The First Three Chapters

It's interesting to think about the first three chapters from my perspective. Even though they're written, I have no idea what they are.

I don't write chapter by chapter. I divide up all that writing after everything's finished. For the most part, my writing does evolve the way you described the first three chapters -- establishing characters and setting, working your way through the plot -- but it's all up in the air right now.

I do have a great number of line breaks, so I guess I'm just going to separate the chapters on according to how they feel. Once I know what they are, I might spend some more time developing them as chapters, but I plan on doing that with the rest of the book, too.

Interesting idea. I may try it once I recover from my flu.

EGGammon said:

1. The Set Up
2. The Hook
3. The Resolution

Chapter One would be the set up - establishing where the characters are, who they are, and their relationships to each other. Chapter Two would get into the action and start to show the plot and the thing that gets the story moving. Chapter Three would develop the plot a little more, ending on something BIG, either a major revelation, a cliffhanger, a character death, or a teaser at what's to come.

What does everyone else think?

Click to expand...

I usually want action a long time before chapter two begins. By then I've stopped reading. In fact, I want everything in chapter one that you list for the first three chapters.

I'd have to agree with James on this one. The first chapter should establish setting, characters, conflict, and a big lead-in for the rest of the book.

You don't "sell" using first 3. Usually how it works is that if they like the first 3, they will ask for the rest, and if they like the whole ms, they might consider offering rep.

So you should make sure you have the whole thing finished, and the first 3 fit well in your grand scheme of things. Otherwise, the agent would see through you...

I don't know if I agree or disagree with the "formula." I think I'd have to agree with JAR here: first chapter is the most important. Don't treat your first 3 as a mini-series. Treat your first chapter, instead. You've got to have a hook, give us good characters, and move us along with the plot and create suspense right in the first chapter. The purpose of 1st 3 is multifold:

1. Show the agent that you can indeed write
2. Give the agent enough feel of what your style is, and how you can make the reader turn pages
3. Give the agent a sense of your pacing... is this a slow story? A fast one? Does it go off with a bang, then whimper through? Or vice versa?...

But you've got to put most of your eggs in the first. Because in a real novel, usually that's how it works. You hook the readers right off the bat with the first chapter, give them something to look forward to turning the pages. Then you may scale back and do expo or slow down the plot a bit to build things up. You don't build things up with 3 whole chapters -- that's too late.

So, I guess I don't agree with the formula. If your first chapter is nothing but set up and character development, you will probably fail. The agent is likely not going to read on.

That's an interesting idea, but I think there would be a danger of two things:
1. Confusing the reader
2. Annoying the reader
Both are lethal, I think (well, to me as a reader they are).

I'm not saying either is inevitable, if you're careful about it and write well enough I'm sure those problems are avoidable. But why not reveal the information that led up to the event in other ways, rather than going back before the opening event? I have read fiction that does similar things to what I think you are describing, but generally almost all of the rest of the book is moving back towards the point shown at the start. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

I have to say that I've never written the first three chapters of a novel to hook an agent. I'm trying to interest the reader, any reader. I think if you succeed in that, you'll hook an agent as well. They're a reader.

1. The Set Up
2. The Hook
3. The Resolution

Click to expand...

I certainly wouldn't waste time on Set Up. I have conflict from the first sentence of the first paragraph of the first page. Resolving everything would seem to be a bad idea.

I'd treat the 1st 3 chapters as a Act 1, using chapter breaks to cover transitions in time and space.

Establish

• High-Concept
• Main story question
• Act story question
• Main Characters

Show

• Initial stages of conflict
• Answer to Act story question implying next Act story question

But I'm unpublished, so feel free to ignore me.

EGG, I wouldn't get too worked up about the first-three-chapters thing. It's just an arbitrary quantity, a taster for readers to decide whether they want to see more.

Some agents ask instead for 50 pages, which might be 2 or 10 chapters. Others ask for a selection of chapters, which gives them the opportunity to see whether your story is going anywhere and also whether the interest and style are maintained. (Some writers, opportunistic and desperate creatures that we can be, might put a great deal of effort into the first three chapters and tail off thereafter.)

Given that some agents are honest enough to admit that all they read initially is the pitch/synopsis and the first page of the submissions they receive, it could all be academic. I think there's a good case for sweating over the first chapter to make sure it contains all the necessary ingredients, but beyond that I'm not so sure.

I tend to see the first three chaperts as


1) Hit the ground running
2) develop
3) develop

They can see then that you are going somewhere and things will happen along the way.

pianoman5 said: EGG, I wouldn't get too worked up about the first-three-chapters thing. It's just an arbitrary quantity, a taster for readers to decide whether they want to see more.

I have to disagree. Those first three chapters are critical, IMHO. They are your chance to sell it to an agent/editor who requests a partial. I also agree that Chapter One is THE most critical - the opening is your chance to sell it to all readers, editors/agents included.

Doesn't mean it has to open with a body, or an explosion. It depends on the type of book. (Some books are slower paced than others.) But it does have to open with a compelling hook and chapter one has to end with a compelling hook. As does chapter three. Your goal is to keep the reader turning pages and wanting more.

If the first 3 chapters doesn't leave them wanting more, then you won't be asked to submit the full. If you aren't ask to submit the full, your chances for representation by that agent, or of selling to that publisher, are over.

EG said: Ok, what if you start the book in media res (in the middle of the action)? Chapter One begins with action that is thrilling and intriguing, but we aren't exactly sure who it's happening to - though readers might be given a general idea & this makes them want to know more. Then by the end of Chapter One, we immediately jump into the past a couple hours, starting to show the events that lead to that moment, introduce all of the characters and the plots (during Chapters 2 and 3 as well), and have Chapter 3 end where Chapter 1 began, only by that time, we know the characters involved in the "big event," we understand the event more (and describe it in greater detail), and that is used as a jumping off point to the novel. What about that?

No. Don't backtrack like this. Show the events as they unfold. Let the reader get to know the characters as the IMPACT from the big event unfolds. There is nothing wrong (in fact, there is something RIGHT) about letting the reader wonder for a while - that's what keeps them turning pages. Don't explain it all up-front. Preserve some of the mystery.

Example - in my book from last year, the prologue opens with a woman giving birth. Common enough. You learn some bits about her as she does, like the fact that she's been on the run. The hammer falls at the end of the prologue, when I let readers in on the fact that the baby she just gave birth to isn't hers. End of prologue.

Now, should Chapter One have opened with an explanation of how that's possible, how it happened? (i.e. going to the scene in the fertility clinic where she's implanted with this baby?) Heck NO! That's a gripping question to keep the reader turning pages. You eventually find out some of it in chapter one, but you still don't get all the answers.

We also don't have to be introduced to ALL the characters/plotlines by the end of Chapter 3, either. Again, there is nothing wrong with letting some of it come later. Don't overwhelm the reader. If you toss too many characters at them at once, a reader is going to get confused, they're not going to "bond" with any of the characters (which leads to a case of "why should I care?"), and they'll probably end up putting the book down in frustration.

As always, this is just MHO.

Susan G.

EG,
The advice coming through is sound. Put the same care and thought into every chapter, not just the first three. Those first three shouldn't be special on that account. With that said, the biggest curse a well-written story can have is that it is a "slow starter." It is essential that the first chapter gets into some action that sets the stage for the storyline, or for a main character, or both. Abandon the thought of using the second chapter as any kind of review. Backstory shouldn't come in large blocks. It's best to spread it out--bring it out in different ways. Same thing for too much foreshadowing. What's important for the beginning? Some characterization (the reader needs to identify with a character right away), some setting (the reader needs to know where the story is taking place, or about the environment in which it is taking place), and some action (the reader needs a hook to keep reading). There are exceptions, particularly in literary fiction, but for a beginner, it's best to avoid experimentation. That said, let your readers tell you if the beginning of the story is working. Re-read first chapters from contemporary books you like, particularly in your genre. Good luck

Chapters

E.G. Gammon said:

Ok, what if you start the book in media res (in the middle of the action)? Chapter One begins with action that is thrilling and intriguing, but we aren't exactly sure who it's happening to - though readers might be given a general idea & this makes them want to know more. Then by the end of Chapter One, we immediately jump into the past a couple hours, starting to show the events that lead to that moment, introduce all of the characters and the plots (during Chapters 2 and 3 as well), and have Chapter 3 end where Chapter 1 began, only by that time, we know the characters involved in the "big event," we understand the event more (and describe it in greater detail), and that is used as a jumping off point to the novel. What about that?

Click to expand...

I think the jumping off point of the novel is the first sentence of the first page. I think you're looking at it too much as this, then this, then that. Much too linear. I think there should always be something happening, or the threat of something happening, and you can introduce characters, have action, and show the plot, all at the same time.

You can start off with action, AND show who it's happening to at the same time. More often than not, action without character is as boring as no action at all.

A character should be introduced when that character becomes part of the story. Often, usually, this will be in the first page or three for the protagonist, but other characters will step forward at different times in the novel.

In media res doesn't mean you have to start with an explosion or a dead body, though in a mystery novel the crime should occur very early on. It only means you start as late in the story as is reasonably possible. Starting with action also doesn't mean you have to begin with an explosion or a dead body. It just means have something happening. Stagnant openings don't keep the reader reading.

Backstory is not a bad thing, and is usually necessary. There's nothing at all wrong with flashbacks, if they're written properly, and most readers prefer flashbacks to prologues. But a well-written flashback is almost undetectable. You generally don't just drop two hours into the past and let the reader know what happened. Flashbacks generally deal with things that are much more than two hours in the past.

If you must show what happened two hours in the past, then two hours in the past is probably where you should have started.

But, yes, backstory is usually the best method of getting in the past, and it's almost always necessary to have some backstory after chapter one in a well-paced novel. You just have to make sure teh backstory doesn't interfere with the pacing, and isn't dropped in all at once to create an info dump.

Chapter

pianoman5 said:

EGG, I wouldn't get too worked up about the first-three-chapters thing. It's just an arbitrary quantity, a taster for readers to decide whether they want to see more.

Some agents ask instead for 50 pages, which might be 2 or 10 chapters. Others ask for a selection of chapters, which gives them the opportunity to see whether your story is going anywhere and also whether the interest and style are maintained. (Some writers, opportunistic and desperate creatures that we can be, might put a great deal of effort into the first three chapters and tail off thereafter.)

Given that some agents are honest enough to admit that all they read initially is the pitch/synopsis and the first page of the submissions they receive, it could all be academic. I think there's a good case for sweating over the first chapter to make sure it contains all the necessary ingredients, but beyond that I'm not so sure.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't submit anything to an agent who asked for a selection of chapters. All I've known refuse to read a selection of chapters, and for good reason.

Asking for the first three chapters really isn't all that arbitrary. Many ask for the first three chapters, OR the first 30-50 pages, whichever is less, and both numbers are there for a reason. You need one or the other to really understand how the writer is handling pace, flow, and development. The fact that sometimes chapters are very short or very long has meaning in itself, and can tell an agent or editor much, but far more often than not, those first three chapters are going to be somewhere within the vicinity of fifty pages.

I think there's extremely good reason to sweat over the first three chapters, and especially over the first page. It's true many agent and editors don't read beyond page one, but if they do, you'd better have the thing written so they keep reading. And if they don't, it usually means the first three chapters aren't any good, anyway.

Every chapter should be written with care, written as well as you can write, but unless those first three chapters are written well above average, and start the novel off well, how the rest of the novel is written just doesn't matter because it will never be read.

E.G. Gammon said:

I was going to introduce the characters and show the event leading up to the horrific event (that sets the story into motion) that I thought would come at the end of Chapter 3. But, now, I guess I should START with the horrific event and as I begin to show the after effects, I introduce the characters and tease at how each of them will be affected by the 'tragic event,' throughout the novel.

Click to expand...

Without knowing what your event is and who the characters are it's hard to discuss this, but some things spring to mind:

1. You're writing a first draft at the moment. Put the events in that lead up to the big event; you can always take them out later if the start is too slow

2. I (and I assume other readers) often get annoyed by stories that start in the middle and then jump back to the beginning as you suggested before. While it is an accepted structure, it is one I'd be careful of.

3. If you can introduce conflict before the big event, you're onto a winner. Get your characters involved in dealing with less important problems before the big one lands right on top of them... but remember that they will have to solve those problems as well, before the end.

As an example of conflict in a chapter before the big event, in one of the novels I'm working on at the moment, the first chapter introduces the main character by having him take an important message on behalf of his king to a nearby city. This serves to introduce a few things: a conflict between the character's duty to his king and his desire to meet his sister as she returns home after a prolonged absence, a theme which will be revisited later; provides an overshadowing of the threat of war (because of the content of the message); introduce tension in the reader who (because of the content of the prologue) will have a nasty feeling that something bad has happened to his sister. And then he gets home to find that his sister is missing...

Hmmm, seems I've a bit off with how to start my stories. I always, always stick to introducing the main characters in the first chapter. Usually I just follow the main character through a day where something minor happens, I never start with a bang.

Is it really that bad to have a slow start? With the story I'm going to be starting soon, I really think it would be best to show what the main character's like before throwing the first major event at her. If I don't, she's going to seem extremely cold. The other option would be to tell the backstory with flashbacks, but I'd have to tell them right away, or else, again, the character would seem extremely cold. So, either way, I'm going to do something I probably shouldn't do, so . . .

A slow start isn't bad, as long as it's an interesting slow start.

TheNightTerror... I can only speak from my experience. I did the same thing... starting with the hero's "ordinary world" -- minor things happening, etc. even though I hinted at a major event that would change his life... TOO SLOW. My betas' comments were along the line: "Where is the plot?"

You don't have to start with a bang, especially if you're not writing a genre where big bang openings are essential (thrillers, suspense, etc.) It's okay to start with the hero's ordinary world, but you MUST push the opening chapter as close to your first conflict as possible. You can fill in the blanks later. You need a hook, so that readers would care to read on. It could be something as simple as a foreshadow of what has yet to come, or an event that would eventually lead to the first conflict... but by the end of the first chapter, you'd better lead to the conflict so that the readers will continue to turn the page...

Whereas just about every other topic that appears in these boards flushes out a range of opinions, on this one there is universal agreement.

The first chapter must get the novel moving. If not necessarily with a bang in the form of mayhem, carnage or the destruction of a planet, at least not with a whimper.

Every reader, from your betas to agents and publishers will read the first chapter and expect to be sufficiently tantalised by it to keep reading. Many bookstore browsers look at the first page of a book to judge whether it's likely to interest them enough to buy it. Some writers even put their hook into the first line. So it's vital to get 'something interesting' happening quick smart.

alaskamatt17 said:

I'd have to agree with James on this one. The first chapter should establish setting, characters, conflict, and a big lead-in for the rest of the book.

Click to expand...

However, remember they are already partly sold on the story idea based on your query. Usually after the query they want a description and synopsis. Then, if they like the story, they want to see if you know how to write, so they ask for the first 3 chapters, or the first fifty pages. Then, if they like that, they ask for the complete manuscript so that they can decide if they want to represent you. I agree the early chapters ought to establish setting, characters, etc., but also the grammar and style and word usage and editing needs to be spotless. Think of them as Simon Cowell from American Idol just looking for a reason to decide that you might suck, and then convince them that you are a professional. By the way, regarding writing chapters or not in early drafts, I write by the chapter, but that's because my books usually have opposing protags and I alternate chapter by chapter between them until it all comes together in the end.

jules said:

A slow start isn't bad, as long as it's an interesting slow start.

Click to expand...

Guess the tricky thing is trying to find an interesting slow start. Wonder how to go about it . . . should be tricky, but hey, the part of the story I know the best is the first segment, so I should be able to play with it a little bit. I hope.

maestrowork said:

TheNightTerror... I can only speak from my experience. I did the same thing... starting with the hero's "ordinary world" -- minor things happening, etc. even though I hinted at a major event that would change his life... TOO SLOW. My betas' comments were along the line: "Where is the plot?"

Click to expand...

That's what I do in damn near every story. Guess I better not ship off any manuscripts anytime soon.

You don't have to start with a bang, especially if you're not writing a genre where big bang openings are essential (thrillers, suspense, etc.)

Click to expand...

Well, lucky for me, I usually write suspense.

It's okay to start with the hero's ordinary world, but you MUST push the opening chapter as close to your first conflict as possible. You can fill in the blanks later. You need a hook, so that readers would care to read on. It could be something as simple as a foreshadow of what has yet to come, or an event that would eventually lead to the first conflict... but by the end of the first chapter, you'd better lead to the conflict so that the readers will continue to turn the page...

Click to expand...

It's amazing to hear about all the simple things I should've known. All I ever did was just tell a story, never worried about anything like that. Stupid, stupid! :Smack: Although, knowing me, I'll write like I normally do, then edit it into something half decent later.

That's what revisions are for.