So apparently it is cliche to start a story with a character waking up, peeing, etc.

Not the best logic, but something to ponder:
-Something is cliche when it is overused or seems unoriginal
-It is stated that "waking up" beginnings are cliche in writing
-This observation is made by people who read a lot of books and stories
-Chances are the books and stories they base their opinion on are published
-Cliche = publishable?
-Publishable = popular/sellable

 

I typically do not start my stories with the MC (or anyone else) just waking up. In fact, I don't even like to start chapters that way. It's just not my style. But if it were, ^this would certainly get my attention.

Thanks, [MENTION=38553]chicagoliz[/MENTION] for an excellent piece of practical observation.

 

No, I suspect we're talking about cliches in unpublished work, not published. I see 'waking up' scenes a lot in the stories I critique, and agents, publishers and contest judges regularly complain about them. I don't see many in trade published stories because agents and publishers regularly reject them.

Then again, many of the stories I critique would be better if they threw out the entire first scene or chapter, regardless of how it starts.

 

Incidentally, someone on another forum posted a link today to an article by Stephen King about opening a story:

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2013/07/why-stephen-king-spends-months-and-even-years-writing-opening-sentences/278043/

He doesn't comment on waking up, but has some interesting thoughts and examples.

 

Don't give me a boring sentence, period. Most people wake up in the morning. You don't need to tell me that anywhere in your novel if its of no particular interest.

People are making this thread an issue of "breaking against the norm." That's not it, at all. If you need to walk your reader through every little step, just to get where you want to go, you have an issue with your story. A practiced writer knows what to skip and makes everything he doesn't of value.

 

^This.

The most helpful comment I got on my first novel attempt was that I did too much of this. It was described as an "immature" writing style. And it is.

 

It can work if your character wakes up on an eighth story ledge and pees fluorescent green urine into the fog, because it immediately raises questions. But if your character slaps the snooze button on his alarm clock and shuffles to the loo scratching his scrotes, the only question you'll raise for the reader is, "Why am I reading this?"

 

Personally I think it's a pretty boring way to start out a story. Then again, "Hunger Games" starts that way, and I hear it was quite successful.

 

Yes!

 

There are several excellent guidelines in various books on writing, about the beginnings. I think you'd profit the most if you read from them, because the advice will be very comprehensive. One book I really found useful in this respect is "Write Great Fiction - Plot and Structure" by Bell. He outlines several approaches to impactful beginnings, as well as how to hook the reader etc.

My favourite way to begin is by using a highly emotionally charged scene. Sometimes dialogue and sometimes internal dialogue help in making it really pop. But the beginning should never be banal or boring.

 

I would say it depends on the context and the way it is phrased? Surely the most cliche way of starting a story is with a murder, and yet that keeps people entertained or intrigued enough to keep reading?

 

I agree with this statement. The only other option would be to start with a usual routine, but have your character complain to himself about how boring his everyday life is and have this boredom set up future events (i.e. he decides to start a life of crime to make things more interesting or something)

 

This perfectly sums up my personal doctrine for writing beginnings. Begin the story as late as practically possible. New writers tend to ignore this and tell us everything. Do not underestimate your reader's intelligence. Just like the above example, it leads to much eye-rolling and "okay, but when does the story start?"

 

The article Edward posted is very insightful. If we apply Stephen King's reasoning, that the opening sentence establishes the voice of the author, you have to ask yourself what starting a story with some trivial anecdote says about the author's voice. Mundane comes to mind...

 

This is the issue. It isn't the "waking up" that's the problem; it's the routine. Most readers don't want to read a story that starts off with routine events - events that happen the same way every day. Beginnings like that are not interesting.

As some of us have said, you can start a story with the character waking up, provided that it's not routine. Something different has to be happening, something new, something that will intrigue the reader. Something not routine.

 

I think everyone is making this more difficult than it needs to be, if I may be so bold. The answer is simple. Start the story at the beginning of the story. Not before, not after. If I may explain...

For example: A man wakes up and has breakfast. He gets a phone call saying his daughter has been kidnapped. He sees the kidnapper outside. He chases and they get into a high speed car chase.

What stands out most? Breakfast. It has nothing to do with his daughter, the person who called him or the kidnapper. If he was waking up in a dystopian future it would set the scene, but a middle class person living in the city doesn't really need any explanation. Worst of all, characters tend to monologue while they get ready. You know how it is. 'Hi, my name is Phil. I'm an average guy. I'll now make a wry comment to show how world weary I am. I have a daughter I love. I got bad grades in school. Another witty comment goes here. Blood type*is A negative. My parents died when I was a kid. I cover my angst with a sarcastic comment. Have I mentioned that I have a daughter? She plays the piano and was once a girl scout.' Info dumps are boring and the reader is likely to forget everything said when the interesting stuff gets going. We can learn about the character by watching him. We don't need to be told what kind of person he is. Readers aren't stupid. We'll figure it out soon enough through observation.

However, just like a story shouldn't begin before the beginning, it shouldn't start after the beginning either. Let's say it started with the car chase. It's action packed! It's exciting! It's a cheap literary device that has been used a million times and will only lead to confusion. Not only do you have to backtrack and explain just what the heck is going on, you have to take the reader out of the exciting car chase and into a scene that is now, by comparison, way too boring. You've sacrificed story for shock value. *

Both these rules can be broken, but before you do, ask ourself why. Are you starting too early because you want to explain a story instead of tell one? Or are you starting too late because you want to shock the reader instead of telling them a story?

Make it easier on both yourself and the reader. Start at the beginning.