Opening with action right out of the chute

[jdm]

Another of the endless questions I have regarding my tastes vs. other people's.

We are always hearing advice about how you should start your first chapter with an action scene in order to grab your audience. Personally, I dislike reading a novel which opens with an action sequence. It makes me feel like I have wandered in on the middle of a fight between two people I've never heard of. I feel lost. I don't know why the ruckus started and I don't know these individuals, so why should I care about them and their problems? I am most likely to put the book down and move on.

I feel the same way about walking into a movie I haven't seen before long after it has started. I spend much of my time being annoyed that I don't know what is going on or being distracted by trying to figure it out.

I like a little bit of background of some sort to give me a sense of who the main players are and reasons why I should give a damn about what happens to them. A smidgen of set up or foreshadowing is enough carry me forward in the story until I learn more about the people in it. Then, if the characters are engaging enough, I can wait for a while for the payoff to the set up and foreshadowing.

The movie industry seems to understand this to some degree. That's why most movies (unless they are sequels) usually start out with some background material and an attempt at character development before exposing the conflict. Why have we, as readers, become so impatient to let things develop and unfold? Explosions and gunfights are fun, but who cares when you aren't rooting for someone just because an author hasn't yet given you a reason to be invested in their characters?

Anyone else feel the same way?

[jdm]

I guess it's just not enough for me to know a character is facing a situation or has problems. I have to know that the character is someone I would either want to be like or else want to be friends or acquaintances with. For me, that takes some time to establish the character and get to know them. Starting right off with action and no context makes me feel as if I had been blindfolded and taken to an isolated region and told "Now find your way back and figure out why we dumped you here." It leaves me totally lost, not caring and wanting to just get the heck out of there.

[Puma]

I agree with you jdm. But I'm also one of the people frequently saying on SYW "start with the action". Why? It's one thing to have a brief introduction of the character so you can develop some interest in him or her; it's something quite different to have a massive info-drop about everything that's happened in their lives up to that point. There has to be enough interest early on to catch and keep a reader's interest.

But there's more to it than this. We've been in an age of instant gratification for at least the last ten years. Readers don't want to invest the time in learning about the characters, scenes, etc. they want a thrill a minute, and the more the better.

And, unfortunately (and one of my harping points), agents seem to think they have to direct their interests towards material that appeals to the thrill a minute group, rather than works that might appeal to more mature readers. (And I think that last word I used, mature, has a lot to do with all of it.) Puma

[sheadakota]

I think this greatly depends on what genre you are writing (or like to read)
For me- Give me the instant gratification- if there isn't action on the first page, I'm out of there- but then again I write and read thrillers.

I don't want to hold hands with your character, I want to know how the hell they are going to get out of the mess someone threw them in. Then after I'm interested, you can let me get to know him/her.

Oh and I'm plenty mature Puma, I just like action :)

[jdm]

Puma:

Your complaint about agents and the instant gratification crowd echoes my own sentiments.

I have sometimes wondered if I've made the first part of my own manuscript too much of a character study for most tastes. It is a two part novel (hey, two for the price of one!), with a lot the first "book" dealing with the two MC's relationship and how it developed. It's essential in order to understand the friendship between them. It's not an info dump as the characters interact throughout, but It takes a while to get to the conflict. Once that is resolved, then it jumps right into the next adventure and its resolution. There is still a lot of character study within the context of the dilemma yet without the need for any history to speak of.

My hope is that I have made the characters and their relationship engaging enough for readers to stick with it. The one beta reader who simply read it for enjoyment said she did not want to put it down once she got started, but I doubt one opinion is significant in being able to say I nailed it. However, if the gotta have it right now crowd is the only market out there, then I am certain I have failed. Regardless, it has been fun. I have just been wondering if there are a few dinosaurs out there like me who have to have some emotional investment in the characters in order to find the book interesting.

[jdm]

I think this greatly depends on what genre you are writing (or like to read)
For me- Give me the instant gratification- if there isn't action on the first page, I'm out of there- but then again I write and read thrillers.

I don't want to hold hands with your character, I want to know how the hell they are going to get out of the mess someone threw them in. Then after I'm interested, you can let me get to know him/her.

Oh and I'm plenty mature Puma, I just like action :)

Given a thriller, I can see where the action might need to come in fairly soon. Still, unless there is something really unique about the dilemma, why should I care if the character gets out of it or not? I have no affinity for them without knowing whether they are interesting or whether I would want to be acquainted with them. If you can write such that you can provide that in a couple of pages before the action starts, I say go for it. I am unable to do it that quickly (and probably am not expected to in a western). I need more time to flesh out the characters.

As an aside, it would be interesting to know the average age of the person perusing the Western forum. Also, just out of curiosity, Sheadakota, since you write thrillers, how did you stumble across this thread in the western forum? I appreciate a viewpoint from a different genre fan.

[Puma]

I'm not Sheadakota, but ... I've written a science based thriller as well as a western as well as a historical fiction as well as a character study that turns thriller as well as a human interest/action story. And in my writing, I've worked in time periods from 1800 to just past the current date. I don't really feel this genre and period hopping is a problem. I'm very much interested in all of the subjects I've written about, so why not?

As far as thriller and action first go, I think it would be hard to beat Michael Crichton in his opening to Jurassic Park - and the characters in his opening really had nothing to do with the rest of the story. Interesting to say the least. Puma

[sheadakota]

The opening with action question is one that comes up often if my genre (not that I own it;))
People will ask the same question you are asking trying to justify why they did not start off with a bang and the answer is always the same-readers of different genres expect different things from what they read.

Romance is for the most part formulatic ( I said for the most part lest someone from that genre comes and bites my h ead off) You do want to get to know the character first here because, you are correct, why would we care?

As for why would you care in a thriller? Well, I suppose that to is formulatic- readers want that adrenaline zing right 'out if the shoot'

Give them something that makes them say OH MY GOD and you got them hooked. start with characterization and they will for the most part put that book back on the shelf.

I am extrememly eclectic in my reading and have everthing from romance to fanatasy to YA to literature and yes even westerns on my shelf- I consider westerns action adventure in a different setting and yup I still like to see some peril at the start- must be the thriller writer in me- but I also will tolerate a slower begining as long as it doesn't take ten chapters to get to the point. If something isn't happening by chapter three ina western I am still out of there.

[J'Dubee]

As far as thriller and action first go, I think it would be hard to beat Michael Crichton in his opening to Jurassic Park - and the characters in his opening really had nothing to do with the rest of the story.Puma


I'd nominate James Michener's works ... Say, Chesapeake ?

[Pistol Whipped Bee]

Personally, I dislike reading a novel which opens with an action sequence. It makes me feel like I have wandered in on the middle of a fight between two people I've never heard of.

That is exactly how my first chapter starts. In my first chapter you're not wandering in during the middle of the fight - you're wandering in immediately after. Here's mine - it's very short: http://neftwink.wordpress.com/2011/05/03/niledead-sea-nasa-iss-pic-plus-the-first-chapter-of-my-book-killing-two-birds-here/

[dpaterso]

I'm neither for nor against, on principle. As with everything, it all depends how well it's done. I've seen it done well, engaging me from the git-go, pulling me into the MC's predicament.

-Derek

[jdm]

That is exactly how my first chapter starts. In my first chapter you're not wandering in during the middle of the fight - you're wandering in immediately after. Here's mine - it's very short: http://neftwink.wordpress.com/2011/05/03/niledead-sea-nasa-iss-pic-plus-the-first-chapter-of-my-book-killing-two-birds-here/

Nice! I think I am able to handle this a bit better than most because it is written in first person. I makes it seem as if the MC is relating the story to me personally. I still feel a bit of the "I don't really know you, so why should I care?" reaction but not as much as with other things I have read. Perhaps it is just because I normally have to warm up to people before I want to hear their problems right off the bat.