature: what is it, why is it needed in a specific work of Dostoevsky. This is a fertile topic, we can think in this direction. On the one hand, the prologue and epilogue create a volume of narration, but on the other hand, Dostoevsky not only created an epilogue for the sake of perspective.
It seems that this is largely an ideological step. After all, Rodion Romanovich suffered terribly before exile and gaining faith. Thus, the Russian classic shows a way out for all those who are desperate and lost. Of course, according to Fedor Mikhailovich, enlightenment of life is possible only with God.
The novel itself, if you do not take the epilogue (in literature we already know what it is), does not give any way out and answer to a person to his spiritual quest. And since Russian literature of the 19th century, according to the apt definition of N. A. Berdyaev, is "educational", it is natural that Dostoevsky could not defeat the temptation and not show the reader a simple and understandable way for the Russian heart to correct and improve itself. By the way, most people really find support in God, therefore, it cannot be said that Dostoevsky is so wrong.
The meaning of the word "epilogue" was clarified and thoroughly investigated by us. If we cast the definition of the epilogue into a lapidary formula, it will turn out something like this: these are events that follow the main plot of the narrative and adjoin thematically or meaningfully to it. The epilogue gives the piece some depth.