Intro or No?

I like intros, I use them as well. Although, a 3k long one may be a bit much. That's like, what, 15 pages? Then again, I suppose it all depends on the story.

If you think you can show it within the story, IMO you'd be better doing that. Starting with an infdump is one way ticket for snoozeville for me

And I'm not the only one. There's quite a few threads on avoiding infodumping round here....here's a recent one

I concur. I'm a tough reader; you really have to seduce me. If you plop a bunch of info on me before I have any reason to care, then I'm not going to, and I'll probably put the book down. I don't mind prologues/intros, but there needs to be some action, something...

I'm on the whackit side.

Intros are nothing more than info dumps. Better to use well-placed hints in the story, using dialogue or minimal descriptions. Assume your readers are intelligent and can figure out what's up.

Leave the intro in your notebook, not in your story.

Roca Fella Bryan said:

It might be a bit of a common question around here, but I'm looking into doing a major trimming. I've got a pretty long introduction that gives the reader a lot of information, but I feel like I can tell that with the story's dialogue.


Without the introduction (which even explains how the city is) 2,876 words are gone. So I'm kind of torn here, but I guess it time to get out my WIP hacksaw and start cutting away. What do you think?


Yay or nay? lol

Click to expand...

What's in bold kinda says it all. I don't want a lot of information right upfront, I want it sprinkled throughout. Why would you want to explain the city and not show it though your character? Dialogue, thoughts, and actions work much better.

It is absolutely legitimate to use an introduction when you don't want to show information that is nevertheless critical to setting or plot. There are four things to remember though:

1. It must be critical to the story -- i.e. key character decisions would make no sense without it;
2. It should be information that for dramatic purposes you can't show (e.g. key historical events unrelated to your characters that still inform their decisions);
3. Make it brief; and
4. Make it interesting.

But 'interesting' doesn't mean 'vivid', 'intricate' or 'detailed'.

What makes information interesting is its contradictions. Contradictions are key to compelling information as conflict is key to compelling drama. Just as you winnow your drama to keep conflict in every paragraph, my strong suggestion is to remove any informational paragraph that has no contradictions in it. To illustrate, here's the introduction shown in Ridley Scott's award-winning movie Blade Runner. I have annotated each contradiction in red.

Early in the 21st century, the TYRELL CORPORATION advanced Robot evolution into the NEXUS phase -- a being virtually identical to a human -- known as a Replicant. (There are things which look like humans, but are not)

The NEXUS 6 Replicants were superior in strength and agility, and at least equal in intelligence, to the genetic engineers who created them. (Mankind's creations are better than their creators)

Replicants were used off-world as slave labor, in the hazardous exploration and colonization of other planets. (Mankind's best creations are treated worse than man himself)

After a bloody mutiny by a NEXUS 6 combat team in an Off-world colony, eplicants were declaed illegal on earth -- under penalty of death. (The creations of man are no longer welcome in man's home)

Special police squads -- BLADE RUNNER UNITS -- had orders to shooot to kill, upon detection, any tresspassing Replicant. (But how can they do that when the creatures are superior?)

This was not called execution. (Why not, when that's what it is?)

It was called retirement. (Which it clearly isn't.)

Click to expand...

Let's check criteria:

• Info is critical: the story is about a jaded Blade Runner's fight to retire four Replicants. The story would make no sense without this backstory.
• Can't really the info instead: the main character doesn't care how replicants came to exist; his job is just to kill them. But the audience cares. You can't write the backstory into dialogue because the main character doesn't care about it; if you tried to show the backstory in narrative you'd have 20 minutes of film in which the main character was absent. So an introduction makes much more sense.
• Brief: short, pithy lines.
• Contradictory: in every sentence.

200k?

http://theswivet.blogspot.com/2008/03/on-word-counts-and-novel-length.html

Some intros are helpful, but they have to be tight and concise (ie: short) in my opinion less you run into info dumping.

A while back I grabbed all the novels off my shelf and read the first 15 pages to get a sense of how published authors start their books. It was very helpfully because while the beginning has to be good enough to hook me, a rarely remember the exact beginnings of books.

As for a tight intro, sometimes I like learning about the world as the story goes along therefore I don't want an intro. It really all depends on what your attempting to do.

From your other threads it sounds like your being aggressive with you work to slim it down. But be careful, aggressive pruning can leave you with a misshapen bush. After doing some cutting, reread it to ensure the pace hasn't been thrown off.

I would also suggest talking a lot with betas if you haven't already. Second opinions are excellent for help you see holes the or slow paces in the work.

Matera the Mad said:

I'm on the whackit side.

Click to expand...

I agree with whackit