Scratch

I've seen many books where they jump straight into one part of the beginning action scene then backtrack to how they got there then continue on with the story.

"The tulips I had purchased from the florist’s hadn’t even begun to wilt as I walked down the sun-bleached sidewalk leading out of my workplace."

Basically demonstrates what Wicki said. It starts calm and is introductory before any big plot point happens.

Wickimen wrote:

soupoftomato wrote:

"The tulips I had purchased from the florist’s hadn’t even begun to wilt as I walked down the sun-bleached sidewalk leading out of my workplace."

Basically demonstrates what Wicki said. It starts calm and is introductory before any big plot point happens.

Ahahahah

stoplaughingatitiandgetonit

Action isn't necessarily restricted to "action" stories. It depends on how you as the author can make it work. There's no surefire method for each and every author and story.

Either can work, I think, depending on how you want it to come across. I think if you start with an intro, you could risk sounding kind of juvenile. I wouldn't recommend doing something like this, for example:

Tom was in the fifth grade and the tallest boy in his class. His favorite subject was math and he loved to play basketball. Blah, blah, blah.

Of course, if you want it to sound childish for artistic effect, go for it.

But sometimes not starting with action can be, well, really great. As long as it's interesting, I think it's good.    Here are some examples...

Salinger's Catcher in the Rye wrote:

If you really want to hear about it, the first thing you'll probably want to know is where I was born, and what my lousy childhood was like, and how my parents were occupied and all before they had me, and all that David Copperfield kind of (...), but I don't feel like going into it, if you want to know the truth.

Camus' The Stranger wrote:

Mother died today. Or maybe yesterday, I don’t know. I had a telegram from home: ‘mother passed away. Funeral tomorrow. Yours sincerely.’ That doesn’t mean anything. It may have been yesterday.

Last edited by scmb1 (2012-05-05 20:56:27)

To start a story, I would recommend starting with a description or a statement.

Example 1:

The moon was cold and it was consuming life.

Example 2:

It was a hot day in Sydney, and Derryl was a mechanic. ( I really used this sentence as the start of a story once).

soupoftomato wrote:

jji7skyline wrote:

To start a story, I would recommend starting with a description or a statement.

Example 1:

The moon was cold and it was consuming life.

Example 2:

It was a hot day in Sydney, and Derryl was a mechanic. ( I really used this sentence as the start of a story once).

I don't think either of those are very good honestly.

I mean, neither of them are particularly interesting.

They're both kind of awkward. The first one is written in kind of a dry way that makes it sound like someone is on the moon, it's cold, and it's eating life. In the second one, remember: show, don't tell. So instead of saying "Derryl was a mechanic," you describe what he's doing and make it interesting. In fact, both of those need some showing rather than telling.

It all depends on writing style and how it can best compliment a story

Well, you can take example from some great books, such as The Master Puppeteer. It starts by saying

Jiro shook his hair out of his eyes and bent over once more to the worktable. He dipped the brush into the glue and began to apply it to the inside of the puppet head that lay in two halves before him.

It explains what he does, basically. And later on you find out the he delivers the puppet to Yoshida at the theater. So, basically, the first chapter is just his daily life, with little bits of explanation. For example, it says

His big hands -- much too big for his skinny thirteen-year-old body -- were shaking so that he was afraid a spot of glue would fall on the strings and ruin the works which made the puppet's eyes and eyebrows move.

From this, you can see that he makes puppets for a puppet show.

Also, you should try writing actively. Example:

Wrong:
"His hands shook with fear."

Correct:
"His hands were shaking with fear."

Hope this helps 

Last edited by SciTecCf (2012-05-06 03:06:24)

Andres-Vander wrote:

SciTecCf wrote:

Wrong:
"His hands shook with fear."

Correct:
"His hands were shaking with fear."

What's the difference? How's one better than the other?

Actually, both are fine. Both are also grammatically correct.
However, the former is describing a finite moment, whereas the second is a lot more description-like!

Well... I'm writing a story about a boy who runs away and... well, you can see it right here. Look at my beginning and see what you think.

LS97 wrote:

Andres-Vander wrote:

SciTecCf wrote:

Wrong:
"His hands shook with fear."

Correct:
"His hands were shaking with fear."

What's the difference? How's one better than the other?

Actually, both are fine. Both are also grammatically correct.
However, the former is describing a finite moment, whereas the second is a lot more description-like!

Actually, neither are more descriptive.
It uses different versions of the exact same words.
Actually, I would say since they have such close meaning you could use the one labeled "Wrong" to remove wordiness.