At this point I would be less worried about where to start (you can figure that out after a completed draft) and more worried about how similar this is to True Blood--the Sookie Stackhouse books/The Southern Vampire Mysteries. I would spend my time trying to set it apart from similar published works, making it unique and my own; I would also focus heavily on prose to give me an edge over the competition.
I've never seen True Blood. When I told my husband the storyline for this novel, he said the same thing. But I won't be focusing on the human/creature cohabitation too much. It'll mostly be Giselle and Lonnie, in a love triangle, on the run, dealing with each other's personalities and trying to get to her end destination before she dies. I'm using the term "golem" here for my creatures, but I've changed them quite a bit to fit them into this new world. Since I've never heard much of True Blood (all I know is that there are vampires living with humans), I can only assume that what I'm doing is completely different than them, since the story is driven by how this creature I created lives and functions.
True Blood has all mythical creatures living with humans--not just vampires. And I didn't mention it to make you stop writing your story--I just wanted you to be aware that there is a lot of urban fantasy out there, and that more often than not, they have a similar premise. But the golem angle is interesting--it should set your story apart nicely from others.
Seriously, what on earth made you think that? Take a look at the opening of The Hobbit. It goes on quite a bit about the Hobbit Hole. How about something more modern - say, Hunger Games? When does the actual action start? Midway through the first book, I believe. Fault in Our Stars - there is no action. It starts with a nice little pondering on death, depression and cancer. What you need isn't BAM BAM BAM action straight up. Actually, contrary to popular belief, action openings are often boring, precisely because of the issues you have already pointed out. The lack of context means readers don't care about the character, which means whether the character lives or dies is really of little consequence. What you need is a bit of mystery. Make your readers ask a question - a simple question. What is this? Who is this? Why is he/she doing that? The reader doesn't have to ask all of these questions - just one will do. The moment you've got your reader asking questions, you've got them, because they will keep reading to find the answer. And that's honestly all you ever really need. I find the word "care" very useless. People often say, "But I don't care about the character!" or "You haven't made me care about them." It's so abstract. I prefer the word "interesting". Make your character and/or opening interesting, and you've got it. And action isn't the only thing in the world that's interesting. "Interesting" is broad - it says nothing about action, drama, soliloquys, or philosophy. But everyone knows on some level what is interesting, because if it's interesting to you, then likely it'll be interesting to someone else. So, go with that. Start with a bit of mystery that makes your reader ask a very simple question. And write from there. Also, if you don't feel action is the right opening for you, for the love of all that's good, don't start with it! Just because someone thinks it's a good idea doesn't make it good for your book.
Further to add: start with an opening that sets the tone for your entire book. For example, if your book really hasn't got all that much action and you start with an action scene, what's really gonna happen? The action lovers will be hooked, the ones not so keen on action will put it down. Then you've got 80% of the rest of the book without much action, which will now disappoint the action lovers who've stuck around. The readers who would've actually enjoyed the other 80% of the book hadn't read far enough to know this. Result: you end up with no readers, or just many very bad reviews lol. Just don't fall for the "I must have action!" thing. Unless it's right for your story, it's just a gimmick. And gimmicks lose their shine very, very quickly.
Maybe 50 years ago you could get away with a slow start, not now. People always pull out The Lord of the Rings as an example, but they might as well be using Shakespeare. The industry has moved on considerably from that point where people would put up with a long opening. In any case you're conflating "the hook" with "action". These are not necessarily the same thing. A better way of putting it is that the reader should be engaged on the first page. The best way to start that is to start right when a major even is taking place. In the Hunger Games the hook is the reaping. Katniss wakes up on the day of the Reaping, thinks about the Reaping all day, and during the Reaping volunteers for her sister, all in the first chapter. The Fault in Our Stars my not have any action, but the conflict starts when the main character meets her love interest before page 10. Bam! Hook! Will these kids fuck? Etc.
Yeah, yeah. I meant hook, not action. I knew there was a proper word for it, I just couldn't think of it. Brain fart.
Also: What's wrong with Colorado? Why would you change to shitty Oregon? The highway speed limit is only 60 and you can't even pump your own gas. Seriously, it is illegal for the layman to pump the gas into their car. They have guys who stand there an pump it for you. And their mountains suck balls. They don't have a single 14er.
Does her father know about the assignment? You've got some conflict right away, first chapter. There you go.
I've never met a guy from Colorado that I've liked. Interestingly , I've met plenty of people from Oregon and liked them all.
Hey, I had some incredible days in Steamboat Springs before the freeway went through it. Ski down to the second lift from the mansion I shared with seven other young people and ski free all day with an outdated tag. Ride horses across flattop mountains in the summer. Colorado is incredible. Can't beat the Continental Divide.
It's a beautiful place to drive through, for sure. I was rather describing the people, at least in the Boulder and Denver areas. Visiting Aspen made me feel like a poor loser though
I need to make the trip from start to finish really long. So I need to start at a place in the west, because the destination is a private island off of Florida. I originally chose Denver because I've been there multiple times and thought it would be far enough away. But I had them driving north into Montana (had to see a guy for information who lives off the grid), which wouldn't make sense if they were in a hurry. So instead I thought Oregon would be good. I've been to Portland. It's pretty there. Just thought it made more sense. Not that it matters. She's only going to be there for six or seven chapters. lol
Back in the day, Steamboat was where the real people were, Vail and Aspen were for the rich, and Breckenridge was for the more adventurous mountain folk. It's all Aspen clones now, I think.
Oh c'mon, "Will these kids fuck?" - it's a romance, of course they're gonna. That's hardly the hook! In my opinion, however, you're mistaking a slow start with a start that is without a hook. Note that in my post I said you must make the start interesting - you need to be interesting to hook anybody, so we're talking about the same thing with just different words. Note also that I said you need to make your reader ask a question - any question will do, but they must ask a question. In Hunger Game's case, it was, "What's the reaping?" - and after you find out, it was, "Will she survive?" as well as "What actually happens in the games?" In Fault in Our Stars, it was, "What qualifies this girl to make these claims? Why does she think this way?" Hazel offers interesting insight which shows her to be an interesting character - that's the real hook. Note also that both of those openings set the tone for the rest of the book, as well as the key theme for the rest of the book. But no, not for a second do I think that a "slow start" automatically means it cannot hook a reader, or that no hook is present. Another question is, I guess, how mainstream do you wanna go? I'd agree that if you wanna be a bestseller, very likely your start needs to be snappier or else written with a lot of skill. If it were a literary novel, those tend to be pretty slow, to be honest. Fantasy readers tend to be more forgiving of descriptions because they actually want all that detail about the world, whereas the same thing in a crime novel would probably lose the reader. Your hook should be appropriate to the kind of audience you hope to engage. And if your book in general is a slow-paced book - you'd do well to start with something of a similar pace. Yes, you're gonna lose the impatient readers - but you'd have lost them anyway even if you could get them to read past chapter 1, because 80% of the book is slow. But you'd hook the ones who like to sit down and savour every last detail and meandering thought, and they would probably enjoy the rest of the book. Anyway, when I say "slow" I mean pacing and sparkly things like murders and explosions and chaotic mysteries. I agree with you that the conflict should be introduced quickly - definitely within chapter 1. Edited to add: last thing. It doesn't hurt to trust in your own writing abilities a little more to believe that what you write is interesting by virtue of you writing it well, even if on the surface nothing seems to be happening. No, I do not think anything necessarily needs to happen on page 1. Within Chapter 1, yes, definitely. But p.1? No. Trust that you write well enough that readers will find it interesting and don't look for gimmicks to up the tension. Oh and I didn't conflate "hook" with "action" - the OP said "action" but in any case, she's already clarified that it was only because she couldn't find the right word and she actually meant "hook"
There's a difference between drama and action. You can do without action in the beginning, but there should, generally, be some sense of argument, theme, conflict etc (drama).