I am working on a life story with a span of around 50 years. It is essentially a memoir whose main character is not the narrator. Since the main character is not famous, the mundane events of the first 25 years are only interesting in light of what happens later. Celebrity biographies can get away with starting at the beginning since the readers already know where the story is headed. I am currently reading Keith Richards' autobiography and even he starts off in the middle, when he was already quite famous. In my case, I have chosen to start the narrative near the end, show enough of the "point" of the story to interest the reader in how the main character got to that point (in his future) and wonder how things will end up. I may be asking too hypothetical a question, but I am trying to decide how much or how little background to give at the (future) starting point. As I write this out, I am beginning to see the pros and cons of telling more at the front of the book rather than saving it for later when it will appear in natural sequence. I think it's a judgement call no matter what. I THINK the trick is to give away as little of the past as possible and still have the "preview" make sense on its own and pique the reader's interest. Anyone have any thoughts on this? Has anyone read something on the topic that I might want to read? Thanks in advance.