# Are the "authorities" wrong about how to start a novel?



## VRanger (Dec 18, 2020)

Are the "authorities" wrong about how to start a novel?

Well, yes, they are.

You read everywhere these days that you must capture your reader and quickly involve them in the plot. It's nonsense, but it's rammed down our throats constantly.

Another site for writers has a years long thread devoted to the notion that you must capture your reader in the *first three sentences*. It's a sadistic little trap where people post the first three sentences of their WIP and a few 'regulars' trash them and explain why a reader will never progress further.

The notion for this thread came to me today in the car. My wife had cataract surgery and we were listening to an Audible of a favorite series as I chauffeured her. Barbara Mertz (writing as Elizabeth Peters in this series) began writing in the seventies and had successful novels until she passed away a few years ago. I've read her Amelia Peabody series first to last, and my wife listened to the Audibles first to last. So now we're both going through the Audibles. We started the seventh book (The Snake, the Crocodile, and the Dog), and have YET to get to the story. Her first chapter is mainly backstory.

*Backstory*? Extended? To *start *a novel? According to every recent "expert" you read, this is guaranteed failure.

Well, Barbara did this seventeen years into her career as a successful novelist. In fact, in this opening chapter she makes sport of editors who demand action to kick off a story.

So how does she pull it off? Her narrative is clever and entertaining ... whether she is writing backstory or current plot. Her first-person MC has personality on display, and the reader is entertained.

Robert Heinlein's Glory Road (you see me feature Heinlein a lot) starts off with a chapter of backstory. It was a Hugo nominee, his sole divergence into heroic fantasy, and a thoroughly entertaining read.

Here's the caveat. These were both experienced, popular authors who by the time of these novels would sell if they wrote a recipe book. Will today's agents or editors take your novel if you are not a "name", and you commit this sin? Maybe not.

That doesn't diminish the fact that their opening chapters were highly entertaining.

I can't count the number of books I've started reading by popular authors, get halfway through, and I'm wondering when they're going to get to the point of their plot? However, I've been entertained for that half of a book, and that's why I was still reading.

I see a lot of hopeful, beginning writers who read all this stuff about "what sells", and that's what they concentrate on. It's a mistake. They need to first learn to write well.

If they don't learn to "write well" before they "write to sell", they'll never achieve either goal.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 18, 2020)

I think that kind of advice doesn't have to be followed, but at the same time, people say it because it definitely couldn't hurt when trying to make an impression on readers.


----------



## VRanger (Dec 18, 2020)

ironpony said:


> I think that kind of advice doesn't have to be followed, but at the same time, people say it because it definitely couldn't hurt when trying to make an impression on readers.



I often provide counterpoint to my own proposals. The "rules" are there for a reason. They do have validity, but not omnipresence. Good writers break them all the time, which I why I closed with the entreaty to learn to "write well". It's often been said of a great actor that he could "read the phone book and entertain". A great writer can write a scene about picking his nose and entertain.


----------



## Kyle R (Dec 18, 2020)

When it comes to writing advice, I'd say there are two sides to the coin.

"Rules" can certainly be broken, or outright dismissed, as long as one has a valid reason to do so. Absolutely! Creativity knows no bounds, after all.

Though it's also worth thinking about why such advice exists.

There's a trend among creative types to scoff at convention and declare, "Psh! _I_ know better!" But do we _really_ know better? Or are we just lashing out in the face of conformity?

To answer that question in a brutally honest way, we'd have to take a good, hard look at our own credentials.

It's entirely possible that we do know better (or at least, we know what works for us). But it's also possible that such advice holds wisdom from far more experienced hands.

I'd say it's worth pondering, anyway. :-k


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 18, 2020)

vranger said:


> Are the "authorities" wrong about how to start a novel?
> 
> Well, yes, they are.



How many novels have you sold, vranger?


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 18, 2020)

Kyle R said:


> There's a trend among creative types to scoff at convention and declare, "Psh! _I_ know better!" But do we _really_ know better? Or are we just lashing out in the face of conformity?
> 
> To answer that question in a brutally honest way, we'd have to take a good, hard look at our own credentials.
> 
> ...



There's good opportunity for a psychologist with this stuff. It's effectively the same as anti-elitism generally, but it's really weird how the zeitgeist has changed in the arts from "the experts could be wrong" to "the experts are DEFINITELY wrong".

Literary small man syndrome, comes to mind. "I'm not successful because of the publishing industry, therefore THE PUBLISHING INDUSTRY KNOW NOTHING!" Or: _It's not ME that's the problem, I don't have to change, it's these friggin' experts and their wrongness that are the problem and they should change!_

I doubt the OP has ever published a novel, much less sold a significant number of novels, and yet here he is (I'm assuming gender, in this case) not only offering an_ opinion_ on how to write novels (which is maybe valid) but actually telling us he knows better and that what 'the authorities' say is 'nonsense'.

....Based on...?

As a point of fact, while there are no 'authorities' prescribing 'rules' on this matter, a lot of the people who do say one should capture readers quickly and involve them in the plot are actually literary agents and publishers. How unfortunate that all the people who actually work on the industry happen to be at odds with us.

Well, maybe they are all wrong and the OP is right however, given the OP is not the person who makes the _goddamn publishing decisions_ I think I'll go with 'the authorities' and consign this 'advice' to the sewer.


----------



## Tettsuo (Dec 18, 2020)

Have you ever picked a movie on Netflix?

If the movie doesn't grab you in the first 5-10mins, do you keep watching? I know I don't.

Books are no different. In fact, the margin for error on books is even less. You DO have to capture the reader's interest as quickly as possible. There has to be something interesting that occurs in the first few sentences, or the reader won't read on the next sentence. Do people go over board? Yup. But that doesn't mean the advice is wrong.

The best way to test out your theory would be with live people. In every books store in the world, you'll have people looking at the first few pages, reading a bit, then deciding to either buy it or put it back. Those that are put back are the ones that don't have an attention-grabbing first paragraph.

Seriously, go to a book store and watch people. They look at the cover, then the spine (for thickness), then they read the back copy. If all of that is nice, they'll open the book to the first page and read. We all do it.


----------



## TL Murphy (Dec 18, 2020)

My question is : Why would you NOT want to grab the reader in the first paragraph?


----------



## Tettsuo (Dec 18, 2020)

Also, you can't look at well-established writers and say "They can do it!".

They can do it because people will read their books no matter what. The readers trust them. They've already established themselves to a degree that you know you're going to get a good product. If you're an unknown talent, you can't do what they do.

This reminds of me page count discussions. People always bring up writers who have these huge books and say, "Their books don't follow the page count guidelines. Why can't I do that?". But if you check out their earliest works, you'll se them all adhere to the rules (for the most part).


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 18, 2020)

Tettsuo said:


> Also, you can't look at well-established writers and say "They can do it!".
> 
> They can do it because people will read their books no matter what. The readers trust them. They've already established themselves to a degree that you know you're going to get a good product. If you're an unknown talent, you can't do what they do.
> 
> This reminds of me page count discussions. People always bring up writers who have these huge books and say, "Their books don't follow the page count guidelines. Why can't I do that?". But if you check out their earliest works, you'll se them all adhere to the rules (for the most part).



Or compare the start of Stephen King's Carrie to the waffling essays he starts his later novel with and see a huge difference in immediacy as well as word count. Comparing the way successful mid-career writers write with debutants is silly. 

Debut authors have virtually no room for error, successful writers with a fanbase have virtually no room for failure. James Patterson could write any book he wanted any way he wanted and it would still be a bestseller.

 It's a comparison between an eighteen year old soccer star on a trial from the academy and a fat, wheezing David Beckham; someone who can barely run the length of the pitch yet still starts games based on name and recognition. Guess who still starts games? The standards are different because the business dynamics are different.

The OP actually supports this with his own 'evidence':



vranger said:


> Well, Barbara did this *seventeen years into her career as a successful novelist*. In fact, in this opening chapter she makes sport of editors who demand action to kick off a story.



It's just a bad take all over.


----------



## EmmaSohan (Dec 18, 2020)

TL Murphy said:


> My question is : Why would you NOT want to grab the reader in the first paragraph?



Most attempts to GRAB the reader on the first sentence ending up distorting the time line.

Second sin, they sometimes mis-state the purpose of the first chapter.

Third sin, sometimes they say what is going to happen in the future and disrupt the natural flow of the story.

Sometimes they aren't even true. Which is to say, they violate the rules of good story-telling to accomplish their goal. There's a choice of telling the story in the way that gives the reader the best reading experience, and they don't take it.



> The stranger didn't shatter Adam's world all at once.
> That was what Adam Price would tell himself later, but that was a lie.



It's on my website under goofy first lines. I think I might change that title to poisonous.

I recently read a book that had a good first line that didn't subtract from the story. It was lovely. And very rare. That's not a problem.


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 18, 2020)

EmmaSohan said:


> Most attempts to GRAB the reader on the first sentence ending up distorting the time line.
> 
> Second sin, they sometimes mis-state the purpose of the first chapter.
> 
> ...



Sounds like a lot of generalizing. Based on what evidence are you saying that MOST attempts to grab readers end up distorting the time line? What are you credentials?



> I recently read a book that had a good first line that didn't subtract from the story. It was lovely. And very rare. That's not a problem.



If it's such a problem then why do you think so many agents, publishers, etc. constantly say that one of the main reasons they put books down is because writers take too long to get going?

I mean, guys, google this stuff! Google: "*main reasons books are rejected". 

*I just did and here was the first website that came up.* First point.

*


> Out of everything on our list, this might be the most important. Your writing may be great, but maybe your manuscript still needs work to be on-par with the level of quality that publishers are looking for.
> Maybe the voice or plot could be more original, or the characters don’t have enough at stake. *Or perhaps the very beginning of your book isn’t as compelling as it could be. *[/FONT]*[FONT=&Verdana]If a potential publisher starts reading and is yawning at the end of the first page, they probably aren’t going to read on much longer (even if you swear it gets really good on page 3). After all, there a lot of other manuscripts in the slush pile.*




Here is the second, linked via the Writer's Digest Again, it's pretty much the first thing mentioned.



> *The book is boring (immediate manuscript rejection!). *“If your opening paragraph is someone driving and sleeping, I’ll put it down,” says the literary agent. “Most writers need time to warm up – but I don’t want to read that. *Make sure your story starts in the first sentence*.”


Getting into the story quickly is literally the number one thing everybody in the industry harps on about. And, wrong or not, they are the ones who decide who gets published. Let's not try to second guess people who did things for a living just because it's inconvenient to us.


----------



## Pamelyn Casto (Dec 18, 2020)

Maybe to think further about this topic we can look at what some fine writers have done for their openings. There are all sorts of interesting ways to open a novel. (I'd guess a lot would also depend on whether we might be writing a "literary" type novel or a more "mainstream" type.) Here are some opening we might talk about. 

Here’s a top ten list of favorite openings from Catherine Lacey at _The Guardian_ https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/jul/19/top-10-opening-scenes-in-books She mentions these authors and their fascinating openings: James Baldwin, Sarah Manguso, Jean Rhys, Dickens, Twain (along with others).

I would add more, such as Toni Morrison’s _Beloved_, one of my favorite openings. Here’s that opening:

124 was spiteful. Full of a baby’s venom. The women in the house knew it and so did the children. For years each put up with the spite in his own way, but by 1873 Sethe and her daughter Denver were its only victims. The grandmother, Baby Suggs, was dead, and the sons, Howard and Buglar, had run away by the time they were thirteen years old — as soon as merely looking in a mirror shattered it (that was the signal for Buglar); as soon as two tiny hand prints appeared in the cake (that was it for Howard). Neither boy waited to see more; another kettleful of chickpeas smoking in a heap on the floor; soda crackers crumbled and strewn in a line next to the doorsill. Nor did they wait for one of the relief periods: the weeks, months even, when nothing was disturbed. No. Each one fled at once — the moment the house committed what was for him the one insult not to be born or witnessed a second time. Within two months, in the dead of winter, leaving their grandmother, Baby Suggs; Sethe, their mother; and their little sister, Denver, all by themselves in the gray and white house on Bluestone Road. It didn’t have a number then, because Cincinnati didn’t stretch that far. In fact, Ohio had been calling itself a state only seventy years when first one brother and then the next stuffed quilt packing into his hat, snatched up his shoes, and crept away from the lively spite the house felt for them.
-----
For unusual or out- of- the- ordinary opening I would also add the opening paragraph to _The Book of Questions: Yael, Elya, Aely_. It begins with this brief “fore-speech.”

I say: I am death, and forthwith am before God
was.
If we spurn God’s image, do we not reject
creation?
              Then where is truth but in the burning space be-
tween one letter and the next?
              Thus the book is first read outside its limits.
-----
Then there is Fernando Pessoa_’s The Book of Disquiet_. Pessoa is said to be one of the greatest Portuguese writers and he writes with a troupe of alter egos (a whole world of friends inside him he says) . This novel has two different people, characters, personalities telling their stories-- so there are actually two openings to this novel. The first one opens this way:

“1 My soul is a hidden orchestra; I do not know what instruments, what violins and harps, drums and tambours, sound and clash inside me. I know myself only as a symphony.”

The second opening, a lengthy paragraph, begins this way (I cut the paragraph short, included just the three opening sentences):

“163 I was born at a time when most young people had lost their believe in God for much the same reason that their elders kept theirs—without knowing why. And so, because the human spirit tends naturally to criticize because it feels rather than because it thinks, most of those young people chose Humanity as a substitute for God. I belong, however, to that species of man who is always on the edge of the thing he belongs to, who sees not only the crowd of which he forms a part, but also the great spaces all around.” 
-----
Oh, and I think the opening to E. Annie Proulx’ _The Shipping News_ is terrific. That first page told me I was going to love this novel to pieces. I did.

It begins with a quote from the first chapter of _The Ashley Book of Knots _(the main character is named Quoyle): “Quoyle – A coil of rope of one layer only. It is made on deck, so that it may be walked on if necessary”. 

Then here are the opening few sentences:

_“Here is an account of a few years in the life of Quoyle, born in Brooklyn and raised in a shuffle of dreary upstate towns._
_Hive-spangled, gut roaring with gas and cramp, he survived childhood; at the state university, hand clapped over his chin, he camouflaged torment with smiles and silence. Stumbled through his twenties and into his thirties learning to separate his feelings from his life, counting on nothing. He ate prodigiously, liked a ham knuckle, buttered spuds.”_

I think taking a close look at how the great writers have opened their novels can be helpful to our own writing—they provide all these new and fresh and unusual ideas for us to explore. In exploring what has worked we don’t have to rely on those viewed as experts. These writers, of course, are experienced and have proven themselves worth reading.)


----------



## EmmaSohan (Dec 18, 2020)

luckyscars said:


> Sounds like a lot of generalizing. Based on what evidence are you saying that MOST attempts to grab readers end up distorting the time line? What are you credentials?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I didn't mean to say what writers should do to sell their books. I would guess a really interesting first line is important to selling a book. Thanks for clarifying that.

I was talking about reading experience. That's all I was saying about first lines that aren't true, are misleading, or distort the natural time line or flow of a story.


----------



## BornForBurning (Dec 18, 2020)

> There has to be something interesting that occurs in the first few sentences, or the reader won't read on the next sentence.





> Most attempts to GRAB the reader on the first sentence ending up distorting the time line.


'Something interesting,' that's the key. It's not necessarily that you've got to hit the reader with a linguistic sledgehammer or something. You've got to tantalize them. I've personally got a weakness for a taste of intriguing narrative voice. Overwriting and underwriting are both mistakes leading to the phenomena I like to call 'blank square syndrome'. Meaning all you see when reading is a blank square. EmmaSohen is talking about said overwriting and yes, it _is _common among amateur writers as a response to the 'this isn't hookey enough' critique. I like writing hookey stuff. Because it's fun to write those machine-gun sentences that slam down like concrete. Not everyone does, or has to. But, as a previous user stated, why _wouldn't _you start with something interesting? Every story starts at the beginning. Which I know sounds dumb when you say it. But it's true. Beginnings are interesting. Intriguing. They bring forth new life, reveal pregnant threads of tension, sow black seeds of death to burst forth at a later date. 



> *Backstory? Extended? To start a novel? According to every recent "expert" you read, this is guaranteed failure.*


Not really. Not if it's interesting. But, if you don't like what the experts have to say, don't read them. I don't. I like to investigate everything personally. Sometimes that leads to failure, but I prefer to _know _know that something is a bad idea, rather then know that somebody told me it was. Anyways, I'm leery of writing blogs in general. Writing advice is generally best encapsulated by scrutinizing a specific piece of writing. So someone saying on some blog 'have a more hookey opening', that doesn't really mean anything to me. An editor saying '_your_ story needs a more hookey opening', that means a lot. The editor might even be wrong. But I will still take their opinion under serious consideration. 

Anti-elitism is just another form of elitism. Eh.


----------



## EmmaSohan (Dec 18, 2020)

luckyscars said:


> Sounds like a lot of generalizing. Based on what evidence are you saying that MOST attempts to grab readers end up distorting the time line? What are you credentials?



Well, I looked at how authors started books. Studied them. Analyzed. Looked again. Lots of books, books I just had sitting around. I ended up with conclusions that are supported by the evidence.

Anyone can go to my website, and find out about starts. What you won't find is proof, which is impossible. What you will find is evidence and reasoning.

I want to say that anyone can do that, but it probably takes at least a month to figure out what to look for. For example, at the sentence-by-sentence level, a story is almost always told in chronological order. But who even thinks to check for that?


----------



## bazz cargo (Dec 18, 2020)

Hmmm... I suppose it depends on what part of your reader you grab...


----------



## Taylor (Dec 18, 2020)

vranger said:


> You read everywhere these days that you must capture your reader and quickly involve them in the plot. It's nonsense, but it's rammed down our throats constantly.
> 
> Another site for writers has a years long thread devoted to the notion that you must capture your reader in the *first three sentences*. It's a sadistic little trap where people post the first three sentences of their WIP and a few 'regulars' trash them and explain why a reader will never progress further.





Tettsuo said:


> You DO have to capture the reader's interest as quickly as possible. There has to be something interesting that occurs in the first few sentences, or the reader won't read on the next sentence. Do people go over board? Yup. But that doesn't mean the advice is wrong.
> 
> The best way to test out your theory would be with live people. In every books store in the world, you'll have people looking at the first few pages, reading a bit, then deciding to either buy it or put it back. Those that are put back are the ones that don't have an attention-grabbing first paragraph.
> 
> Seriously, go to a book store and watch people. They look at the cover, then the spine (for thickness), then they read the back copy. If all of that is nice, they'll open the book to the first page and read. We all do it.



I think you do have to capture the reader quickly.  But capture, doesn't necessarily mean involving them in the plot. As Tettsuo describes the readers sequence of events, the synopsis does that to a degree.  

For myself, there are a couple of things I am looking for when I read the first few pages to decide to read on.  Most importantly, it is the style of the writer.  Is this something I want to invest my time in?  So no matter how exciting the first few pages, I'm not looking to get hooked by the story at this point. But a few things that hook me may be:

1) It has a lot of dialogue and actions, not long flowery descriptions that give way too much information in a narrative.

2) The MC is someone I can relate to.  Intelligent, introspective, vulnerable, humourous, etc.

3) The setting appeals to me.  Typically I prefer large city centres to sleepy towns. And if it's set in a school in a small town...well there has to be something else really interesting and very quickly, and maybe even the first few sentences.  

So I think that I do agree with Vranger that you don't have to akwardly ram in the plot, just because it's a common rule. And frankly if they do, it can be a turn-off for me. But something has to grab the reader.  I guess that is where the writer's voice/style comes into play.


----------



## LCLee (Dec 18, 2020)

vranger said:


> Another site for writers has a years long thread devoted to the notion that you must capture your reader in the *first three sentences*. It's a sadistic little trap where people post the first three sentences of their WIP and a few 'regulars' trash them and explain why a reader will never progress further.



[FONT=&Verdana]I have been on the forum posting my first three sentences for a few years, and I never looked at a critique as trashing. I use it for my monthly short stories. I feel if the first three sentences are optimized, it will draw the reader in a bit.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&Verdana]
[/FONT]


vranger said:


> *Backstory*? Extended? To *start *a novel? According to every recent "expert" you read, this is guaranteed failure.



I recently wrote a novel that goes into a back story on the third paragraph. When some of the beta readers called me on it, I did some research and found a lot of references. In fact, since then I have noticed movies will start with a bang and then say six months earlier—or the like.


----------



## Taylor (Dec 18, 2020)

This is such a great discussion and really got me thinking about this.   

I just googled "first pages of _The Goldfinch_".  It is a novel by Donna Tartt and won't the Pulitzer in 2014.  This blogger uses her "first page checklist"  to analyze it.  Pretty much meets all of the criteria discussed in this thread.  

https://www.livewritethrive.com/2016/03/23/first-pages-of-best-selling-novels-the-goldfinch/ 

Checklist is here:

https://www.livewritethrive.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/first-page-checklist.pdf


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 18, 2020)

EmmaSohan said:


> Well, I looked at how authors started books. Studied them. Analyzed. Looked again. Lots of books, books I just had sitting around. I ended up with conclusions that are supported by the evidence.
> 
> Anyone can go to my website, and find out about starts. What you won't find is proof, which is impossible. What you will find is evidence and reasoning.
> 
> I want to say that anyone can do that, but it probably takes at least a month to figure out what to look for. For example, at the sentence-by-sentence level, a story is almost always told in chronological order. But who even thinks to check for that?



Okay, seriously, unless you have read essentially every book in existence you have no business appealing to "I've looked at books" as a means to justify sweeping generalizations in the manner you did. 

Why? Because your sampling of books is driven by your own personal biases. For all I know, you've only looked at crap books your entire life. How do I know you haven't? It's infinitely possible. If I looked only at shit books, I could easily agree with you that X, Y, Z doesn't work, because few things in shit books do work. 

Now, I don't actually think you have only read poor examples to arrive at your conclusion, but that isn't really the point. The point is that even if you have read 'a lot of books' you have almost certainly only read maybe 0.0001% of the books in the world and that makes "I've looked at books and the books I have seen are evidence of a general rule that can be applied to the other 99.999% of books I have not read". 

Do you see the problem?

This is why expert knowledge (as a plural, no single expert is reliable) is vital. Consensus is how we know 'what works'. Because you CAN'T figure everything out 'from looking at books' and 'reasoning'. You don't have enough years in your life nor, no offence, brain. None of us do in the singular. The initial point of writing, ironically, was for exactly this reason: Because nobody was able to 'just know' things from primary sources. Education mattered. Sucks I have to use the past tense.

Anyway, the point...'Grabbing' a reader early isn't optional, it's mandatory. It's a rational truth, obvious, with zero downside (who puts down a book because they feel TOO 'well-grabbed'? Absolutely nobody) and plenty of upside (people tend to stick around if they like things initially, even if they aren't so great in the middle). 

We can all disagree regarding _exactly_ what 'grab' means here, of course, and I'm sure that difference in opinion is at the heart of probably any disagreement here. I hope so, because essentially the rest of it is inarguable, because logic says you cannot _entertain _someone if you are not of _interest _to them and the rest is all semantic blathering. 

To argue that it is not important to 'grab' a reader and to do so early (I don't care if 'early' here means the first page, paragraph, sentence, word, letter or spot of ink - early is early) is ridiculous, almost jarringly arrogant, as though to say "the reader should afford us endless hours of time and if they don't they are dreadful commoners". 

The reality is the moment somebody opens our book(s), we are on a stage under bright lights performing at a show they have no popcorn for, an uncomfortable chair to sit on (or no chair at all), and zero obligation to stay. _We _have no business assuming _they _will stay and _we _have to earn every second they do stay. We have to cherish it, make the most of it, pull out all the blasted stops and every trick from our sleeve to keep them _a little bit longer_. We do this as though it is five minutes in heaven, because once they leave they probably ain't coming back.

But 'slow and steady through the book'? No, that's not how it works -- _like, have you MET a millennial? _


----------



## Matchu (Dec 18, 2020)

Does that include Russian novels?  I need to finish, or start And Quiet Flows The Don again. I think I read 200 pages in 1987.

[and not even top drawer abstruse/obtuse/Russian, neither]


Same question with that Guerdieff/Ouspensky shit. (hic...Xmas hiccup, apols)


----------



## EternalGreen (Dec 18, 2020)

Trust, but don't test, your reader's patience.


----------



## EmmaSohan (Dec 18, 2020)

luckyscars said:


> Okay, seriously, unless you have read essentially every book in existence ....



I assume we agree that the first sentence is sometimes not true.



> It's just paper. Heck, for the most part it isn't even paper... (Teen Inc., Petrucha)



Are we disagreeing on how often this happens? From the book I read last night



> I was in love with Verona Cove from the first day, but I waited until the seventh day to commit.



It turns out, there was no commitment in what she did. Thinking there was, I was misled reading that chapter.

As that shows, most of the time the "incorrectness" isn't obvious unless you sit down and analyze things. I've done that. Has anyone else? I suspect I have a monopoly on earned opinions.

Are we arguing about quality of books? I think our target audience here is closer to "someone who got their book published." Both of those books were good.

We can argue about what counts as "incorrect" of course. That will affect the percentage. I know that. It's all subjective. But the idea that one would have to read every book to make a judgment about this denies the well-accepted concept of polling.

And it misses the point. I ask myself, why would an author say something that isn't true? For the first sentence, I mean -- they essentially don't occur anywhere else.

Answer: From somewhere, there is pressure on authors to have a really interesting first line. And no pressure to, like, tell the truth.



> Like all big mistakes, mine started with a goat.



All big mistakes start with a goat? And contradicting even that, the honest second sentence.



> But if I'm being totally honest, I wouldn't be riding my bike to school at dusk, with nefarious deeds ahead, if that telegram hadn't arrived last month.


----------



## VRanger (Dec 18, 2020)

TL Murphy said:


> My question is : Why would you NOT want to grab the reader in the first paragraph?





Tettsuo said:


> Have you ever picked a movie on Netflix?
> 
> If the movie doesn't grab you in the first 5-10mins, do you keep watching? I know I don't.
> 
> ...



Thus my discussion that the opening needs to entertain, but it doesn't have to be a slam-bang introduction to the primary action of the story.


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 18, 2020)

vranger said:


> Thus my discussion that the opening needs to entertain, but it doesn't have to be a slam-bang introduction to the primary action of the story.



Absolutely nobody with any vague understanding of fiction has ever said that a story’s opening needs to be a “slam bang introduction to the primary action of the story”, not least because “primary action of the story” is a term that has absolutely no meaning.


----------



## BornForBurning (Dec 19, 2020)

> All big mistakes start with a goat? And contradicting even that, the honest second sentence.


Clearly a voice-driven piece. I think it works. The author isn't asking us to be believe that all big mistakes start with a goat. She's asking us to believe that the narrator believes it.

EDIT: Yah know, maybe I take that back. It's starting to bother me, too. Largely because I feel the narrator said it to impress me, not because she actually believes it. That rankles. Girl, who do you take me for?


----------



## EternalGreen (Dec 19, 2020)

Editors won't fully read a majority of MS they receive. If you want to be read, start off with something the editors will like. Make "promises" you can keep. If you focus on strong openings, you may find that your rejections are more personal, which means the editor(s) actually read your work.


----------



## Sam (Dec 20, 2020)

vranger said:


> You read everywhere these days that you must capture your reader and quickly involve them in the plot. It's nonsense, but it's rammed down our throats constantly.



No, it's not. 

If I pick a novel off the shelves and it doesn't hook me within the first page, I put it back down. I have several friends, all of whom are avid readers, who don't even read past the first paragraph if it doesn't hook them. 



> Another site for writers has a years long thread devoted to the notion that you must capture your reader in the *first three sentences*. It's a sadistic little trap where people post the first three sentences of their WIP and a few 'regulars' trash them and explain why a reader will never progress further.



And it's based in truth. 

OP, there are hundreds of new books on the shelves every month. Your book, if/when you get one published, will be lost in a sea of other books in the same genre. Of the handful of readers who go to book-stores nowadays, given how easy it is to have a book in seconds on your Kindle or E-reader, they will have maybe thirty minutes of free time to peruse the shelves in search of their next read. They will judge any book they pick up on two key factors: the jacket blurb and the first couple of pages. They will not have time to read any further. If either of those two things grabs their attention, they may purchase the book. But if nothing grabs them, they'll put it back down and move on to the next one that catches their attention. 



> The notion for this thread came to me today in the car. My wife had cataract surgery and we were listening to an Audible of a favorite series as I chauffeured her. Barbara Mertz (writing as Elizabeth Peters in this series) began writing in the seventies and had successful novels until she passed away a few years ago. I've read her Amelia Peabody series first to last, and my wife listened to the Audibles first to last. So now we're both going through the Audibles. We started the seventh book (The Snake, the Crocodile, and the Dog), and have YET to get to the story. Her first chapter is mainly backstory.
> 
> *Backstory*? Extended? To *start *a novel? According to every recent "expert" you read, this is guaranteed failure.
> 
> Well, Barbara did this seventeen years into her career as a successful novelist. In fact, in this opening chapter she makes sport of editors who demand action to kick off a story.



Yeah, and do you know what the _key _point in these three paragraphs is? "She did this *seventeen *years into her career as a successful novelist". Yes, an established author with an established readership *can do whatever the absolute fuck they want. *They're _established_, OP. They already have a myriad of fans who buy their work based on their name, not on how well they hook them. 

You, on the other hand, are not an established author of seventeen years with a fanbase already established. You are trying to get there. And in order to achieve this, you first have to get people to buy your work. That means giving yourself every advantage humanly possible, including hooking them to get them out the door with your book in hand. Once you have done this, and are Stephen King levels of famous, feel free to engage in all the pejorative back-story you want. 



> So how does she pull it off? Her narrative is clever and entertaining ... whether she is writing backstory or current plot. Her first-person MC has personality on display, and the reader is entertained.



The reader could be bored to tears as well and they're still going to buy the book. Why? Because they're a fan from seventeen years ago when she hooked them on the first page. 



> Robert Heinlein's Glory Road (you see me feature Heinlein a lot) starts off with a chapter of backstory. It was a Hugo nominee, his sole divergence into heroic fantasy, and a thoroughly entertaining read.



Robert Heinlein is a megastar. He can do whatever he likes. He could publish a book with pictures of fluffy kittens and readers would lap it up. 



> Here's the caveat. These were both experienced, popular authors who by the time of these novels would sell if they wrote a recipe book. Will today's agents or editors take your novel if you are not a "name", and you commit this sin? Maybe not.



It seems, OP, that you've come on the problem. 

No, they won't. Why? Because they receive so many manuscripts across their table every day that they're looking for any excuse to dump yours in the rejected pile. Starting with back-story or flashbacks is a huge bugaboo for publishing houses. I learned this lesson the hard way, OP. 



> That doesn't diminish the fact that their opening chapters were highly entertaining.
> 
> I can't count the number of books I've started reading by popular authors, get halfway through, and I'm wondering when they're going to get to the point of their plot? However, I've been entertained for that half of a book, and that's why I was still reading.
> 
> I see a lot of hopeful, beginning writers who read all this stuff about "what sells", and that's what they concentrate on. It's a mistake. They need to first learn to write well.



Yeah, absolutely, and part of writing well is learning what works and what doesn't. Writing is a dog-eat-dog world. It's tough, harsh, unforgiving, but most of all it's not fair. The reality is, you not only have to be able to write well, you also have to know your market, your readers, the previous history of the publishing house you're approaching, and unfortunately a lot of that only comes after being rejected a hundred-plus times. 

Trust me, I had the same opinion you did when I first started. I thought I could write well and do whatever I wanted, like my writing heroes had done, but that was quickly and brutally beaten out of me by the sheer number of rejection letters. And when I questioned why I was rejected, the answer was nearly always the same: "your story didn't interest me". 

When I finally got published, my first paragraph had a massive hook in it. 

I learned my lesson.


----------



## David K. Thomasson (Dec 20, 2020)

luckyscars said:


> How many novels have you sold, vranger?



Ad hominem.


----------



## PiP (Dec 20, 2020)

If a book does not grab my attention in the first chapter I take the view, 'life's too short' and move on to another book. I struggled with John Grisham's book, The Whistler, as it introduced too many characters in one go. My husband who also read the book, said the same. If we were not already familiar with the author, we would not have been tempted to buy more of his books. 


I am busy, so I have limited time. I will not labour through books which do not hold/grab my attention from the start. The characters must be engaging as well as the opening chapter.


----------



## TL Murphy (Dec 20, 2020)

Life is short and there are so many books to read. You can usually tell in the first paragraph if the book is worth investing your precious time.


----------



## VRanger (Dec 20, 2020)

Sam said:


> Yeah, absolutely, and part of writing well is learning what works and what doesn't.



It looks like that's about the only part of your reply that responded to what I wrote, rather than what you imagined. Nowhere did I say "abandon hooks", only that there is more flexibility in how to capture a reader's interest than some "experts" advise. Is it somehow a mystery to you that my examples would come from successful authors? LOL



Sam said:


> I have several friends, all of whom are avid readers, who don't even read past the first paragraph if it doesn't hook them



Pity them. I've never abandoned a read after the "first paragraph". I've generally gone to enough trouble to get a book I may have some interest in to not then learn something about it. I have put them down after a few pages, generally either because it's in a style not to my taste, or I simply find bad writing. Personally, I'm patient with plot if the writing is at least competent.

The point is to engage the reader. You engage the reader by writing well. I've looked at myriad efforts by hopeful beginners who start with dramatic hooks (they thought) but their writing is crap, because they haven't yet learned the craft.



Sam said:


> Yes, an established author with an established readership *can do whatever the absolute fuck they want. They're established, OP. They already have a myriad of fans who buy their work based on their name, not on how well they hook them.*/QUOTE]
> 
> There is some danger in making statements like this in utter ignorance of the specifics being discussed. Here is the first paragraph of her *first book *published.
> 
> ...


----------



## Sam (Dec 20, 2020)

vranger said:


> It looks like that's about the only part of your reply that responded to what I wrote, rather than what you imagined. Nowhere did I say "abandon hooks", only that there is more flexibility in how to capture a reader's interest than some "experts" advise. Is it somehow a mystery to you that my examples would come from successful authors? LOL



I responded to all of what you wrote, but whatever. 



> Pity them. I've never abandoned a read after the "first paragraph". I've generally gone to enough trouble to get a book I may have some interest in to not then learn something about it. I have put them down after a few pages, generally either because it's in a style not to my taste, or I simply find bad writing. Personally, I'm patient with plot if the writing is at least competent.
> 
> The point is to engage the reader. You engage the reader by writing well. I've looked at myriad efforts by hopeful beginners who start with dramatic hooks (they thought) but their writing is crap, because they haven't yet learned the craft.



If that were true, every English lit graduate would have a bestseller. It is, in fact, demonstrably untrue. Writing well is half the battle. You can write the most technically sound novel imaginable and it won't matter a damn if there's no _story, _no _conflict, _no _hook. _A great novel employs both great writing and great storytelling. 



> There is some danger in making statements like this in utter ignorance of the specifics being discussed. Here is the first paragraph of her *first book *published.
> 
> _I saw it first at twilight. The Highland mountains were purple in the fading light, the western sky a brilliant tapestry of gold and crimson. Against the fiery northern sunset the ruined tower rose in jagged silhouette, still standing guard over Blacktower House, which sprawled along the slope of the hill below. _
> 
> It doesn't sound like you or your friends would have read further, and you'd have missed out on a clever and amusing author.



No, my friends and I would have read on, because the first line _is_ a hook. "I saw it first at twilight". That is a patently obvious hook. It sets up a question of what the character saw, such that you want to read on to find out what it is. 

This comes from the flawed notion that hooks have to be action-laden. They don't. The best hooks are ones to get you to ask questions. That opening line couldn't be any more of a hook if it tried.


----------



## VRanger (Dec 20, 2020)

Thought better of.


----------



## Sam (Dec 20, 2020)

Yeah, I'm happy to call truce. 

I've been saying for years: good stories keep us on the edge of our seat; great stories keep us on the edge of our seat when we don't even know why. That's why a hook that poses an immediate question for a reader, which they will then demand to know an answer, is every bit as powerful as a hook that starts with action. 

No hard feelings.


----------



## VRanger (Dec 20, 2020)

Sam said:


> great stories keep us on the edge of our seat when we don't even know why.



Agreed. I mentioned in here somewhere that I've read a LOT of books where I'm halfway through the book and I don't know when the meat of the plot is going to start, but I'm entertained and still reading. (Actually, with me that's a slam dunk. If I finish the first chapter, there are only a handful of novels in my life I've abandoned after that, even if I was wrinkling my nose at times).

For the last couple of years I've been reading Jack McDevitt's "Alex Benedict" series. It's very unusual plotting and writing. The stories are sci-fi mysteries, and for a considerable portion of the novel you have no idea what the story is getting at. The MCs get interested in something ... you do get that much. Then they roam around interviewing people and doing research. Most of the time, the focus of the mystery changes well into the book, and the final act is straight out of left field.

You get one interview after another where the interviewee denies useful knowledge. Deep into the series, I now expect one more more of the interviewees is lying and will soon try to murder the MCs, but that's not the point. 

There is nothing extraordinary about his style, and the personalities of the MCs are in no way unusual or titillating. Yet he's been a success. I'm certain these books are not for everyone. They impress me as a somewhat intellectual exercise, and I have room for that.


----------



## indianroads (Dec 20, 2020)

The purpose of everything we write is either to entertain or educate. Obviously, first few pages of a fiction book need to capture the imagination of the reader, and entice them to read further. I believe there's an over-emphasis on the first sentence... or three sentences... or first paragraph - people have a longer attention span than that. 

Potential readers see your book title and cover - if that looks interesting, they'll read the description - if they're intrigued they'll pick up your book and read a few pages. If they're still interested they'll usually make the purchase.


----------



## EmmaSohan (Dec 20, 2020)

We want to write a first sentence that is engaging and meaningful. But, it's hard to do meaningful without any setting; it's hard to do engaging without any character.

So, in one style of starting a book, the first line is action and then it's a huge bootstrapping. Not knowing what's going on can actually be an incentive to keep reading (and is a well-accepted technique), so not knowing what is happening at the start can actually be a hook.



> It was Christmas, and Dan was in the middle of proposing to my mom when there was a knock at the door. (Lucky Caller)



The author has merely started the story at an interesting point in the action. It has potential and importance. But there was no way of doing that without creating mystery -- who was Dan? What was the knock? Will he finish the proposal? And on and on.



> All five of us looked that way -- me, Mom, Dan, my sisters Rose and Sidney, all of our heads swiveled en masse [EDITED: I HAD ORIGINALLY TYPE IN MASSE]. . .



that continues the story but it also fills in the setting/characters.

I am trying to reconcile Sam and vranger. There are different styles of starts, and in my opinion this is the best. You could see it as mystery, and you could see it as ordinary story telling.

The author then continues the scene, and we quickly get to a discussion of opening the door that I think makes most sense if the girls are teens.

We don't get to who is at the door until page 5, but that was not the author drawing out suspense (which some authors do intentionally). It was just the author spending 4 pages explaining who Dan was and filling in the backstory of proposing.



> Is this seat taken?" I asked the attractive young woman sitting by herself in the lounge. (The General's Daughter)



In way, you could not ask for a more mundane start to a story. But it has potential, and it raises questions.

A hook? No. This book hooked me about as fast and strong as a book can, but that was on word 65. Enough to keep going? Yes. Contrast that to:



> My brother was the king of nowhere. This fact doesn't matter to anyone ...



I laughed at how bad that was, then set the book down with no intention of reading it.


----------



## bdcharles (Dec 20, 2020)

vranger said:


> You read everywhere these days that you must capture your reader and quickly involve them in the plot. It's nonsense, but it's rammed down our throats constantly.
> 
> ...
> 
> So how does [Barbara Mertz] pull it off? Her narrative is clever and entertaining ... whether she is writing backstory or current plot. Her first-person MC has personality on display, and the reader is entertained.



To me, that's exactly _how _she has captured her reader / audiobook listener - with clever and entertaining prose and MC personality. If that's the thing that involves the reader in the plot, then so be it. Other writers might use an inciting incident, or a curious deviation from the norm, or a tense moment of action, or a vivid description, to hook their reader. Just ... something. I think uncertainty around this point sets in where people think capturing the reader's attention must adhere to one form. It needn't, to my mind.


----------



## bdcharles (Dec 20, 2020)

indianroads said:


> I believe there's an over-emphasis on the first sentence... or three sentences... or first paragraph - people have a longer attention span than that.



*shifts about nervously, tries desperately to make it past the first three lines of a randomly-selected book*


----------



## EmmaSohan (Dec 20, 2020)

Sam said:


> When I finally got published, my first paragraph had a massive hook in it.



Can you share? And one of your failed first paragraphs? I like examples.


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 20, 2020)

EmmaSohan said:


> I laughed at how bad that was, then set the book down with no intention of reading it.



That's interesting, because "My brother was the king of nowhere" is most definitely mysterious and, depending entirely on what sort of book it is, it could be appropriate.

I look for basically three things in an opening:

- Flawless delivery. I don't want any indications of incompetency or juvenilia. A hell of a lot of self-published novels read like fanfiction. I would actually count...



> All five of us looked that way -- me, Mom, Dan, my sisters Rose and Sidney, all of our heads swiveled in masse




...as sounding pretty juvenile. Heads that _swivel in masse_? Give me a break. Besides the image being ridiculous, heads don't swivel and rarely in unison, it's _en masse _not _in masse _as a French loan phrase. Is it a big deal? Of course not, not in itself, but these are the kinds of silly little details that suggest the writer is not at a professional level. It's not quite terrible, but it would certainly make me distrustful of what was to come and if the subsequent sentences were like this I would probably stop.

The other things I look for in openings...

- Originality. I don't want an opener that feels like it could have come from a thousand others. I don't want the book to start with the character waking up and seeing the sunlight at their window. I don't want the book to start with family breakfast. I mean, sure there are ways to redoing the classics in a fresh way, but generally speaking these are warning signs. I don't want a book that starts with a description of weather or of cities.

- Assertion. This one is tricky. Basically, the opening needs to not equivocate, there should be no vagueness in terms of time and place (unless that's the intent, but even then).

A good example of an opener, possibly one of the best in the world, is De Maurier's Rebecca:



> Last night I dreamt I went to Manderley again. It seemed to me I stood by the iron gate leading to the drive, and for a while I could not enter, for the way was barred to me. There was a padlock and a chain upon the gate. I called in my dream to the lodge-keeper, and had no answer, and peering closer through the rusted spokes of the gate I saw that the lodge was uninhabited. No smoke came from the chimney, and the little lattice windows gaped forlorn. Then, like all dreamers, I was possessed of a sudden with supernatural powers and passed like a spirit through the barrier before me.


[FONT=&Verdana]

[/FONT]If I was going to nitpick this, I would probably remove 'I dreamt' from the first line. It's not necessary, as it is mentioned it being a dream a few sentences later, and feels a little bit like equivocation. Why not "Last night I went to Manderley again"? However, this sense of vagueness, of separation, is quickly dispensed with with the pure, rich detail that follows regarding the rust on the gate and the windows. It feels like the author knows exactly what she is trying to say and that, perhaps, is the best way to achieve power. Openers must be POWERFUL.


----------



## VRanger (Dec 20, 2020)

bdcharles said:


> To me, that's exactly _how _she has captured her reader / audiobook listener - with clever and entertaining prose and MC personality. If that's the thing that involves the reader in the plot, then so be it. Other writers might use an inciting incident, or a curious deviation from the norm, or a tense moment of action, or a vivid description, to hook their reader. Just ... something. I think uncertainty around this point sets in where people think capturing the reader's attention must adhere to one form. It needn't, to my mind.



Yep. Lot's of people seem to have missed my point that something entertaining needs to involve the reader (hook), but it need not be immediate involvement in the plot's focus. Maybe I didn't hammer that hard enough, or my comment was so long that people forgot the point by the end. LOL


----------



## Sam (Dec 20, 2020)

EmmaSohan said:


> Can you share? And one of your failed first paragraphs? I like examples.



It was the opening to a military thriller: 

_In the stairwell of the apartment on Lubyanka Square, the semi-naked man tossed his briefcase down three flights, then leapt over the banister as the door above crashed open and two men sprinted after him. _ 

And from the first novel I ever wrote: 

_Peter Hunt awoke at 5:37 a.m. to watch the sunrise. _ 

And from my current WiP: 

_On the morning Jeff Morton found Jesús, his wife called to tell him she wanted a divorce, his son called him an asshole, and his boss called to fire him.  _


----------



## Foxee (Dec 20, 2020)

Sam said:


> _On the morning Jeff Morton found Jesús, his wife called to tell him she wanted a divorce, his son called him an asshole, and his boss called to fire him.  _


I love, love, love this. It's a GREAT kickoff to what sounds like an interesting story. Great job, Sam.


----------



## EmmaSohan (Dec 20, 2020)

Sam said:


> _In the stairwell of the apartment on Lubyanka Square, the semi-naked man tossed his briefcase down three flights, then leapt over the banister as the door above crashed open and two men sprinted after him. _
> 
> _On the morning Jeff Morton found Jesús, his wife called to tell him she wanted a divorce, his son called him an asshole, and his boss called to fire him.  _



On the scale of 1 to 10 in interestingness, these seem to both be tens. Are you saying that the first line has to be this interesting to get out of the slush pile? I would believe that.

I am going to guess that the second start is followed by a retelling of Jeff's morning. I am also going to guess that no other chapters of your book begin with a summary of what is going to happen in that chapter.

And, I am guessing, you hope I understand that you usually don't begin your chapters with a summary of what is going to happen. And, if you are asking, if you begin all your chapter in your other book like that first start, I think you are going to have a best-seller. Unless the next sentence moves back in time.

Your starts also do a good job of advertising what your book is going to be like. The one line is high-action, and the Russian-sounding name suggests military. Written in what might be called purpleless prose.


----------



## Sam (Dec 21, 2020)

EmmaSohan said:


> On the scale of 1 to 10 in interestingness, these seem to both be tens. Are you saying that the first line has to be this interesting to get out of the slush pile? I would believe that.



Thank you. 

Yes, your first line should always leave the reader with more questions than it answers. 



> I am going to guess that the second start is followed by a retelling of Jeff's morning. I am also going to guess that no other chapters of your book begin with a summary of what is going to happen in that chapter.



Not necessarily a re-telling, but certainly a quick recap before moving on with the rest of the chapter. And, no, the other chapters won't have a summary. 



> And, I am guessing, you hope I understand that you usually don't begin your chapters with a summary of what is going to happen. And, if you are asking, if you begin all your chapter in your other book like that first start, I think you are going to have a best-seller. Unless the next sentence moves back in time.



Correct. Everything after that first sentence moves forward. 

That's why it's important to nail your hook so that you can segue into the nitty-gritty afterward. But the story has to retain the sense of intrigue and mystery going forward, or the reader will get bored and put the book down after a few chapters. 



> Your starts also do a good job of advertising what your book is going to be like. The one line is high-action, and the Russian-sounding name suggests military. Written in what might be called purpleless prose.



While "purple prose" has its use within certain literary genres, in a thriller it would be more of a distraction than anything. 

But I appreciate the compliment nonetheless.


----------



## Foxee (Dec 21, 2020)

It can be annoying to feel like there is a false imperative or a made-up rule. Good advice, however, you can take or leave, use or not.

What's really wrong, though, with being encouraged to be interesting? We're not really shooting for the opposite as writers, after all.

When I'm choosing a book, especially from an unfamiliar author, the first page is a sample of how they write. A good hook is great, it's fun, it makes it easy to get into the story quickly which I do like. I'm also looking at the author's voice and style and can I stand to ride along with them for the duration of a whole book. It needs to be solid all the way through...so I'm actually asking for the whole book to be as good as the hook, if possible. Demanding reader, I know!

What grabs someone from the get-go is subjective. I just read a novel that started with an aerial view of the landscape that turned out to be the path of a bullet, very appropriate for the title Long Range and, to me, interesting and well written. Would everyone have been into this universally? Of course not.

A hook without a strong style, voice, and story is just a gimmick.

Perhaps some of the frustration toward this idea of being told to grab the reader right away has to do with finished drafts vs. getting the story ideas down initially. At least for me, it's intimidating to see others' finished work that's been through rounds and rounds of refinement and feel like I have to do that first time out of the gate with a draft.


----------



## indianroads (Dec 21, 2020)

Foxee said:


> [...]
> 
> *A hook without a strong style, voice, and story is just a gimmick.*
> 
> [...]



I hate gimmicks, and if the hook is just that I'll often abandon the book and give it a bad review.


----------



## apocalypsegal (Dec 22, 2020)

> Good writers break them all the time



And the key word being "good writers".

Like any advice, you can ignore it if you can sell it to the reader. That's the key. Or, sell it to your agent, who then sells it to an acquisitions editor.

Another thing, the way things were written decades ago doesn't really apply today. Readers are different, they're exposed to tremendous amounts of books that we just didn't see in the 70s. And even then, the writing books told us to hook the reader within the first sentence, or at least the first paragraph. And if not then, before the end of the first page. Even in the 70s, people were reading the first page and making decisions about whether to pick up a book or not. Or they were looking at the back cover copy.


----------



## Llyralen (Dec 23, 2020)

These are my own observations about it as a reader for what they are worth.

I don't think that there has to be action in the first few lines or even first page, but you have to feel IN the story or WITH the story almost immediately or else why would you bother?  Being allowed to put 2 and 2 together yourself with what the author is *showing not telling* seems to really help put you into the book.  But then *conflict* is what intrigues you to keep reading.   Conflict can be about an all-out shoot-out or it can be the subtle hint from a parent that they disapprove of their child's desire to paint.  

Backstory can have all of this, so it's okay to have it if it is offering what you need to launch you into the book and keep you hooked.   You can feel like the backstory is happening to you.   You can put conflict in the backstory.   I can also get super annoyed if I feel like the author is just having a nostalgia trip for themselves instead of building suspense in that backstory.

*Suspense*.  Alfred Hitchock taught the principal of suspense in an interview once kind of like this: if you detonate a bomb then you only get the satisfaction of the explosion (action only) but if you show a bomb being placed (preferably with a timer) and people you care about who are about to be blown up in that space not knowing about the bomb... then you have suspense.   Which one will keep you at the edge of your seat for an hour?   Yeah.... I think this is an important thing to know about hooking people.  

I am actually really picky about which books I keep reading.   That first page is pretty darn important. 

A random bonus FYI from me:  One of the coolest first chapters that I've read recently was in Nobel-prize winner Halldor Laxness's _Independent People_.  The first chapter sets the scene of the Icelandic landscape by telling bloody and chilling ghost stories about the history of a ghost named Columkili (or something like that) who lives there.  The author then introducing the main character who buys the land.  No one else has dared for years--generations have been harried by Columkili in failure after failure as well as possessions and insanity.   The man is feeling very optimistic about his own abilities to run a successful sheep farm there.   He looks out over the grass and the waterfall and the wind and curses Columkili out loud and tempts Columkili to do his worst, he is not afraid.  The next chapter is this man getting married and bringing his young bride to his dugout.   Brrr... gives me chills just thinking of it.  What an awesome way to introduce conflict and introduce character! .. oh I've got to go read that again. It's much better than I can describe.  Genius!


----------

