posted
I have heard tale that it is either cliche, novice, or otherwise unacceptable to begin a work with a character's name or dialogue... how firm are these unspoken rules? Do they even exist beyond just internet-forum rumour?
To clarify,
quote:Alex sat up, his head throbbing...etc, etc, etc
or
quote:"I don't wnat to ask again," the man said. Alex just stared at him silently.
Do these approaches turn you off as a reader? Honestly I don't see any particular reason why they shouldn't be acceptable. But then again I've never published a novel. Not yet anyway
posted
This is probably considered heretical in these parts, but sometimes I think we of the aspiring writer persuasion wring our hands too much over openings.
I'm not a fan of opening with dialogue, but it certainly isn't a deal-breaker for me, and it happens a lot. I can't see why anyone would object to having the main character's name at the beginning.
Most of the time:
It is probably good to introduce your main character quickly after the story starts.
It is probably good to have the plot beginning to move forward ASAP.
It is probably good to give the reader a taste of the millieu/setting early on.
I always pay attention to the first three or so pages when I read a novel, or the first page-and-a-half when reading short stories. I've seen every "rule" that I'm aware of about beginnings violated to some degree.
Many authorities give contradictory guidance about details concerning beginnings. If you tried to integrate each of them, you might wind up with a null set and never get to start at all.
As a reader what I like is to be shown a little bit about a character, and a little bit about a story that's beginning to happen. If you do that with reasonably lucid prose, I bet you'd be okay. Really, in the end it's more about the 2,500 to 150,000 words that follow, i.e., the story.
posted
Can you verify the source about it being wrong to begin with the character's name? That sounds ludicrous, especially for a short story. Sorry--I do tend to balk when I hear things for the first time.
But then, as was stated previously we need to know who the viewpoint character is, where they are, what they are doing, plus the genre from the getgo... at least with short stories.
posted
If you have a true prologue where the event happening is distanced from the opening of chapter one in time or space, then of course the main story/character doesn't have to be mentioned right then and there. However, you better make the event transpiring interesting of itself and then not so compelling that the reader is annoyed that THAT isn't the story/character filling the rest of the novel. I guess that's why you call it a prologue -- to warn the reader to not get too involved.
Posts: 1580 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
There is absoluetly no reason not to introduce your character in the first sentence. And, when introducing a character, there is often no better place to start than with a name.
Particularly when using 3rd Person Limited Omniscience, it is entirely awkward for a person to think of themselves as other than by their name or a pronoun and its better to precede any pronoun with the proper noun to which it refers. Since we are seeing the world as from inside their head, we see the MC as they see themselves.
Now in full Omni, which is out of fashion at the moment, you can start by describing the MC as the shadow lurking along the alleys and later bring the character out with a name.
In first person, bringing out the MC's name takes a little effort. You can't just slip, "My name is..." into a narrative. Well, you can, but you will often want to do it more creativly.
OSC's "First Paragraph Free" method allows you to use the first paragraph to establish things like setting or your character from without. But, just because it can be free doesn't mean it should. I find that I prefer stories that don't use this allowance.
Don't get hung up on the first word or whether it should be a name. Don't worry about it, write it so that we care as quickly as possible what happens next. Sometimes you need to use a name, sometimes you don't. Don't push one way or the other, just push to make it make me want to keep reading. That's all you need to think on. Get me (the reader) involved deeply, quickly.
[This message has been edited by pantros (edited December 22, 2006).]
posted
Some people think it's "cliche" to use proper spelling, capitalization, and punctuation. Maybe it's cliche to use the alphabet too, I think that if you're going to rebel against proper spelling you should rebel against using the letters to indicate the intended pronounciation. Let's rebel against spaces too.
I don't like opening with dialogue because dialogue is generally heavily dependent on context (like who is speaking to whom, and in what situation). Only start with dialogue if you can reasonably remove all references to the identity or situation of the speakers, letting the spoken dialogue stand entirely on its own. If the dialogue passes this test, then leave it that way as a clearly defined opening vignette. If it doesn't pass that test, then establish the scene and characters before moving to dialogue. I also don't like starting with a character's name unless that character is going to be the POV. If you don't want to write in a Alex's POV, then don't start with "Alex sat up," and then describe things that he couldn't sense or know.
posted
Dear heavens, Survivor, that makes my head want to explode! What the devil was that all about?!? ROFL
Posts: 105 | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
"PH34r /\/\3!" seems to be "fear me!" Does the other stuff mean anything, or was it just some fun gibberish?
Posts: 78 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
If it's not gibberish... then survivor would have no life considering the effort to "leet" that much text would be futile in the sense that nobody would care tot ake the time to decode it.
Posts: 2195 | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
It would also be pointless in the sense that it would undermine the point I was making...which is that striving to be totally original leads to total meaninglessness.
Posts: 8322 | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
