posted
Sorry to spoil, but this isn't the posting of "13 lines", I just . . .
You know, people 'round here advocate the hook aweful hard. They snicker and cajonkle, spruefully pandering dilly-boxes and feather-winks. Look around, see if people are looking, and tear down the greatest literary figures of our time, go ahead. Shove my fingers in Poe's eye. Remove Hemingway's tooth. He don't need it anyway. Kick poor little Stevie King in the #$%#%.
I search the first 13 lines for hooks, pouring through my collections. Sometimes they are there, sometimes not. I'll tell you . . . I read at least 30 pages of a novel before I decide if I'm interested, and my wife reads at LEAST 15. I'm a LOT more tolerant than she with regard to novels.
Sure, I can see that a catchy hook might be important to a premiere novelist in this day and age (not unlike myself), but to be honest - the first thirteen lines isn't going to make or break a reader's anything. Nor an authors.
But it's fun for us, isn't it? To poke fun at the all time greats?
Disclaimer: No actual authors were hurt in th process of writing this letter. No dashing's or rabberdooks were intended by the author. Furthermore, there is a large can of soda that prevents editing of this letter, due to its superflously nebercariedness. Ahhh . . . Pepsi.
posted
No, the first thirteen lines aren't the be-all and end-all of any book, but they can be the deciding factor for a harried reader or editor at a busy publishing house. In one-on-one interview sessions with agents and editors at writers' conferences (as opposed to critiqueing sessions where you've sent your 20 pages ahead), those professionals make up their minds whether they want to see more by scanning just a few pages, and may actually read only the first page. There are conference sessions and writing books dedicated to the importance of the first five pages. There is a special value in the very beginning of a manuscript.
quote:But it's fun for us, isn't it? To poke fun at the all time greats?
To poke fun? I thought we were trying to learn from them. Discussing whether particular openings worked or didn't work for us is informative, not destructive. Just because someone doesn't like any particular opening doesn't cause its author any cosmic harm. There are plenty more who do, especially if we're talking about the greats.
Posts: 1810 | Registered: Jun 2002
|
posted
I've thought a lot about the whole "HOOK" thing since I joined Hatrack, and I've decided that there are lots of different ways to hook me as a reader. Surprisingly, or perhaps not so surprisingly, the plot hook has the least influence on me. In fact, I enjoy reading so much that I am perfectly willing to endure the most hackneyed plot - or even the almost complete absence of a plot - if the writing style is good enough, or if the characters are interesting, or if the dialogue sparkles. Heck - I'll read Gene Wolfe any day even when I don't have the slightest idea where his stories are going (an intellectual I ain't, man) just because he says whatever it is he's saying so gosh-darned beautifully.
Though I have absolutely no evidence to back this claim up, I'm believe that the primary hook the editors are looking for on that first page is simple competence with language, with the ability to compose a sentence that is interesting and not clumsy. The best plot hook in the world will go unread if it's mantled by plain ol' crappy writing.
posted
I totally agree, cowbass and JBShearer. Actually, with novels plot hooks as we use them here are irrelevant. Very little will keep me from reading a novel past the first page, and it's generally an abysmal writing style. With short stories there is *some* merit to a plot hook, but we use it all wrong here. We don't need to be WOWED, we just need something that sparks a connection between us and the story.
Posts: 3567 | Registered: May 2003
|
posted
I don't think we're limiting the hook to a plot hook. Anything that hooks the reader to keep reading is fair game, from a plot hook to an engaging writing style and anything in between. For some readers a hook might be a promise of adventure, for others a hint of romance or intrigue, while those same things would be turn-offs for other readers. For some of us, as has been mentioned at least twice in recent posts, wonderfully creative or coherent writing keeps us reading.
Those same things will entice or not entice editors and agents, but it's a good bet those editors and agents won't give a manuscript as much wordage to impress them as a casual reader might.
[This message has been edited by Kolona (edited March 01, 2004).]
posted
I was hanging out in the bookstore on my break at work today, and I just started grabbing random books off the shelves and reading the first couple of paragraphs to see what kind of hooks they had. Know what I found? An almost complete absence of "hooks," at least the way they've been defined here on hatrack. In fact, I only found one writer that had a catchy hook, something that wouldn't get ripped to shreds if we posted it here. (I don't remember who it was...I've had a long day and my brain is rebelling against the slavery that Radio Shack has forced upon it by refusing to function).
Funny thing is, with those "stinker" openers, they were sitting on shelves at a bookstore. Okay, it was Waldenbooks, so it hardly counts as a bookstore, but close enough.
posted
And this all makes me wonder if the reason so many critiques in Hatrack discuss hooks is because it is a way of not having to say, "You know, this is just bad writing."
None of us want to hear it directed at ourselves, and we certainly don't want to ruin anyone else's dreams, so we shy away from saying it. Avoiding the real problem, even though out of politeness, only creates a new problem.
I speak out of guilt. I've offered a few critiques of 13 line posts and never had the courage to say what I was really thinking, which was "Nothing will help this - throw it away and start over."
Difficult issue, really.
[This message has been edited by ccwbass (edited March 03, 2004).]
posted
Let's keep in mind the purpose of 13 lines. Supposedly, the first page of your manuscript should have the first 13 lines of your story, and supposedly editors read these lines and then make a judgment about a story. If this is true--and there's no reason not to believe it is--then the point of looking at the first 13 lines ISN'T to determine if a story as a great "hook," but to determine other things: proper grammar, correct spelling, clear writing. If the first 13 lines lacks any of these, the manuscript will probably get bounced.
The idea of "hook" is this--is there something in these first 13 lines that will keep the editor reading. This is why I don't like the term "hook," because it denotes too much--it suggests there has to be something really powerful when, in fact, there doesn't have to be anything like it.
Rather, I think, we should speak of the "element of strangeness" -- something that leads the reader into the story; something that makes the editor turn the page.
You have to remember that the first 13 lines isn't the BEGINNING of a story. According to Nancy Kress, the beginning of the story is the first 3 to 6 paragraphs. Sure, one can have 6 short one-sentence paragraphs, but one also might take up to 3 manuscript pages for the beginning. What's important is that the beginning--the first 3 to 6 paragraphs--has a hook or, as Damon Knight calls it, a time-bomb set to go of at the end.
This is why it's unfair to judge the "hook" of published works based on the first 13 lines. You can look at the first 13 lines to see what elements of strangeness are there--what elements that keep you reading--but if you really want to study the hook or the time-bomb, then you need to read the beginning--the first 6 paragraphs.
PS -- Let's keep in mind we're talking about short fiction. Though Kress says a beginning for a novel is between 3 and 6 paragraphs, it seems to me that the entire first chapter should be regarded as the beginning, and whatever hook or time-bomb needs to be established, it needs to be established by the end of Chapter 1.
[This message has been edited by Balthasar (edited March 03, 2004).]
Printer-friendly view of this topic
