pascsad maritah girtruda
Theo Pontbriand
A prequel is a literary, dramatic or cinematic work whose story precedes that of a previous work, by focusing on events that occur before the original narrative.[1] A prequel is a work that forms part of a backstory to the preceding work.
Like sequels, prequels may or may not concern the same plot as the work from which they are derived. More often they explain the background that led to the events in the original, but sometimes the connections are not completely explicit. Sometimes prequels play on the audience's knowledge of what will happen next, using deliberate references to create dramatic irony.
Though the word "prequel" is of recent origin, works fitting this concept existed long before. The Cypria, presupposing hearers' acquaintance with the events of the Homeric epic, confined itself to what preceded the Iliad, and thus formed a kind of introduction.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the word "prequel" first appeared in print in 1958 in an article by Anthony Boucher in The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction, used to describe James Blish's 1956 story They Shall Have Stars, which expanded on the story introduced in his earlier 1955 work, Earthman Come Home. However, Christopher Tolkien, writing about the history of The Silmarillion in 1977, claims that his father, J. R. R. Tolkien, "coined the highly uncharacteristic word 'prequel'" when badgered for a definition of the relationship between The Lord of the Rings and The Silmarillion sometime after 1955.[4][5]
Sometimes "prequel" describes followups where it is not always possible to apply a label defined solely in terms of intertextuality.[8] In the case of The Godfather Part II, the narrative combines elements of a prequel with those of a more generalized sequel by having two intercut narrative strands, one continuing from the first film (the mafia family story under the leadership of Michael Corleone), and one, completely separate, detailing events that precede it (the story of his father Vito Corleone in his youth). In this sense the film can be regarded as both a "prequel and a sequel" (i.e., both a prior and a continuing story), and is often referred to in this manner.[8]
Time-travel often results in a work being considered both a prequel and a sequel, or both a prequel and a "soft" reboot, depending on how drastically history is altered. Examples of arguable soft-reboot prequels include Star Trek, X-Men: Days of Future Past, and Terminator Genisys. Time-travel sequel-prequels can be found in the original Planet of the Apes series. Even though the latter three films depict world events chronologically prior to those of the first two films, the narrative itself is continuous for the main characters, as three apes from the first two films go back in time. The later installment Escape from the Planet of the Apes served as both a sequel and prequel to the first film.[9][10][11] Transformers: Beast Wars is an example of a TV series that uses time-travel to serve as both a sequel and prequel to another series (in this case, the original Transformers cartoon).[citation needed]
Like anyone who did not embrace Game of Thrones, I was continually surrounded by people who had, and their love of the show fascinated me. Clearly one of the factors that made GoT such unmissable viewing for so many was its atmosphere of precarity: it seemed that any character, no matter how beloved by audiences or apparently essential to the grand scheme of things, could die at any time.
The best doom prequels do much more than exploit the established appeal of existing characters and settings for a few (hundred million) dollars more. They are reading lessons that encourage us to discern subtle ironies and shades of meanings inscribed in the most seemingly predetermined chain of events. They are also invitations to find significance in parts of a story, a life, or an experience other than its conclusion. Given the course of world events right now, we may need to master this skill for our own sake.
Welcome to the forum and the series! I'd advise you to read at least the first 3 main books first, myself. Also, be careful on this site to avoid spoilers! Even thread titles can sometimes give stuff away. Maybe bookmark your thread.
As I said in another thread, I think it is best to read it in publication order, which would be after book 10 (Crossroads of Twilight). The second best point to read it (if you can't wait that long) would be after book 6 (Lord of Chaos).
The reason is that if you read up to book 10, you will get to meet an important character introduced late in the main series before (s)he shows up in New Spring. Also, if you have at least read book 6 you will know the fates of two of the major characters in New Spring. Not knowing this makes New Spring less rewarding, even though its certainly still a good read.
Another matter, which is very important to me, is to avoid spoilers. I like the gradual introduction to the world and how the Power works in the main series. If you start out with New spring before the main series, this gradual revelation is "spoiled". Not everyone cares as much about this, but since I do, I thought I'd mention it.
welcome to WoT! You've stumbled across in my opinion (and I'm assuming most people heres), the most epic book series ever written. As for your question, I read New Spring after book 13 Towers of Midnight and I loved the decision to wait until then. Made me appreciate the characters in New Spring much much more. Hope you enjoy
To avoid spoilers, stick to the structured sub forum because it's hell for leather here. You'll be able to find comprehensive answers there without WTF's if you read stuff here (up to 13) and you're only on say, book 2.
I think put off New Spring until at least book 10. In fact, I read New Spring as the first book in my first re-read and I was very happy with my decision. It let me appreciate the intricacy of the character and plot threads even more. So basically - read it quite late in the series!
Everyone here has answered in respect to spoilers--the earlier you read NS, the more it spoils. So that's a balance for preference... There still a valid (most important) question of what *you* want from the prequel. Everyone here has responded from the position of using the prequel to give hindsight appreciation to what you already know. Valid. Very valid.
Another way to approach the prequel is to use it to build momentum to the story arc, specifically in this case, the arcs of two of the major characters that have development in book 6. If you read NS after book 6, you develop hindsight appreciation. However, you might appreciate the momentum of leaning into their backstory *before* their development. In that case, reading after book five and before book six can serve the momentum of the series for you. You can feel a strong pull for those characters which makes book six then more impactful...
It's a discussion of how you want to use the prequel to aid your reading. Strategically building momentum? Or hindsight appreciation? Both are valid ideas. No perfect answer since you're trading one for spoilers and vice versa. My opinion: either after book five, or wait till publication order.
Dragonmount is a fan-maintained website dedicated to Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time fantasy series. It is an online community of people from all over the world who have come here to experience the series to the fullest.
I love Star Wars. I remember using our couch as a trampoline when my dad brought home the original Star Wars in VHS form, and being glued to our TV until the credits rolled. But as much as I loved the original Star Wars movies, I didn't like the prequels as much. Not bad, but not great. Every time I watched a prequel, I just wanted to go back and watch the originals again.
It's kinda the same with the Old Testament and New Testament for me. I love the NT. Like LOVE it. I learned greek so I could read the original manuscripts. I love Jesus, I love the stories, I love the Epistles...it just feels like home to me. The OT, not so much. I'm inspired by the heroes, I'm uplifted by the Psalms, and I'm grateful for the Proverbs. But it's always seemed like foreign territory for me.
Ryan and Todd explore the prequel as a narrative form. They consider its radical potential and how it might function ideologically. They discuss prequels such as Fire Walk With Me and Better Call Saul.
I have an alternative idea; it would involve persuading Lynch to come on board and direct the movie titled "Flyer, talk with me." In my head, this would consist of several interviews, perhaps on the chaise longue...
I am in the midst of launching a prequel restaurant that depends on the audience's familiarity with the Twin Peaks franchises, called Fire-Wok With Me, but Mr. Lynch is proving to be unreasonably precious and litigious. ETA 2026!
You see, Star Wars has always been about binary, black-and-white morality. In the original trilogy, that works just fine. The good guys are plucky underdogs, and the bad guys are a fascist galactic empire who think nothing of blowing up a populated planet for shits and giggles. In the wider, more complicated world of the pre-Empire days though, things are, and should be, more nuanced.
While they might be merry old samurai hippies in the original trilogy, the organised, prolific, altogether more militarised Jedi of the prequel period are a hardcore conservative faction, incredibly rigid in their doctrine, code, and methods. They are ubiquitous, unchallenged, and if anything, slightly too powerful. They have restrictions on sexuality, a strict religious code, make free use of mind control for "the greater good", and enforce stoicism to the point of detachment. They demand utter devotion, are run by an oligarchy, and almost entirely cut themselves off from the outside world. Which, by my count, all sounds a bit cultish.
c01484d022