Part of Kurt Vonnegut's advice for writing short stories is to start as close to the end as possible. I think this is good advice. But I'm sure I'm not the only writer who sometimes writes their way into a story. Sure, you can always cut later, but what are some tips or tricks you use to start a story as close to the end as possible?
In medias res is a similar concept: beginning a story in the middle of the action. I habitually write the climax first, followed by the denouement. The beginning is the last thing I write, because only after I know what happens can I decide what information the reader needs to appreciate the main events.
Definitely similar but not exactly the same. I'm a big fan of starting in media res. In fact, I believe it is the best way to start a story. If I do sort of write my way into a story in the beginning, I always think it's a good idea for me to go back and change it to stat the story actually in the story. But starting the story as close to the end is a little more difficult. Starting as close to the end as possible is advice I've only seen for short stories. When you want to stick to 20 pages, it really matters what's in there. I'm 100 percent a pantser. I sort of start with a "what if..." and just go from there. But that mean sometimes I'm not starting as close to the end as possible. That's why I was wondering if anyone had any ideas on how to approach this. I recently wrote a short story I thought was pretty good. I was working on revision and editing, and then I realized the end of the story was actually where I should start. Not the actual hard ending, but so much closer to it. It changed the story a lot, but, man, it came out so much better. I thought I had a good story. Now, I have one of my best stories. I want to know how to do this more. It doesn't always click like that. And I feel like starting as close to the end as possible is sometimes hard to pull off. At least for me it is. But I do buy into this advice and think short stories are better for it. To anyone and you too @Catriona Grace: Do you read and write short stories? Think starting as close to the end as possible is good advice? What's your method to get there? And is your story better for it?
I think old Kurt would be just fine with the way you're working; I've always interpreted this quote to refer to the finished product, not how you get there. All he's saying is that too many writers start their stories slowly so they can build to a climax or take time explaining something or other, and they often end up boring the reader with unnecessary development as a result. "Just get to the damn point already!" he would say. If your story is about the last throes of a failing marriage, start with the big fight, don't end with it; give us 2,000 words of the good stuff, not 5,000 words of this, then that, then the next thing. So, I think you're doing all right. As you said, sometimes you have to write your way into the story, and that's fine, as long as you go back and cut all the stuff that you wrote for yourself, not for the reader. The only way I can think of to avoid that work is to plan more ahead of time, but if you've found that approach doesn't work for you, then all you can do is write until you find the end, then edit accordingly.
Several times I've realized that my first few paragraphs, or the first dozen or so, were unnecessary and basically background information for me as the writer, but didn't need to be shared at all with the reader. Then I just needed to find a way to insert a little info here and there from it. As for starting as close to the end as possible, I think it's at least a very good idea to think about it when you're writing a short.
Honestly, it's not bad advice for any length of story, even a novel; it's just that the larger the story you want to tell, the more setup you legitimately need. But you should still trim as much as you can.
If by "starting as close to the end as possible" you mean eliminating all unnecessary verbal foreplay, then I do think it is a good idea. It's not something I consciously do. The concept was indelibly engraved in my head by a high school English teacher named Mr. Choate who once circled the first paragraph of a composition and wrote in red, "Wordy, dear." When I asked him what he meant, he explained about unnecessary verbiage, especially at the beginning of a story. I have blessed his name for 50 years for that piece of advice, and I still have that composition. I wrote my first short story sixty years ago and my latest short story a few days ago. Generally I spend a lot of time turning short story ideas over in my head, deciding what's relevant to the story and what's not, so that by the time I actually write the thing, most of the dross has been eliminated. Other times, I sit down and scribble whatever comes into my head, then later edit out about half of what I wrote in order to eliminate the stuff I invented while warming to the real story. With my own short stories, my philosophy is, "If 5,000 words are good, then 3,000 words will be better, and 2,500 words will probably be best." Removing the excess gets my beginning closer to the end. Is this what you mean?
I think what you're saying about wordiness is important to, but I think Vonnegut's advice is more of a plot issue than a wordiness issue. I think @AntPoems summed it up pretty nicely when he said this upthread. @Catriona Grace -- So, getting out the wordiness will always help, but for me, personally, getting the word count down has never been my goal. My word count usually goes up during revision, and this is a good thing for my writing. I always aim for 3k to 5k words with my short stories because that's what most publishers of short fiction seem to ask for. I would say right around 4k is my sweet spot.
There's also a strong tendency among many writers (especially beginners) to want to first show 'the happy world' of the protagonist so when it all hits the fan it will feel more powerful. So they often write a chapter or more of good pleasant times where nothing really happens. It's usually far better to start at the moment when the fan is hit. There needs to be a sense from the very beginning that a story is taking form, that things are being set in motion. Andre Norton was a master (mistress?) of starting stories like this.
That's a lot of short story writing, for sure. You must have written hundred of stories, no? Do you submit and publish your shorts?
Short stories don't usually have chapters, but I guess they can. I really like starting my stories with the what-if senecio. However, it doesn't always lead to a story that starts as close to the end as possible. Even the best in-your-face-action packed beginnings can still be starting the story in the wrong place. I like all of Vonnegut's advice for short story writing, but I think this is the one I struggle with the most. I'm no beginner and I always think I'm on the right track until I realize I'm not.
Not hundreds, no, but quite a few, ranging from perfectly ghastly to pretty darn good. Many of the best ones are published. Many others are deeply kept secrets in order to preserve my reputation as a competent wordsmith.
I’m not sure I even could write like this. My brain only thinks chronologically. Plus I never know the ending of a story until I get there.
