On jumping in with both feet versus building a foundation

[ShelbyDawn57]

“Humanity at its best.” The cute redhead standing next to me laughed as we watched the chaos at the gate. The airline had just announced that the snowstorm outside had forced them to cancel all flights.

That's the first line of a story I just started. Obviously, I'm dropping the reader right in the middle of something. But I also give just a hint of background so that they're not completely lost.
Our MC is in an airport, standing next to a cute redhead. The redhead has a sense of humor. Flights have been cancelled due to weather, ands there is chaos about.

Alternately, I could have started by introducing the MC, perhaps even the redhead and explained how the storm had raged down from Canada dumping ungodly amounts of icey cold stuff in its path. I could have told the reader all about the MC, what he looked like, what he does for a living, why he was in the airport. I could have taken half a page to set the stage. Either way works.

My question is, which works best for you, and why?

All skate... Go...

 

[DEFCOM5]

What works for me and I wish I could do it jumping both feet and then building the foundation

I cannot do that yet with my writing.

If a story starts with "Alexa looked at the erected cock in front of and wondered how she arrived there", I want to know more. You can to tell me about Alexa. I will keep on reading, wondering how she ended up starring at an erected dick.

This is what I like.

 

[dirk2024]

“Humanity at its best.” The cute redhead standing next to me laughed as we watched the chaos at the gate. The airline had just announced that the snowstorm outside had forced them to cancel all flights.

That's the first line of a story I just started. Obviously, I'm dropping the reader right in the middle of something. But I also give just a hint of background so that they're not completely lost.
Our MC is in an airport, standing next to a cute redhead. The redhead has a sense of humor. Flights have been cancelled due to weather, ands there is chaos about.

Alternately, I could have started by introducing the MC, perhaps even the redhead and explained how the storm had raged down from Canada dumping ungodly amounts of icey cold stuff in its path. I could have told the reader all about the MC, what he looked like, what he does for a living, why he was in the airport. I could have taken half a page to set the stage. Either way works.

My question is, which works best for you, and why?

All skate... Go...

I like being hooked right away. Give me a little taste then start building your world.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

I like the way you did it, but I am sure there are instances when the full-meal-deal build-up would be better. It’s all good.

 

[TheWritingGroup]

I tend to start in the middle of something, but the "something" can be a conversation, or a car ride, or a doctor visit. I am not saying that's best, it's just what's easy for me to start with. Tolkien-like "20 pages of describing the backstory and landscape" starts are fine for some writers and some stories.

--Annie

 

[SimonDoom]

I'm all in favor of jumping right in. I like the way you did it. In three lines, you've given me a crystal clear picture of what's going on. It's a perfect jumping off point for the rest of the story. The "foundation" is best laid as the story progresses, through narrative and dialogue and action rather than through tedious backstory.

I think this is the reality that a lot of authors don't quite grasp: readers don't need to know everything you think they need to know. They want to get to the parts that matter.

 

[Erozetta]

It depends on the story.

Sometimes a foundation is needed and sometimes jumping right in is the way forward. But it's highly dependent on the tone and content of the story I'm telling.

 

[TheRedChamber]

Not only should you jump straight in, but if you call it 'Redhead in a Snowstorm' then I'm definitely reading it and indeed have already half-written my own draft in my head in about three milliseconds.

(This is what I call the 'Snakes on a Plane' principle)

 

[DeMont]

“Humanity at its best.” The cute redhead standing next to me laughed as we watched the chaos at the gate. The airline had just announced that the snowstorm outside had forced them to cancel all flights.

That's the first line of a story I just started. Obviously, I'm dropping the reader right in the middle of something. But I also give just a hint of background so that they're not completely lost.
Our MC is in an airport, standing next to a cute redhead. The redhead has a sense of humor. Flights have been cancelled due to weather, ands there is chaos about.

Alternately, I could have started by introducing the MC, perhaps even the redhead and explained how the storm had raged down from Canada dumping ungodly amounts of icey cold stuff in its path. I could have told the reader all about the MC, what he looked like, what he does for a living, why he was in the airport. I could have taken half a page to set the stage. Either way works.

My question is, which works best for you, and why?

All skate... Go...

@ShelbyDawn57,
Good evening my dear colleague,

I'm going to be the I'm the one standing between both queues thinking. I'm thinking about the story I'm about to give flight (no pun intended) to. Depending on the nature, and progression of the story I'll drop my MC and protagonist right smack bang in the middle of a sex scene to grab the reader's attention from the get go. A bit like a lot of television shows will open with a furious argument and someone getting gunned down so the police have to solve the crime from the opening scenes of the forensic team.

In others I will build from developing characters and situations and use the "build up curve" to the peak of the main action.

In short I will use whichever one works best for the story I want to tell. The real question is, which one will the readers respond to the best I think. That, of course, is something we can't know at the time of starting, and writing, that opening sentence.
Deepest respects,
D.

 

[Britva415]

I could have told the reader all about the MC, what he looked like, what he does for a living, why he was in the airport. I could have taken half a page to set the stage. Either way works.

Half a page in which nothing happens doesn't work great for me personally. Especially if it's the first half-page of the story. So, as long as stuff is happening while you're delivering that other information, that's kind of having both: Setting the stage while also presenting events as necessary (to interest the reader in the plot).

I'm a fan of delivering the different elements of the "foundation" at the exact moment they become required because of the story events. So, that's another way to have both: Dropping reader into events while also presenting the stage-setting as necessary (to provide the contextual info to understand the plot motivations).

In a way, that's just two different ways of saying the same thing, but I prefer thinking about it the second way. It's a story. Plot is the higher priority. Otherwise it becomes an impressionist tableau, static and voyeuristic.

 

[Britva415]

On jumping in with both feet versus building a foundation

 

[StillStunned]

I've often said that you have your reader's attention on credit. You have to give them something back. Not necessarily immediately, but that's one of the best ways to keep them reading.

Anything before the inciting incident had better be intriguing enough to hold their attention. And then the question is, if it's so interesting, why isn't that the subject of the story? If the background isn't intriguing, then it should be written well enough for the reader to extend the credit until the story starts to pay off.

The foundations are just that: they're underground, out of sight. When you're viewing a house, you don't start by looking at the foundations. You'll want to know about the building's structural integrity at some point, but if the outside is a pretty redhead with a sense of humour most buyers would be willing to have a look inside at least.

 

[TheWorldBuilder]

Half a page in which nothing happens doesn't work great for me personally. Especially if it's the first half-page of the story. So, as long as stuff is happening while you're delivering that other information, that's kind of having both: Setting the stage while also presenting events as necessary (to interest the reader in the plot).

You've got to grab the reader. We hear and read lots of comments about the first twenty seconds so it has to be straight into a scene with both dialogue and description first, then drip feed enough hints from page 2 to paint the backscene in broad strokes. If there's a logical place later, and the story needs fine detail, that's where the reader learns it.

There's an anecdotal statistic that JRRT's unpublished background material for Middle Earth was three times as many words as 'Hobbit' and 'Lord of the Rings' combined. Larry Niven has stated (probably in N-Space but I'd have to check) that whilst developing 'The Mote In God's Eye', his first collaboration with Jerry Pournelle, they had twice the published wordage in developmental notes and, in a later revision before publication, they threw away the first 100,000 words because they were too reluctant to criticise one another in the early days.

There might be the odd occasion where the first chapters are about the miraculous birth of the baby, but generally things work better if you just get on with the preaching.

 

[AchtungNight]

Hook at the beginning for sure. Then keep building your world.

 

[THBGato]

I definitely prefer an in media res opening. The absolute best I've read here is JC McNielly's Hero Worship which starts with a woman drowning then, in a superb plot twist, NOT falling in love with her rescuer.

 

[VallesMarineris]

“Humanity at its best.” The cute redhead standing next to me laughed as we watched the chaos at the gate. The airline had just announced that the snowstorm outside had forced them to cancel all flights.

That's the first line of a story I just started. Obviously, I'm dropping the reader right in the middle of something. But I also give just a hint of background so that they're not completely lost.
Our MC is in an airport, standing next to a cute redhead. The redhead has a sense of humor. Flights have been cancelled due to weather, ands there is chaos about.

Alternately, I could have started by introducing the MC, perhaps even the redhead and explained how the storm had raged down from Canada dumping ungodly amounts of icey cold stuff in its path. I could have told the reader all about the MC, what he looked like, what he does for a living, why he was in the airport. I could have taken half a page to set the stage. Either way works.

My question is, which works best for you, and why?

All skate... Go...

Starting in the middle is maybe the oldest trick in literature. The Odyssey starts, for example, not even in the middle, but shortly before the climax when Odysseus will return to (spoiler alert) deal with Penelope's suitors. Likewise, Hamlet starts after the king's murder, when Hamlet the prince returns, not before.

It's called in medias res. The Roman poet Horace is said to have coined the term. The trick is that old. Wikipedia discusses a long list of contemporary examples of the technique:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_medias_res

What you're doing in your story is a modern version of in medias res known as a cold open. Many TV series episodes, and most James Bond movies, start that way:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_open

So what do you do about backstory? You insert just enough to explain the situation, but no more. For example, your scene could continue:

“Humanity at its best.” The cute redhead standing next to me laughed as we watched the chaos at the gate. The airline had just announced that the snowstorm outside had forced them to cancel all flights.

I'd been checking her out, hopefully without her noticing, since I'd arrived at the gate earlier. I have a thing for redheads. They light up for me like fireflies in any crowd. I also have a thing for short women, which she was; or rather, they have a thing for me. I'm quite tall, about two meters.

"I love humanity. It's people I can't stand," I replied with the old cliché, which earned a smile. "Where are you staying?" I continued. This should have been a simple transfer to my flight home. But seeing the weather, I texted my EA to snag me a room as soon as the plane had landed here and we were in cellphone range.

"What?" was her only reply. I understood then she was new to air travel. By now all the rooms in all the hotels around the airport would be booked. I could read her distress like an open book under those cute red bangs.

Have your narrator fill in the backstory as needed. Small bits that you fit together to build the whole environment, the situation, and the characters. Only what's needed. As Elmore Leonard has put it, try to leave out the parts that readers skip over.

Of course, @StillStunned may advocate the opposite technique, à la James Michener and Marcel Proust, in which you start when the magma has first cooled to form continents, and work your way up through world history that culminates in your two characters exchanging lustful gazes in the light of the airport bar's big screen TVs.

Some writers can carry that off. My mind doesn't seem to work that way. So, in medias res.

 

[StillStunned]

Of course, @StillStunned may advocate the opposite technique, à la James Michener and Marcel Proust, in which you start when the magma has first cooled to form continents, and work your way up through world history that culminates in your two characters exchanging lustful gazes in the light of the airport bar's big screen TVs.

I could advocate that, but on these forums I've repeatedly argued for starting as close as possible to the inciting incident: the event that kicks off the narrative. That's what in medias res is: forget about the background, tell only the actual story.

Like I mentioned earlier in this thread, the further away from the inciting incident you begin, the better your skills have to be to hold your reader's attention.

 

[UncleJunior]

I've done both.

In general, if I'm going to use this character again, then I will spend some time building them up. I try to avoid long buildups for characters that aren't going to do more than explode all over each other. Some of my stories are stories and some are just scenes. I use shorts to focus intently on one thing and then leave the reader a little hungry.

For stories that are stories, I follow most of the rules instead of just the ones I need for a scene. I do tend to restrict even that to what's needed in the scene however. I'm not one to present pages of lore and worldbuilding before giving you at least one character that you care about. I don't consider a diatribe about the political climate of the warring kingdoms preferable to a scene where a child looks out at an army forming up at the property line.

A kid waking up to see an army where they chase butterflies explains the political climate enough for the ten pages of violence that's about to take place.

 

[AwkwardMD]

There are no wrong answers

 

[IWroteThis]

My question is, which works best for you, and why?

I can unequivocally say, it depends…

If you use it as a teaser, then just go back and tell the story from the beginning, it doesn't do much for me. It does depend on how far into the story that scene is and how much it gives away. The closer to the beginning, the better, in my opinion. Even if you don't provide much information, it's going to be a distraction and affect my perception of the story until it gets back to that point.

I really hate the ones where they start with the end, then tell the whole story, ending it just like it began.

If you use it as the actual starting point of the story, then throw in the background information by having them talk to each other, it works well. Careful use of flashbacks or introspection can work as well, but you need good triggering and separation. I got roasted for not being careful enough in a story that heavily used flashbacks instead of dialogue for a lot of the non-PoV character's explanations.

 

[redgarters]

I'm more prone to starting slow. Maybe I lose readers over beginnings like this:

The carbonara was good. I had prepared it from scratch with the right ingredients and method. I was rather proud of that.

But even if it's not jumping right in, I like to give the reader a picture, something to visualize, something to grab the mind, Here, it's a woman who likes to cook, most likely just for herself, alone in her kitchen.

This is another one of those, just of an environment, that's really also describing the mental state of the MC:

It was beginning to really feel like winter. Freezing wind. Snowdrift. Perpetually overcast skies. Endless dark.

Or I try to make the reader have questions:

I walked with my hands jammed in my jacket pockets, boots hitting the pavement in that half-dead rhythm that came at the end of a shift.

Where is she walking? Why is she tired? What does she do that requires boots and shifts?

If I can then invoke some feelings with the picture that helps:

" "Fucking dyke." He muttered it under his breath, but I still heard it. As I was meant to. I ignored him, like I ignored the looks and whispers and the slurs."

What's going on and why is that woman just taking that shit?

I've got a WIP that jumps in a bit more, going

It was crowded in the club. Just the way I liked it. Music thumping, lights flashing. The drinks had been flowing freely and I‘d lost the girls sometime after midnight. Maybe on purpose, maybe not.

We'll see how that goes.

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

Starting in the middle is maybe the oldest trick in literature. The Odyssey starts, for example, not even in the middle, but shortly before the climax when Odysseus will return to (spoiler alert) deal with Penelope's suitors. Likewise, Hamlet starts after the king's murder, when Hamlet the prince returns, not before.

It's called in medias res. The Roman poet Horace is said to have coined the term. The trick is that old. Wikipedia discusses a long list of contemporary examples of the technique:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_medias_res

What you're doing in your story is a modern version of in medias res known as a cold open. Many TV series episodes, and most James Bond movies, start that way:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_open

So what do you do about backstory? You insert just enough to explain the situation, but no more. For example, your scene could continue:




Have your narrator fill in the backstory as needed. Small bits that you fit together to build the whole environment, the situation, and the characters. Only what's needed. As Elmore Leonard has put it, try to leave out the parts that readers skip over.

Of course, @StillStunned may advocate the opposite technique, à la James Michener and Marcel Proust, in which you start when the magma has first cooled to form continents, and work your way up through world history that culminates in your two characters exchanging lustful gazes in the light of the airport bar's big screen TVs.

Some writers can carry that off. My mind doesn't seem to work that way. So, in medias res.

Thanks for the how to and other stuff. I'm still curious; which works best for you, and why?

 

[Statius]

“Humanity at its best.” The cute redhead standing next to me laughed as we watched the chaos at the gate. The airline had just announced that the snowstorm outside had forced them to cancel all flights.

That's the first line of a story I just started. Obviously, I'm dropping the reader right in the middle of something. But I also give just a hint of background so that they're not completely lost.
Our MC is in an airport, standing next to a cute redhead. The redhead has a sense of humor. Flights have been cancelled due to weather, ands there is chaos about.

Alternately, I could have started by introducing the MC, perhaps even the redhead and explained how the storm had raged down from Canada dumping ungodly amounts of icey cold stuff in its path. I could have told the reader all about the MC, what he looked like, what he does for a living, why he was in the airport. I could have taken half a page to set the stage. Either way works.

My question is, which works best for you, and why?

All skate... Go...

That opening is really great. Stick with it. It sets a tone, just maintain it.

 

[NaughteeDragon]

This is a great in medias res beginning. I know what (a cute redhead), I know where, and I know why they are there. Everything else can be filled in. They are strangers so I don’t need to know about their history and relationships. It’s perfect.

 

[AG31]

“Humanity at its best.” The cute redhead standing next to me laughed as we watched the chaos at the gate. The airline had just announced that the snowstorm outside had forced them to cancel all flights.

That's the first line of a story I just started. Obviously, I'm dropping the reader right in the middle of something. But I also give just a hint of background so that they're not completely lost.
Our MC is in an airport, standing next to a cute redhead. The redhead has a sense of humor. Flights have been cancelled due to weather, ands there is chaos about.

Alternately, I could have started by introducing the MC, perhaps even the redhead and explained how the storm had raged down from Canada dumping ungodly amounts of icey cold stuff in its path. I could have told the reader all about the MC, what he looked like, what he does for a living, why he was in the airport. I could have taken half a page to set the stage. Either way works.

My question is, which works best for you, and why?

All skate... Go...

I like all kinds of approaches in my wider fiction reading, but here in Literotica I definitely prefer the jump-right-in approach.