My best advice is to start the novel with some immediate action to lure the reader in, but have a slight cooldown/rest period immediately afterward. This allows you to introduce the character's worldview, motivations, etc. after a period of great interest. I've found this tactic works well. Just my two cents. I hope the novel goes well.
Thanks, Masked Mole. I guess it would depend on the idea of action. My story won't be action packed not in the vein of certain genre standards anyway. In fact I'm debating whether or not Obadiah will ignore Ike during their meeting. But I understand what you mean - something of interest happening to catch the reader's attention. Perhaps a hint of something violent. This is a good idea too, something I didn't think of.
You're right. If your book is dialogue-based, you might want to start it with a confrontation or something.
I would say opening scenes should introduce the theme and create intrigue (i.e. mystery) of some sort. Creating intrigue is the easier task and is flexible in how you want to create it, but figuring out a way to introduce the theme often determines my first scene for me.
I like to start where things change. You can establish the status quo in about a paragraph, usually, and then, BAM, story starts!
My advice, as previously noted like a broken record: write the story, decide on the first chapter after you are well into it.
On a very general and probably obvious note, it seems like a good idea to start a book in the middle of some kind of happenings or at least dialogue. Not necessarily fast-paced action or anything, but something that's at least not a "prologue", to throw the reader into the situation right away and save explanations for later. Especially if the chronological beginning of the story is slow, a common tactic would seem to be to start the book at least slightly after the beginning and only give "backstory" information once a few more engaging things have happened. The first few paragraphs tend to be the most important ones in a book as they have to convince the reader to commit themselves to reading the rest of it. Looking at my own reactions, a story can hold my attention much more easily after that first bit since I already have some desire to find out more. When I'm first starting to read and know very little about the book, I don't necessarily have that yet, so if it bores me before I'm interested, I have little motivation to keep going.
See http://relentlesswriters.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/tips-better-beginnings.html Of course, everyones uncle and his dog express an opinion via a blog - and they can't all be right. So, at the end of the day, do what works for you.
I personally like openings that "set the terms of the agreement" between you and the reader. In the interest of brainstorming, here are a few that come to mind immediately. "Fight Club" starts with Tyler Durden having a gun inside the mouth of the MC as they're about to blow up buildings. The voice, POV, and theme are established in a dramatic way. With "Wild" by Cheryl Strayed, she is midway through her hike where she loses her boots through a combination of bad decision making and bad luck. But she continues on. That's the story in a nutshell. Fight Club opens near the end, "Wild" midway through. I love James Bond openings. Even if you've never experienced Bond before you immediately know what to expect even though the opening has nothing to do with the plot - fun, action, crazy weapons with crazier stunts. "High Fidelity" starts with a list of bad break ups. In two pages you know what the next two hundred will be like. So, I think it's less important where in the story you start and more important on setting up the agreement with the reader. Hope there is a nugget of inspiration here for you. Good luck.
I don't decide on writing a story until I have a title , plot, tentative ending, at least one significant theme of the story, at least one vivid scene in my head, and finally, a vivid beginning. If each story is it's own unique shape and size, then there is only one perfect beginning for each story, and in my mind, the story doesn't even exist until the intro is realized. Why is this so? The story has a certain pace, certain themes, a tone, etc, and only one starting scene is going to initiate the desired recipe exactly. Pace is an obvious factor for what type of opening scene you want. Fast paced will obviously likely benefit from opening right before the turning point. Let's talk for a second about my favorite non intellectual male targeted movie, Crank, starring Jason Statham, about a hit man who has been injected with a drug that will stop his heart in (I think ) 12 hours. It's~ 90 minutes of non stop action, from shocking his heart, to public sex, to drinking 100 red bulls, to killing his enemy, and then falling out of a plane and telling his girlfriend "no regrets." The movie literally opens with him finding out he's been injected with the cocktail. There is never a tangent in the movie. The whole thing is a sprint. Now, sure, lots of action films start with action. What makes this film stand out it one, the action starts at 0 s, and two, the action scene is unique to this particular plot- it is not a generic opening. By action I mean something extreme and important is happening, not just violence. From the first fifteen seconds of this film we know ExACTLY what we're getting (man has 12 hours to live and he needs to keep his heart rate up and he's an assassin) and how were going to get it (non stop increasing doses of wild absurdity). I think there are many more deciding factors than just pace, which is why I wont even call a story a story until I know that opening scene.
I tend to assume that the point where I'm comfortable starting will be well before the point where the piece should actually start. I say "piece" because this is also true, in fact more true, of nonfiction for me. I don't try to figure out where to start; I just start, and later I cut the piece's head off. I'm not saying that this is the right way to do it. It's just, right now, what I do.
I think it is all to easy to forget as writers we know context. I think the beginning needs to be a place that is both interesting but also requires no context. A beginning should be enhanced by context and not require it. To be clear. I don't mean a lack of questions. I mean an opening should probably have things you don't know yet. Otherwise it will be an info dump at the same time I think a reader should be able to explain what is happening. Like for example if the opening is a chase scene it is fine that they don't know why it is a chase but it is not fine for reader to not be aware it is a chase. I think this isn't quite what you are asking but I think it is an important aspect easy to overlook. And it does hold something relating to what you are asking which is. Does you scene or current scene idea able to give context of what is happening without spoiling why? Is it interesting without context being explained?
While the example she gives is in reference to a Fantasy what she advises would apply to many others. Tension is good to start with. Action - who does the reader side with? http://blog.bookcountry.com/ask-literary-agent-mary-c-moore-answers-questions/ There are some other good bits in the interview.
I like this idea, but I'd like to hear more on how that would work, for example, a detective story, usually first person, and clouded in mystery.
Well, the Bond example is pretty straight forward - the start is the end of the last adventure. If you are doing a Mike Hammer like book, he's in a smoke clouded jazz/piano bar drinking whiskey making cynical observations about the clientele and life in the city. Something interrupts his moment and you're off. Starting midway through or at the end is a bit more difficult for a mystery for obvious reasons. Honestly, I dont read much detective/mystery stuff so I'm not the best person to ask on this. Try mimicking High Fidelity for a mystery/comedy. Top five dead bodies. "Sorry Mary, if you want to enter the top 5 you gotta have a lot more blood that that."
I always try to start a novel with an interesting situation...something I believe would be interesting to the reader, while introducing the main character. I am not a fan of "a day in the life, before things change" so that the reader can understand the main character and situation, before moving forward. I think conflict is useful. But it doesn't have to be a fight or a car chase. It can be internal conflict, such as insecurity, or trying to beat a deadline, etc. Each story has it's proper starting place. Sometimes after the first draft is finished, the proper starting place comes into better focus...and the initial chapter is revised, or even removed.
Very interesting idea - and I love the way you phrase this - requires no context! It's giving me some ideas.
Thanks. I noticed that from when I show people my work. Whenever someone is confused it was usually because I neglected to mention something. The idea was solid but I didn't show it all. So that is why I try to remember that as my own personal tip. I am glad I could help.
I have been in a writing funk for a while. Recently I decided to try writing short stories because it's a more attainable goal and it would be good for my mental health to actually finish a project for once. I had this idea that I really loved, and I was super excited for it, and I thought it made sense and had a point etc etc and then I started it and I'm 1000 words in and I'm already just sitting here, hopeless, like "Why am I writing this? It's stupid. This story is pointless. This is the dumbest idea ever. It doesn't make any sense." I don't understand how two days ago before I started writing it, I could have it planned out and have it seem like such a good story and then as soon as I start writing it, it feels like a mess with no point. This always happens when I write. I like my idea, I finally start writing, and at some point it fizzles out and I hate it and I hate myself and I feel like it's the worst piece of trash to ever be written. I'm trying to push myself to write this story and finish it even if I hate it. One positive was today I really was not feeling it at all but I was determined to write at least 500 words, and I was able to churn out 500 words (of mostly BS, but at least words) in about 5-10 minutes. WHY do I hate myself and my writing and my ideas so much? What is going on? Am I messing up in the planning process or something? Sorry if this is a jumbled or pointless post. I am just feeling really down right now and I'm a little hypomanic.
I think most writers feel that way at some point in their writing. Don't let it stop you. Write it anyway. Find what made you want to write it and don't bother about whether it turns out good or bad. Have fun. Enjoy yourself. Discover your story and all the endless possibilities. Just keep writing.
I may be wrong, but it sounds as if you're so focused on the goal that you start to write as soon as your ideas pop into your head. I'd say keep these ideas, but nurture them. Give them time to gel into scenes you can envision clearly, characters that you know well (and love). See if you can discover where plot holes are likely to occur and spend some (very fun!) time figuring out how you might plug them. Maybe a couple of new characters will solve the problem? Something in their past connects your two main characters instead of them just randomly meeting each other on the street? Maybe if your story takes place at different time of year the events will be more plausible? Something happens just after a particular bit of technology gets invented, rather than just before? Your character takes the train to a different destination from your earlier plan, which allows the setting to make more sense? Just having an idea doesn't make a good story spring into being. I'd say give yourself time and let all the story elements come to life BEFORE you start writing. Then ...stick to it, no matter what. If you walk away in disgust every time you hit a snag or lose enthusiasm, you'll never get finished. We ALL hit snags. A snag-free writing experience rarely, if ever, exists. The difference between people who finish stories and those who don't is the ability to stick it out through snags. People who back off, take a wee break, then figure out a way to make their stories 'not stupid' any more, are the people who finish. There is no magic wand that will turn you into a writer who finishes things.
What @jannert said. People often get the wrong idea about writing, as if all one needs to do is open the "creative" spigot and words, ideas and images spew forth, unbounded, and arrange themselves into a harmonious whole. It's not like that at all. Writing takes careful forethought, even for pantsers. At the same time, there is a tendency among beginning writers to a) expect that perfect finished product on the first go and b) when it doesn't happen, to assume that it's because "my writing sucks". As a rule, first drafts are...well, first drafts. Not for general distribution. Much editing needed. Right now, you are aspiring to First Drafthood. So, if your "inner critic" is looking at your embryonic work and saying "that sucks", send it to the skating rink the fast way (the critic, not the writing). You have work to do. Oh, and if you suddenly have an inexplicable urge to clean out your closets or put all your CDs in alphabetical order...ignore it. That's your inner critic gone underground. Good luck.
I agree with Ed and Jannert. Hating your story before you even start is a great way to shoot it dead before it has a chance to blossom. Sometimes what helps me when I hear the Inner Critic™ in me is repeat the MST3K Mantra, but replace it with the necessary details: “If you're wondering how s/he eats and breathes, and other science facts-” (your characters going ‘La la la’ is optional here) “-Just tell to yourself it's just a [draft], you should really relax.”
