Several points which have not yet been made.
There is no need to hit the reader with a huge amount of setup before the main action begins. The more usual practice is to give only the barest setup first, then layer in more details as they become necessary.
However, if you're good enough, you can make that big chunk of setup utterly fascinating. Some of the more successful writers manage it. Few of us are that good, of course, which is why we adopt the more usual practice.
To dissect every story: Each begins with the main character in some kind of ordinary life. It could be happy or unhappy, but it's reasonably stable. This is the setup.
Something happens which pushes the MC off balance (the inciting incident). S/he decides to do something to right the balance: set off on a journey to find a treasure, rescue a hostage, escape a horde of zombies.
Another thing not mentioned. There is no need for a perfectly linear progression from Setup through II through Cat Development Climax etc. Some writers start well after the beginning of the story, right in the middle of the action. Then they flashback to the II.
Or they never flashback at all. The II happened BEFORE the text of the story. It may not be mentioned at all. Or summarized with a single sentence.
Is a big setup needed such as the one the original poster described? Probably. In the first draft. For the writer, but maybe not for the reader. Unless we are a super planner who outlines everything before we start to write, we probably need to get clear in our own head first what the setup is: the world, the people, the problems they face. Write it down as soon as it occurs to you.
You can always ignore it later, or shrink it, or re-distribute it throughout the text. But until you have a complete book you rarely know just what an animal it is in all its glory. THEN worry about the precise location of the II or whatever.
There is no need to hit the reader with a huge amount of setup before the main action begins. The more usual practice is to give only the barest setup first, then layer in more details as they become necessary.
However, if you're good enough, you can make that big chunk of setup utterly fascinating. Some of the more successful writers manage it. Few of us are that good, of course, which is why we adopt the more usual practice.
To dissect every story: Each begins with the main character in some kind of ordinary life. It could be happy or unhappy, but it's reasonably stable. This is the setup.
Something happens which pushes the MC off balance (the inciting incident). S/he decides to do something to right the balance: set off on a journey to find a treasure, rescue a hostage, escape a horde of zombies.
Another thing not mentioned. There is no need for a perfectly linear progression from Setup through II through Cat Development Climax etc. Some writers start well after the beginning of the story, right in the middle of the action. Then they flashback to the II.
Or they never flashback at all. The II happened BEFORE the text of the story. It may not be mentioned at all. Or summarized with a single sentence.
Is a big setup needed such as the one the original poster described? Probably. In the first draft. For the writer, but maybe not for the reader. Unless we are a super planner who outlines everything before we start to write, we probably need to get clear in our own head first what the setup is: the world, the people, the problems they face. Write it down as soon as it occurs to you.
You can always ignore it later, or shrink it, or re-distribute it throughout the text. But until you have a complete book you rarely know just what an animal it is in all its glory. THEN worry about the precise location of the II or whatever.
Last edited:
