"Start" is the operative word here. Voice and style certainly don't end there! It takes pages to establish tone, style, voice. It takes pages to establish setting and character, too. Insisting on loading all of these functions onto the first sentence strikes me as insane. Readers (if not writers) are better than that.
As long as the voice and style extend throughout the book, you're correct. However, if somebody spends a lot of time crafting the opening sentence to be an unputdownable attention-grabber, then lets the rest of the story fall to a lower level? Then it smacks of gimmickry. I read a while back (in a how-to book or article ...can't remember just now whose it was) that agents are often disappointed by this modern obsession with sparkly opening sentences. Or that 'first 50 pages' syndrome. Yes, if you work hard getting this right, you have a good chance of capturing an agent's interest. However, she (I do remember the agent was a she!) said that what so often happens is the rest of the story is a let-down. That it's obvious the new author has worked very hard to create a good first impression, but the rest of the story doesn't match up. She said that while it's important to capture interest, it's a mistake to pack the beginning with too big a punch. If you start at a high level of action or suspense or character quirkery, and then have to drop back to get the real story started, the reader can feel quite let down. She's personally the sort who likes to start slowly (but interestingly) and build to a high-level climax. Not start with the climax and work backwards. She was the sort who is instantly put off by grammatical mistakes and 'bad writing,' but is willing to give a slow start a few pages before deciding to reject it. And she was most adamant that the story's style—as used in the first paragraphs and pages—MUST be sustained throughout the novel. She said: if it looks as if somebody else other than the author wrote the beginning, agents tend to reject the MS. It's coming back to me slowly. I think this was an article written by an agent which was published in Writers' Digest over the past year or so. I'll look back through my issues and see if I can pinpoint it.
I disagree. Even I can tell bad/ mediocre writing after a paragraph or two. Again, I am talking about unpublished material. It's very hard to find writing that is a) unique, b) earnest, c ) grammatically well written, d) economical, e) clear, and f) doesn't usencliches. All of that on top of voice can be established within the first few paragraphs. Establishing voice in the opening is not my idea, I got it from a famous writer, probably Stephen King, from a link posted in this very forum. He points to opening paragraphs from various famous works, and points clearly to the differences in voice. I can try to find the link if you're interested. If you think voice takes pages to establish, then you and I clearly have different definitions of voice.
I agree that it's not about starting with explosions. But writing needs to be strong from the very beginning. This is not as trivial as it sounds.
Yes, you're right. But strong writing doesn't mean gimmicky or 'hooky.' It means it sucks you in and sustains you throughout the whole story. Just obsessing over a story 'hook' won't get you there.
A single paragraph is usually enough for me to know what's up in terms of style. A graduate from Harvard Law told me one of the first things he learned is that the people will subconsciously realize whether they like you or not the first time they hear you speak. Often times before the first complete sentence out of your mouth is even over. It is a tall order to hook the reader with a single sentence a lot of the time. But a paragraph, I think, definitely gives you enough room to express your first idea or literary flourish. There has to be something given: if not a Michael Crichton-style attention-grabbing line, then a cool visual, or an insight, or a fresh way of writing a common novel-hook.