In medias res v. once upon a time

[StillStunned]

Over the past few months I've engaged in a few discussions about where to start a story. Sooner or later they tend to become confused when I talk about "inciting incident" and someone else talks about "in medias res". So maybe we can have a thread devoted specifically to these issues and how we interpret them..

First, in medias res. Literally this means "in the middle of things". Yes, I had three years of Latin at school. In terms of storytelling, it means "skip the intro and get to the good bits." Start in the thick of things. A commonly used example is the Iliad. The poet defines at the start what story he's telling: "Sing, oh Goddess, of the wrath of Peleus's son Achilles..." (yes, I had five years of Greek at school too). The Iliad isn't the story of the Trojan War: it begins with Agamemnon pissing off Achilles, and Achilles going into a sulk. But the poet doesn't give the background, he doesn't explain the reasons for besieging Troy. No: here we are, this is what's happening.

This is what I mean by an inciting incident too. That's the phrase I've come across in books about fiction writing. It means: "Here's the trigger that sets the story in motion." Where you place that inciting incident depends on what story you're telling. If you were telling the story of the Trojan War, you could begin with the Rape of Helen (rape in the old-fashioned sense), or with the wooing of Helen by the Greek princess and the oath that they swear, or with Paris's choice between the three goddesses, or even with Leda coming home from bathing in the river and saying, "Honest, it wasn't that handsome goatherd, it was Zeus in the shape of a swan!" Whichever of these incidents you choose will affect what story you're telling.

On the opposite end you have stories that begin with background information. The basic fairy tale formula of "Once upon a time there was a magical land, and that land was ruled by a beautiful Queen, and that Queen lived in a beautiful castle on top of a mountain, and in that castle there lived also a pigherd who was hung like a centaur, and one day the Queen bore twin children, a daughter who resembled her mother and a son who resembled the Queen's new pageboy, who used to look after the pigs, and when those children grew up they went on a journey to the Land of Exposition...". In literary works, the one that springs to my mind is Beowulf: "So anyway, we've all heard of the Spear-Danes in days gone by, and Scyld Shaefing and his descendants until we get to Hrothgar, who built a mighty hall that pissed off his neighbour because of permitting issues..."

Of course this can be tricky. The first Star Wars movie famously begins with "A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away...", which is essentially the same as "Once upon a time". But then the scroll starts, and we're pitched straight into a Galactic civil war, without knowing what's going on beyond the immediate picture of stolen information and deadly pursuit. The inciting incident, or the trigger for the events of the movie, is Leia sending R2-D2 off to find Obi-Wan. The Skywalker Saga as a whole starts much earlier - with trade wars and lightsaber negotiations - but those aren't the story being told in Ep. IV.

I wrote two stories for Dark Fairy Tales: Hag-Ridden: A Fairy Tale, and Black Boots To Meet The King. Ostensibly, they both begin with the "Once upon a time" opening:

Once upon a time, in a fair land where it was always late-summer, there lived a King. This King was wise and just, and his people loved him. But none loved him more than the Queen his wife, and yet she did not love him more than he loved her.

and:

In a small old house in a small old town lived a cobbler. All day and every day he toiled, working leather, sewing threads and hammering nails to make boots, shoes and sandals for the people of his small old town.

But "Hag-Ridden" has half a Lit page about a witch cursing the King and Queen and the land, and about the Princes, before we get to the action. If I'd started in medias res, I'd have skipped all that and gone with, "Two princes went out hunting one day...". That's where the action kicks off.

"Black Boots" jumps to the action immediately. The third paragraph begins, "One day, one such a stranger walked into the cobbler's workshop." This is the inciting incident for the story: the cobbler is asked to make boots, the lady wears them to seduce the King. A proper "Once upon a time" would have first explained that the King was unmarried, but he'd called all the ladies in the land to his castle so he could choose his bride. In this version, we don't get this information until a third of the way through.

So those are my thoughts on in medias res, inciting incidents and fairy tale openings, or at least how to define them. How you use them, and when, depends on what story you want to tell, and how you're telling it.

Thoughts? Opinions? Suggestions? Examples?

 

[ElectricBlue]

So those are my thoughts on in medias res, inciting incidents and fairy tale openings, or at least how to define them. How you use them, and when, depends on what story you want to tell, and how you're telling it.

Thoughts? Opinions? Suggestions? Examples?

The worst openings here on Lit area those that start, "When I went home on summer break..." Those are an immediate back click for me, because there will be multiple paragraphs of irrelevant back story, unnecessary detail, info dumps, people mentioned but you don't know whether you're meant to remember them or not.

Start when they story starts, but not before.

 

[Britva415]

I'm confused about the "versus" in this premise.

"Once upon a time, the fearsome dragon Trogdor was burninating the village. Lily escaped the cottage before the thatch roof caved in - and ran straight into the arms of Thy Dungeonman!"

 

[Djmac1031]

I think the majority of my stories tend to just jump right in. Although sometimes I'll take a pause to then back up a little and set up the situation in more detail. Really depends, but in general I'm not a big fan of several paragraphs of exposition before we get into it. Id rather sprinkle the backstory in in small doses as the story progresses.

 

[StillStunned]

I'm confused about the "versus" in this premise.

"Once upon a time, the fearsome dragon Trogdor was burninating the village. Lily escaped the cottage before the thatch roof caved in - and ran straight into the arms of Thy Dungeonman!"

It's about story structure rather than the actual use of "once upon a time". Do you describe the setting, and then tell the story within that setting? Or do you tell the story and show the setting as it unfolds around the characters? Like I mentioned, Star Wars essentially begins with "Once upon a time" but then plunges into the thick of things. It's just that traditional fairy tales often begin with backstory.

Your example begins in medias res, despite the "once upon a time". There's no background information there: we don't know who the dragon Trogdor is, or who Lily is, or the Dungeonman. A proper "once upon a time" would explain that the land is being terrorised by a fearsome dragon, and all the king's horses and all the king's men were unable to stop it, but the only person in the whole land who didn't fear the dragon was the Dungeonman. Or something like that.

On the other hand there are plenty of stories that begin, "Jack drew his sword as the dragon swept down. For seven years the evil creature had been plaguing the land. It had burned the towns and driven the people from the plains into the mountains. Great warriors and mighty sorcerers had gone forth to meet it, and all had been vanquished. In despair, the King had offered his daughter's hand in marriage, but there were no more heroes to claim it. Until Jack had been kicked off his uncle's farm for interfering with the sheep, and had become the plucky hero that the land needed."

That's all exposition, hiding behind the merest pretence at an action opening. It would be easier to follow if it did actually begin with "Once upon a time..." and then shifted to Jack's tale within the setting.

 

[SkyBubble]

I had three years of Latin at school.

I had two.

The worst openings here on Lit area those that start, "When I went home on summer break..." Those are an immediate back click for me, because there will be multiple paragraphs of irrelevant back story, unnecessary detail, info dumps, people mentioned but you don't know whether you're meant to remember them or not.

If, say, the main characters are college age and home on summer break, you might use a sentence or two to establish that it is, in fact, summer break, and this character and that character either were, are, or are about to be in some sort of relationship involving sex. Then get to the actual story.

I'm all for painting a picture, setting the scene. I do it. But you can paint too much of a picture at the beginning.

I think the majority of my stories tend to just jump right in. Although sometimes I'll take a pause to then back up a little and set up the situation in more detail. Really depends, but in general I'm not a big fan of several paragraphs of exposition before we get into it. Id rather sprinkle the backstory in in small doses as the story progresses.

In one of my stories, it's the woman's first time and she's always been pretty adamant that she's against premarital sex. I open with "I must admit, the lady surprised me." Then into her story.

 

[StillStunned]

On the other hand there are plenty of stories that begin, "Jack drew his sword as the dragon swept down. For seven years the evil creature had been plaguing the land. It had burned the towns and driven the people from the plains into the mountains. Great warriors and mighty sorcerers had gone forth to meet it, and all had been vanquished. In despair, the King had offered his daughter's hand in marriage, but there were no more heroes to claim it. Until Jack had been kicked off his uncle's farm for interfering with the sheep, and had become the plucky hero that the land needed."

That's all exposition, hiding behind the merest pretence at an action opening. It would be easier to follow if it did actually begin with "Once upon a time..." and then shifted to Jack's tale within the setting.

Even worse:

Jack drew his sword as the dragon swept down.

"Pitiful fool!" roared the dragon. "For seven years I have plagued the land. Don't you know that I have burned the towns of this land, and driven its people from the plains into the mountains? Great warriors and mighty sorcerers have come forth to meet me, and all have been vanquished. In despair, your King has offered his daughter's hand in marriage, but there are no more heroes to claim it. Who are you to challenge me?"

"I'm just a simple farmlad," replied Jack. "My uncle kicked me off his farm for interfering with the sheep. But I'm the plucky hero that the land needs."

 

[TheLobster]

I am somewhat confused about your usage of the term "in medias res." It's different to how I (and trusted sources like TV Tropes Wikipedia) appear to define.

You seem to apply the term to an onset of story where there is any kind of substantial action, right from the start, as opposed to devoting at least a few paragraphs solely to exposition of the settings and/or characters. In your Iliad example, we have the beginning that features scenes from the Trojan War, as opposed the whole Helen affair which led to its outbreak in the first place. Those scenes are certainly action; however, they are not exactly "the middle" of things in terms of the entire progression of events being related in the Illiad.

As far I understand the technique, in medias res essentially means that the narrative picks up when it's already 'too late' into the story. It throws the reader inside a moment that follows not only anything in the setting's distant past -- the backstory -- but also the more recent past, the one which the narrative has to eventually circle back to. The telltale sign that in medias res has been used is that there's got to be a record scratch moment after that abrupt beginning, and then the time rewinds to tell us how the characters got where they were at the start.

In other words, it's only in medias res if someone (the narrator, the protagonist, etc.) says the equivalent of "Yup, this is me; you might be wondering how I got in this situation..." If the Iliad started immediately with the duel between Hector and Achilles, and then the action backed off to treat with the events of the war that preceded it; then yes, that would be IMR. But it doesn't, it simply skimps on the backstory and starts where the real story does.

Going by this definition of IMR, I'd have to say that not only I never do it, I actively despise it whenever I encounter it in a story on this site. In medias res on Literotica invariably means starting with an out-of-the blue sex scene, frontloaded as a cheap trick to hook in the one-handed reader and make him stay for the dull exposition that follows. It's awful, and it almost always makes me click away immediately.

 

[Britva415]

The worst openings here on Lit area those that start, "When I went home on summer break..." Those are an immediate back click for me, because there will be multiple paragraphs of irrelevant back story, unnecessary detail, info dumps, people mentioned but you don't know whether you're meant to remember them or not.

Start when they story starts, but not before.

Bad enough when it happens at all, but much worse when all those paragraphs are written in past-perfect.

"Had had had had had haddy hadhad."

 

[Britva415]

Going by this definition of IMR, I'd have to say that not only I never do it, I actively despise it whenever I encounter it in a story on this site. In medias res on Literotica invariably means starting with an out-of-the blue sex scene, frontloaded as a cheap trick to hook in the one-handed reader and make him stay for the dull exposition that follows.

Twice, I have done a version of this which I consider very light: It's basically a very brief and not-detailed kind of a teaser which serves more as an indication of a place which the story will arrive at, rather than a stroke scene to get you going early. And the "exposition" is the story, the one I actually want to tell, not a mere dull backstory to grudgingly explain and also make the reader plod through.

It isn't "here's them having sex, let's watch the complete scene and then when it's over and everyone's spent, then let's back up and tell a story you don't even need anymore." It's more like "they're going to have sex, and (other stuff in the brief pre-scene indicates that) there's more going on as well, so, now that you have had that expectation set, let's go ahead and begin at the beginning - and when we get to that sex scene, you'll get the whole of it."

EDIT:
Now that I review those two stories, I'll fill in that part of what I mean by "very light" is that those opening mini-scenes really aren't even sex scenes at all. But they do make clear that two people will wind up in very intimate circumstances together, and hopefully the effect is that the reader understands that they will be shown the related sex scene in due course.

 

[SkyBubble]

I am somewhat confused about your usage of the term "in medias res."

It literally means in the middle of things.

 

[Djmac1031]

I think my purest form of in medias res is The White Room.

Readers literally find themselves in the same position as the lead character at the very beginning: in a strange place with no idea what's going on:

I woke to a whiteness so blinding it took several moments before I could do anything but squint. My eyes eventually adjusted to the pain enough to open fully, but the brightness never dimmed.

I found myself on my back, looking up at what should have been a ceiling, or the sky, or ...well, something. Anything. Instead, all I could see was an unbroken field of white.

Was I awake? Maybe I was dead. I felt disembodied, and there were several failed attempts by my brain to send signals to my limbs before I could finally recognize the existence of them.

"Okay," I thought, "so I'm not dead. I'm still in my body. And I don't think I'm dreaming. But that doesn't mean anything. You always think a dream is real until you wake up."

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I think that @TheLobster is right about what "in medias res" means in writing, but I understand and agree with what the O.P. said. I also like starting the story with a scene that has some kind of action, a dramatic moment, a fight, something. And then, as the scene progresses, I slowly reveal who the characters are and what's going on.

I prefer such writing to stories that begin with (long) exposition. I think that in these times, and at a place like this, grabbing the reader's attention right away is just as important as actually writing a good story. We're basically fighting for the audience these days, regardless of whether we write and publish mainstream stories or smut in a free website such as Lit.

 

[Britva415]

I would postulate that it's basically impossible to write a story which really begins at the beginning and doesn't ever once refer to anything from a previously-un-exposited past. We're either talking about Dick and Jane levels of triviality or else Fellini levels of avant-garde.

The opposite side of that coin is, is beginning a story with "exposition" not really just beginning at a different place? I'm kind of reacting to @AwkwardlySet above, whose comment about beginning with long exposition makes me imagine that there's still stuff happening. It's still a story. it's still storytelling and there are still (ideally) inciting events in that "back" story.

So as far as the "where to start a story" question goes: Like many of our other discussions, "it depends." It depends on the way the storytelling is done, and it could depend on the content of the story. Some stories work best with the main inciting event happening immediately. Some stories have multiple inciting events, and the first one we see isn't necessarily the one which is the crux of the whole story.

I think the only reliable thing to say is that stuff should be happening. A "back story" should be told as a story (or sub-story) and not delivered as a static infodump, and that's true no matter where it is in the manuscript, beginning, middle or end.

 

[Djmac1031]

I would postulate that it's basically impossible to write a story which really begins at the beginning and doesn't ever once refer to anything from a previously-un-exposited past

*The Bible has entered the chat*

 

[Britva415]

*The Bible has entered the chat*

Calling that "a story" is fighting words!

 

[Djmac1031]

Calling that "a story" is fighting words!

I didn't say it was a GOOD story.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I would postulate that it's basically impossible to write a story which really begins at the beginning and doesn't ever once refer to anything from a previously-un-exposited past. We're either talking about Dick and Jane levels of triviality or else Fellini levels of avant-garde.

The opposite side of that coin is, is beginning a story with "exposition" not really just beginning at a different place? I'm kind of reacting to @AwkwardlySet above, whose comment about beginning with long exposition makes me imagine that there's still stuff happening. It's still a story. it's still storytelling and there are still (ideally) inciting events in that "back" story.

Your post is hard to understand.

My point was that I avoid starting with exposition altogether. I often start the story with an active scene, initiating with dialogue, some action scene, or a scene where the two main characters meet, but almost never with narration beyond a sentence or two.

 

[iwatchus]

Calling that "a story" is fighting words!

I can use a term that is a little more direct if you would rather...

 

[Djmac1031]

I must admit I had a little fun with opening sequence to my story My Daughter, The Nudist by starting in the middle then immediately... well, here, just read:

"Leah! What the hell???"

My daughter had been home from her summer trip to Europe less than twenty-four hours, and here she was, walking around the house, stark naked.

"Didn't I tell you, Daddy? I'm a nudist now."

If this were a movie, this would be the point where the image freeze frames, the record needle scratches, and the voice over comes in:

"I bet you're wondering how this all started. Let's rewind to the beginning."

 

[Bramblethorn]

*The Bible has entered the chat*

"In the beginning, the universe was created. This has made a lot of people angry, and been widely regarded as a bad move."

 

[SkyBubble]

The opposite side of that coin is, is beginning a story with "exposition" not really just beginning at a different place? I'm kind of reacting to @AwkwardlySet above, whose comment about beginning with long exposition makes me imagine that there's still stuff happening. It's still a story. it's still storytelling and there are still (ideally) inciting events in that "back" story.

Sometimes the exposition includes a little of what's happening, as scene setting.

 

[SkyBubble]

Calling that "a story" is fighting words!

Without commenting on whether it's true of false or a combination thereof, I'd say it's a very long story with a lot of subplots and side comments.

 

[SkyBubble]

"In the beginning, the universe was created. This has made a lot of people angry, and been widely regarded as a bad move."

"God created man in His image and likeness, and man promptly returned the favor." -- Voltaire

 

[Djmac1031]

"In the beginning, the universe was created. This has made a lot of people angry, and been widely regarded as a bad move."

"In the beginning, there was darkness. That is to say, there was me." - Lucy Morningstar,* AKA Satan herself, from Between Angels And Demons, a story where I decided to tackle my own unique origin of the universe .

(*Lucy Morningstar, copyright @EmilyMiller , all rights reserved. Used with permission.)