I have been watching more and more of Dan Wells. He has a good grasp on what writing a novel is. I'm not sure what the rules are on links, so I will avoid posting one until I get an answer on that. Look up on Youtube: Dan Wells On Story Structure. The channel is a goldmine for good information.
Mine starts with a small dive into magic to keep the reader interested, then a deeper dive into some magic theories, and just when you're about to pull out and discard it as a boring story, I jump straight into the action, and unknowingly, your experience is enhanced by the "boring" section, which you forgot because the main character is currently slaying an entire castle of guards.
On the "How NOT to start a story" list, there should be the main character waking up and looking him/herself in the mirror, describing their hairdo. I'm very much against book burning, but this...
My book starts with a scene displaying how utterly horrible the villain is, to establish his threat immediately.
I'd start with a character (not necessarily the main character, but a significant character) in a setting. This character should be doing something unusual for him, or finding out that he has to do something unusual for him. By "unusual" I mean something other than sleeping, eating, going to the office, watching TV, or any of the other ordinary day-to-day things he does. All this should be happening by the end of page one.
Generally I start it off slow. I find that novels that start with a big Bang tend to overwhelm and confuse, and also take away from the glamour and excitement of the Big Scene, later on in the book. Take Cornelia Funke's writing for example, and most certainly on her new novel, Reckless. It starts off immediately with the main character, Jacob, in the thick of it. I stopped after the first two chapters because not only do I found her writing dull, but the way she lays her stories out, too fast. Unless I start my novel with an epilogue, I start my characters out in a normal(for them) setting and gradually build up the suspense and such. That's just me, though.
I tend to spend a lot of time on the opening of my novel - I like it to start right in the middle of it all. With action pretty much included in the first sentence. I like the sentence to be gripping enough to pull my readers in and to make them want to continue the novel.
If you start with a wimper then surely you'll finish up going out with the pathetic fizz of a damp squib. Sorry Islander but, that's how I see it. Any story, novel or otherwise, must arouse readers' intrest from the word go. The beggining should be both potant and captervating. Not just the first couple of hundred words but, if you can do it the very first line should grab the reader's attention. Here are the first lines from the three books that are on my bedside table at the moment; She began watching him six weeks before his wedding. - The Stalking Widow by John Burke Already I am thinking, who is she? does he know her? - an ex-lover perhaps? Why six weeks before his wedding (any signicance there) ?. What are her intentions? 'Go away! You can't sit with us!' Jane McKenzie squinted up at Esther through bright sunlight. -In Love and Friendship. by Benita Brown Conflict straight away. Bring it on. 'How bloody stupid do you get?' He ran as fast as his legs and scorching lungs would allow, and as he did, he heard his mother's voice in his head. 'How bloody stupid do you get?' - The Myth of Justice by Graham Pears Here I think it is quite obvious the he has done something really stupid and is having to get away pretty sharp.
i wouldnt start straight with a description i'd squeeze it in, in places through the next few chapters.
If it is absolutely imperative that the reader know early on about the cataclysm that reduced humanity to just 1000 people then I think that a prologue might be a good way to go, despite the reservations about prologues. But emphatically not an infodump prologue. Start with that cataclysm (in media res), maybe with some survivors crawling out of the rubble or some such. Then flash forwards to your story proper. The point is that the novel then starts with action, not description, which tends to draw readers in. Successful fiction can start with an infodump -- East Of Eden starts with a long description of the Salinas Valley -- but unless you're a Steinbeck you'll have trouble pulling it off.
^Yes, I agree completely. Excellent points. Prologues that only offer me info tend to just make me impatient. I want to get into the action.
if fact not 1000, but 11241 humans were still alive in 2341. But other than that, thanks for the replies.
I usually skip prologues, assuming I buy the book once I see that there is one (often I don't). The fact of the cataclysm can easily be imparted to the reader early on through exposition, dialog between characters, etc. The reader doesn't need a huge info dump will all of the particulars, though. You have to consider what back story information the reader really needs to understand the story, and what part you're just tempted to put there as more of a conceit of the author. I have to look at that balance in my work. It's all too tempting to say "Hey, I made up all this cool stuff, and the reader is damn well going to hear about it." Whether the reader needs to hear about it is another matter.
I usually spend weeks on the first few sentences of a new novel. The opening paragraph is (IMHO) the most important of the entire works. I always try to do three things in those early sentences:- 1. Introduce the main character (or a principal character) straight away. Often in the first few words. 2. Introduce a suggestion of conflict - again, I like to do this immediately. Get straight into the story. 3. Base it in a context that gives the reader a point of reference. This is possible in just a few lines and I'd want to get it done quickly. A simple example... General Callaway quickened his steps as soon as he saw the smoke. He loosened his sword in its scabbard as he rounded the corner and started down the hill toward the castle's kitchens; he had a feeling in his gut that this had nothing to do with Cook's woolly-headed apprentice. This smacked of Farolian treachery.
I was mostly trying to be funny , but I meant you can start it on a low key and still make it interesting, for example by arousing the reader's curiosity or loading it with emotional meaning.
Ok, I give up. I editing my story to fit in the prologue information into the actual action. Actually it seems more interesting this way, thanks for the advice.
I must be weird. Those lines do very little for me. I wouldn't necessarily call them a turnoff but I hardly think they are captivating. Thoughtful minds, I am sure, can ask questions about any line. This one doesn't stand out to me personally one bit. I say start with what feels right for your story. I don't care for stories that start with a bang too much. And I can't very well expect my readers to like something I wouldn't like. Starting with a bang is overrated, IMO. I find subtlety and quietness much more inviting, weaving in the bang some time later after I am already ensnared in the quietness of the book. Maybe it's just me. How I start my novels can vary. I usually go with my gut for what is best. But I feel starting with a bang would outright slaughter my novels. (At least not a huge bang)
I know I have the start that will stay when I can't rewrite it any better. My NaNo has started very differently to how I planned but when I rewrote it, it wasn't as good.
There are no basis in which I use to start my stories. The way I start my stories tend to depend on what idea comes to me first. That is to say, the first sentence that I write will set the tone and method of introduction. Two of my flagship titles begin with action, and information generally comes on a need-to-know basis. Things like character descriptions almost always comes from character interactions. For my romance novella, however, I used a more descriptive opening that leads into the story. Just for fun, I also wrote an optional scene before the novella that ties it into my mother-ship titles. Most of my spin-offs actually start this way. My third mother-ship title starts with action, but not the exciting fighting or chase scene type of action like the previous two. It begins with a discovery gift-wrapped in description.
My start for my current (and first) novella isn't so exciting. It starts off with my character wondering about life and existentialism, a process of boredom, and also it's sorta a theme in the story. Also, I want to start with it humdrum, just like my character's dull life, before the real adventure starts and everything's flipped upside down. Plus, I somewhat think that by doing that it makes the exciting parts that much better by comparison. I might be wrong, who knows. Also, I used a treatment/outline/storyboard. Freewriting and diving in. I try to write 500 words a day (I'm a new writer and I'm not used to this.)
As a reader I really like a good beginning and I'm the same as a writer. I like to describe the setting but not too much because I don't want the prologue/chapter to be weighed down by it, and I want enough action in it to make it flow, I also like seeing a glimpse of important characters, and when I read the first chapter I want to be able to briefly tell what the book is about (basically I like seeing a glimpse of the main plot). But I'm also a very visual person and in my previous stories a lot of the chapters included way too much detail and learning to cut down the immense amount of detail is proving to be hard work, but it's coming along!
^^^^I don't mind some heavier detail in the first chapter cause that's sort of like a tour guide to the world of your story. As long as it doesn't weight the entire story down, I'd like a little briefing about this nice place I'm visiting before I witness something big go down. But that's just me as a reader.
