Epilogue in literature is what? Is the epilogue required as part of a literary work

Those who read books (well, at least sometimes),meets in some of them "prologue", "epilogue" or "preface" and "afterword" of the author. Many people do not quite understand the difference between these pairs of concepts, so we decided to write an article that answers the question: the epilogue in literature is what? Of course, we'll talk about both the afterword and the preface.

Foreword and Afterword

Maybe we will say the obvious things, butlet the reader not be angry with us. So, when the author wrote the book, and his publisher asks him to write a preface to it, then in the latter the writer can write whatever his heart desires.

For example, C. King in the preface to his work "How to write books" dotted recalled his childhood. Sometimes the author also writes an afterword, and again he does not recall the events described in the book, but some, perhaps technical or personal episodes, and perhaps reincarnate and recreate in his memory the socio-cultural context that allowed the book to be born.

And if we ask ourselves: the epilogue in literature is what it is, then a completely different approach. The author can not, in the form of reflection, present the reader with personal experiences. When they talk about an epilogue or a prologue, they mean parts of a literary work, however, not very necessary components.

Prologue and epilogue

A novel (usually it contains a prologue and an epilogue) iswhole history. But if the author for some reason decided that he needed a small prelude to the main story and the same final chord, then why not.

For example, "Crime and Punishment" F.M. Dostoevsky is self-sufficient. The story ends with the recognition and fainting of Raskolnikov. But FM Dostoyevsky wanted to show the further path of the hero (or heroes, if one also had in mind Marmeladov).

The edifying meaning of the epilogue in the novel of the Russian classic

The main issue here is the epilogue in the literature: this is what, why it is 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 the volume of the narrative, but on the other hand, Dostoevsky not only created an epilogue for the sake of perspective.

As it seems, this is in many respects an ideological step. After all, Rodion Romanich suffered terribly to exile and gaining faith. Thus, the Russian classic shows an outlet for all desperate and lost. Of course, according to Fyodor Mikhailovich, the enlightenment of life is possible only with God.

The very same novel, if you do not take the epilogue (in the literaturewe already know what it is), does not give any way out and answer a person for his spiritual quest. And since Russian literature of the 19th century, according to NA Berdyaev's apt definition, is "instructive," it is only natural that Dostoevsky could not overcome the temptation and not tell the reader a simple and understandable way to the Russian heart for correction and self-improvement. By the way, most people really find support in God, therefore, it can not be said that Dostoevsky is so wrong.

The meaning of the word "epilogue" was clarified by usthoroughly investigated. If you cast the definition of an epilogue in a lapidary formula, it will come about like this: these are the events that follow after the main plot of the narrative and are thematically or in meaning adjoin to it. The epilogue gives the product some depth.