Post-Disaster First Chapters

[Shorewalker]

I think the reader knows that the protagonist is going to survive that initial 'threat' because their name is all over the back cover blurb, amongst other reasons.

Regarding how to start a book and 'knowing' better, I think it's less that than it is pointing out how readers can be quickly alienated. With so many books out there to read, most readers need to be engaged from the off, one way or another. The how of it is down to the writer, but the other writers here are also readers, so their personal feelings on openings are relevant, in that they are the people the writer is appealing to.

 

[night_wrtr]

I think the reader knows that the protagonist is going to survive that initial 'threat' because their name is all over the back cover blurb, amongst other reasons.

Reader: Did the main character just die in the first scene?
Author: How do you know they are the main character?
Reader: The blurb on the back? It says this story is about them and their struggle to-
Author: Aha! Didn't see that death coming did you! +1 to me. Bow before my creative genius!

 

[Paul Meccano]

I think the reader knows that the protagonist is going to survive that initial 'threat' because their name is all over the back cover blurb, amongst other reasons.

If I were to write the story " I Frankenstein's monster" should I tell the story on the rear cover blurb? or should that be in the book?

Bob is a magician that gets shot in the first scene, on the first page of the book. The story then starts 2 weeks earlier and tells the story of bob, leading to the first scene, and finally, to him being brought back to life as a monster.
Would you say in the blurb that bob the protagonist ends up as Frankenstein's monster? of would you say the book's about a monster that's brought to life with an unexpected personality?

"Bob Frankenstein does LA" Could be the sequel

More importantly would you say the protagonist survived?

 

[Paul Meccano]

Reader: Did the main character just die in the first scene?
Author: How do you know they are the main character?
Reader: The blurb on the back? It says this story is about them and their struggle to-
Author: Aha! Didn't see that death coming did you! +1 to me. Bow before my creative genius!

Reader: Did the main character just die in the first scene
Author: Yes
Reader: Why didn't it say that was going to happen on the blurb at the back
Author: maybe because if you read on, you'll find the character is alive inside a different body.
Reader: Sorry, I'll read on rather than putting it down thinking I know whats happening.
Author:

 

[tinkerdan]

Funny thing:
These alleged conversations with the author will never happen.
The frustrated reader will either throw the whole piece at the wall or in the trashcan.
Or both.

 

[Ihe]

In an ideal world, there would be no blurbs/synopses to spoil ANYTHING. But if you want a marketable chance, then you need to give potential readers something about the story they are considering buying, so life-and-death stakes in the beginning isn't that good of an idea.

Life and death in the first chapters is definitely doable, but if your goal is to use it for tension, it's gonna fail its purpose. Having secondary stakes is a sensible way to work around that. I don't see the problem with that advice. It all comes down to what you are using life-and-death for. It has other uses (character development, intro to armed conflict, etc), but then you need to bring the real stakes some other way.

 

[Paul Meccano]

In an ideal world, there would be no blurbs/synopses to spoil ANYTHING. But if you want a marketable chance, then you need to give potential readers something about the story they are considering buying, so life-and-death stakes in the beginning isn't that good of an idea.

Life and death in the first chapters is definitely doable, but if your goal is to use it for tension, it's gonna fail its purpose. Having secondary stakes is a sensible way to work around that. I don't see the problem with that advice. It all comes down to what you are using life-and-death for. It has other uses (character development, intro to armed conflict, etc), but then you need to bring the real stakes some other way.

the voice of reason finally.
A sensible voice making sense of the whole.
I'm not against everyone's reasoning from a singular perspective, I just feel there is more it than is being highlighted in these stunted viewpoints.
Each story is different and yes there are a great many that follow similar paths but be careful with pots of tar and brushes. Again if there were a finite to the ways in which we can tell a story, it would have been discovered long ago.
SF as a genre, if nothing else highlights that point.

 

[Paul Meccano]

Funny thing:
These alleged conversations with the author will never happen.
The frustrated reader will either throw the whole piece at the wall or in the trashcan.
Or both.

They are welcome to. There's no law to say they have to stay young and try new or different things!

 

[Shorewalker]

the voice of reason finally.
A sensible voice making sense of the whole.
I'm not against everyone's reasoning from a singular perspective, I just feel there is more it than is being highlighted in these stunted viewpoints.

This is disrespectful to other posters here. They have a different opinion to you, but that does not mean that their opinion is 'stunted'. It means that it is different.

 

[Appello]

To add onto this point - I remember reading a couple of books that started with battle scenes. I had the immediate lack of tension. Both instances, I'll have to try remembering which books they were, the characters died at the end of the fist chapter. Chapter two moved to a new POV which was the main POV the rest of the book. This didn't sit well with me. I had the normal thought that they would survive, and I also just spend X number of words getting to know the character. It felt like a waste and a cheap trick to bring tension.

Ugh, Way of Kings (no idea if that's the book you are referring to, but your comment just brought it to mind). Three long chapters in, and you've met - some guy who died thousands of years earlier, an assassin who isn't really a central part of the ongoing story (just a peripheral character), and then, in the third chapter, when you finally think you're being presented with an MC you can sink your teeth into, the rug is suddenly pulled out from under you, the guy dies, and it turns out he wasn't remotely important to the story.

That kind of thing really annoys me, as a reader. I feel like my emotions are being manipulated just so the author can go 'har har, tricked you again, you thought he was the MC didn't you, hurr hurr.' Not the best way to start a book, imo. But then everyone else raves about that book so maybe it's just me

 

[Paul Meccano]

This is disrespectful to other posters here. They have a different opinion to you, but that does not mean that their opinion is 'stunted'. It means that it is different.

I have no problem with different opinions. I just feel that any opinion/ advice that aims to restrict people in how they go about the creative process should either be qualified ( spelling and Grammar are qualified, there are rules guiding us, even they are stretched sometime's ) or kept purely as an personal preference. It just sounds so I'll informed and stunted to say it doesn't work with only one or two offers of qualification from the Billions of written pieces in this world going toward proving that point?. I could do the same in saying that there are so many books out there that are rubbish because they haven't started on the same premise. Not that I would.

My point is not aimed at the individual as I am not a people hater, it is truly aimed at the viewpoint itself. We are all capable of changing our minds.

I'm a dyslexic discovering every day how beautiful the writing process is regardless of the difficulties it throws at me. This post has taken nearly 30 min to write, with checks! Please do not spoil the creativity in new writers. They may well prove you wrong? but never if you throw books in the bin prior to reading them.
Please be aware that while you are saying I'm disrespectful, I am opening the creative/ writing process up while others are busy shutting it down.

 

[Cathbad]

I am opening the creative/ writing process up while others are busy shutting it down.

So that no one takes this personally, who are these "others" that are "shutting it down"? Because, frankly, I find your words offensive. Everyone on this site tries to help - not hinder. Differing viewpoints are encouraged - not discouraged.

 

[Paul Meccano]

So that no one takes this personally, who are these "others" that are "shutting it down"? Because, frankly, I find your words offensive. Everyone on this site tries to help - not hinder. Differing viewpoints are encouraged - not discouraged.

I think If I were to say who,( and I can't because it isn't one person but a collective fudging) It may then be taken personally. If the threads are read then you can make your own mind up.
How you have found it offensive, (not being part of this conversation) I don't know. Honestly. I'm sorry you feel offended.
Someone posted asking for this thread to be taken down because of my comments and their request was removed instead. I repeat I am not out to offend, instead I have posed very relevant questions.

 

[The Big Peat]

I didn't start this thread for a debate on Rules and Strictures vs Creation and Experimentation; I started it to help me (and hopefully others) refine some ideas on first chapters - what goes well together and what doesn't, what's tricky to pull off and what isn't - and maybe riff on a few new ideas. Certainly none of it was meant to be about Rules and Strictures, and if it reads that way, that is probably the result of rushed writing.

And while starting the thread gives me very few rights over what is said here, I nevertheless do ask that people please address the topic rather than having an argument on a different one that will drown out the possibility of the original topic being discussed. It would be nice and the arguing on Rules and Strictures vs Creation and Experimentation can be done elsewhere. Apologies to the mods if I'm overstepping the bounds here.



As for Life & Death, Dramatic Tension et al - the bit about there being no dramatic tension is my personal opinion as a reader; nothing more, nothing less.

That said, since a lot of people seem to share leanings in that direction, I stand roughly by what I say with maybe a bit of refinement: If you want your opening big action scene to have a lot of dramatic tension, the stakes should be something where the reader isn't confident that the character losing said stakes ends the story. The life of the MC is the obvious example, but not the only possible one, and in some stories the reader won't be confident about that.

Which is not to say you can't have a big Life and Death struggle at the start.

Because your starts doesn't have to have big dramatic tension (This is the biggest refinement from what I originally said imo). A risky move personally if combined with an action scene, but totally doable, particularly in genres where lots of action is expected. For a Normal Day start for a Space Marine or Merc, there probably will be action. That said... finding some stakes that are believably in the balance helps a lot (as does starting from an enemy PoV in my reading experience).

Because your MC's life can be a stake that doesn't mean ending the story early doors.

Because you don't have to start with your MC (although that is imo super risky once you're past any prologue).

Because killing a MC when not expected is an incredibly effective tool when done well that can turn good stories into great and great into classics. But the effects of that shock doesn't mean there was dramatic tension beforehand!

And a bunch of other reasons that I can't think of right now. Because a point on Dramatic Tension and Stakes can only cover that ground and there's a lot of ground outside.

Its also possible to write so well that people will get Tension out of a scenario that would be Untense when done by most writers.


p.s. My please delete post was me changing my mind on making a post, not my comment on the thread.

p.p.s. Also, these thoughts would change with a sequel. There's a lot more credibility to the threat of killing a MC 4 books into a series rather than 4 pages.

 

[Paul Meccano]

And while starting the thread gives me very few rights over what is said here, I nevertheless do ask that people please address the topic

I feel you do have some rights to that request, more so than asking for a thread to be removed because you didn't like an opinion, even if a dislike shared by a few friends. I'm sorry if you felt like your thread had been misconstrued.
I agree with your amendments but you must admit it waters down the original points made in the first place leaving it more as: If you have a good story to tell, write it how you want to without feeling bound by others opinions, for how do they know where your story goes.
At worst it says: There have been books that starting this way has not worked for, but there are some books that starting this way has.

 

[Cathbad]

How you have found it offensive, (not being part of this conversation) I don't know.

I am sorry you think I need to post to "be a part of the conversation". I read dozens of treads I don't post in, and tat makes me feel a part of the conversation. I learn a lot just by reading these posts - including tis one.

 

[Shorewalker]

The problem here is not what is being said, but how it is being said. As writers, we are aware of the power of words and to use charged language can turn a debate into a confrontation.

'Stunted', 'fudging', 'the voice of reason finally', 'shutting it down'...these are judgemental words and expressions that will immediately irritate. They are also not necessary when proposing a different approach or communicating a different opinion.

I'm all for debate...I learn a hell of a lot that way...but you're never going to get somebody thinking about their beliefs/approaches if they've been described as 'stunted'.

Just sayin'...

 

[Paul Meccano]

I think the reader knows that the protagonist is going to survive that initial 'threat' because their name is all over the back cover blurb, amongst other reasons.

This is where it went personal for me and there is evidence on this thread of ganging up to prove a point. Just because many say something it doesn't mean its right.
I apologise if I have offended.

I really do not like bullies

 

[Paul Meccano]

So that no one takes this personally, who are these "others" that are "shutting it down"? Because, frankly, I find your words offensive. Everyone on this site tries to help - not hinder. Differing viewpoints are encouraged - not discouraged.

I am sorry you think I need to post to "be a part of the conversation". I read dozens of treads I don't post in, and tat makes me feel a part of the conversation. I learn a lot just by reading these posts - including tis one.

I'm sorry but really!
did you read the discussion or just join in the bullying!
You haven't posted on the thread but you step in, take sides, and whilst telling me off say that differing viewpoints are encouraged.

there seems to be an unhealthy clique raising its head here? and having seen few postings from any other members than the few daily visitors I am feeling like I've walked into a closed room. Please tell me this isn't so.

 

[HareBrain]

People need to cool it, please. I've read the thread through and can't see any evidence of bullying. If anyone feels that they are being attacked personally, they should use the "report" button.