So - I'm looking back at my beginning and I've got a potentially vexing question. I know what I can do to take if from boring to punchy - but I'm not sure I like the plot results. So as always I'm defaulting to "ask the forum" At present - my tv-reporter protagonist is catapulted from her small-town news gig to a national network by uncovering a political spending scandal that takes down a US Senator. We don't see this action and the story begins a few months after it happens, with the call from the national network. This beginning is slow, but it works for the fact the story is itself a political drama and it mirrors the past experiences of both the villain and the mentor character. I'm debating the merits of returning to the beginning I'd thought of way back in the dark ages when I first brainstormed this story (I was in high school), where our intrepid young reporter just happens to be on scene during some sort of major violent event, and then has to spend hours and hours on air with the national bigwigs - impressing them in the process. This is great for action, and it gives me a "dumb luck" start that I can later use to make the character question her worthiness...but in the process I undermine the fact that the character is a smart cookie with a real brain for details, which explains her later progress as a political reporter. I'm also worried about opening with a literal bang, as the rest of the book actually involves her getting an interview with the Pope and her subsequent rise to stardom. So, I don't have any more explosions lined up. Thoughts. Leaning toward keeping what I have but liking some of my other options.