I probably could be convinced, that there are good reasons for prologues in mystery novels. Okay, maybe, not probably. I've come to really dislike them. They are often (read usually) trite, overworked and serve the exact same purpose. They either show the murder from the p.o.v. of the victim (the "and suddenly everything went black" prologue, where the poor shlub opens the door, turns, looks up, goes down that path, sees HIM or HER, cries "what are YOU doing here?" or remarks with deep insight "oh, it's you" and then ends up stabbed, garrotted, shot, whatever. And goes splat.

The other is the "bolt out of the blue" scene, often the murder which actually takes place in Chapter 7. It's foreshadowing I guess. i don't know. I don't need foreshadowing in a murder mystery or indeed in a book. This prologue shows the dead body bleeding on the sidewalk, or comments on how normal everything was until the boy saw the flash of red. I get this one, sort of - it is a way to show the murder and get it over with. I guess it is supposed to hook the reader. I don't quite get why since it is pretty clear to readers that they're reading a murder mystery.

In today's pile of books to review, there was a mystery that reaches, I believe, a new low in tacky prologues. It's not grotesque or all that trite, althougbh it is trite. The set up is "no one really paid attention to this guy as he walked by" and calmly killed someone blah blah blah.... It somehow manages to combine elements of trite with cutesy-poo and massively unrealistic/unbelieveable dialogue. It should have been cut - and i really believe that without reading another page. It took all of three paragraphs (the length of the prologue) for me to know I would not be reading this book.

"He put his hand to his chest, coughed, and fell forward... The small girl pulled at the woman's hand and pointed. "Look, Mamma. Red paint. The man is spilling his red paint."