Train wrecks grab people’s attention. Having someone on board keeps their attention.
Exhibit A: Charlie Sheen.
Attempting to cash in on his recent celebrity meltdown, this weekend the actor launched his 20-city variety show in Detroit. Apparently, Charlie Sheen bombed. He was heckled, booed, and eventually abandoned by the 5,000+ fans, proving it’s easier to get people there, than to keep them.
They came to see a train wreck, but discovered no one was on board.
Forgive the unseemly parallels, but there’s a lesson here for writers. It goes something like this: Getting a reader’s attention and keeping a reader’s attention are two very different things.
I was thinking about this when I read literary agent Rachelle Gardner’s post Why “No” Comes Quickly… but “Yes” Seems to Take Forever. She writes,
Recently on my blog, a commenter mentioned it would be nice if agents and editors would actually read a manuscript before rejecting it. The truth is, we read exactly as much as we need to. It’s not necessary for an editor or agent to read more than a few pages to determine if it’s a “no.” It takes a lot longer to determine if it’s a “yes.” (emphasis mine)
Apparently, what grabs an agent and what keeps them are two very different things. Or are they? Perhaps what grabs them is what keeps them reading, and what keeps them reading is potentially what sells the story. But what keeps a person reading, whether or not they are an agent, is different per individual.
Either way, the first step to keep someone reading is to grab their attention. Here’s four common ways that writers grab a reader’s attention in their first couple of pages.
- Train wrecks — explosions, action, chase scene, sex scene, murder, mayhem, mystery, etc.
- Compelling premise — what the reader understands about where the story is going keeps them reading, even through a slow or lackluster beginning.
- Interesting characters — someone so quirky, so charismatic, so interesting, so smart, so evil, so despondent, so upbeat, we can’t help but want to follow them.
- Good form — command of the language, lovely prose, economy of words, brevity, precision, consistent POV, authorial voice, realistic dialog, etc.
As a reader, which of these four elements are you looking for in the first few pages? Or do you think that’s unfair? Do you think an author deserves more than just the first few pages to grab your attention? And do you think that agents and editors are too quick to reject stories based on such slim evidence?
I can totally relate to Rachelle’s description. As a reader, it’s “not necessary for [me] to read more than a few pages” to determine if I want to stay with a writer. I recognize that readers bring different expectations to those first pages (which is why we often chafe against what agents seem to want). Nevertheless, what grabs you is not necessarily what grabs me.
Using the above “opening elements,” here’s what I look for in the first few pages, in order of their importance to me:
- Good form
- Compelling premise
- Interesting characters
- Train wrecks
No amount of train wrecks or interesting characters will keep me reading a book that is not well-written and does not have a compelling premise. In the long-run, an intriguing storyline will keep me reading despite average writing. As long as I feel a story is going somewhere I want to go, I can put up with serviceable prose. Nothing grabs me more in the first pages of a book than good writing. Conversely, nothing turns me off more in the first pages of a book than poor writing. But that’s just me.
The least interesting opening to me is the train wreck. Which is funny, because I think train wrecks have become one of our most conventional openings. Perhaps television and cinema are to be blamed for this, I don’t know. I’m not suggesting you start your book without action, but that no amount of action can sustain a poorly written book, without interesting characters, that is going nowhere. Detonate a nuclear bomb in chapter one if you like, but if we’re not in safe hands by chapter two, I won’t stick around for the fallout.
While grabbing readers may entail orchestrating train wrecks, keeping them is another story. For if there’s no one on board, you will most likely find the editor waving off spectators: “Nothing here to see, folks. Move along.”
* * *
Question: As a reader, (1) What grabs you and (2) What keeps you? Are they the same thing or different? Do you agree that a compelling plot can keep someone reading through an inferior opening? Out of the four “opening elements” I listed, what is their order of importance for you as a reader?
Authors (because of editors, perhaps) put so much effort into their first few pages or first chapter than it can end up being of a totally different cake than the rest of the book, in terms of quality of writing. If they’re not careful, that is.
Jay, I do think that’s one of the problems with “how-to” books. Aspiring authors are drilled about the importance of the first chapter to the point that we neglect other, equally important parts, of our novel. Our stories end up looking like a faux cityscape in Toontown — loud colorful exterior fronting a cardboard cutout.
Very well put. I tend to be a character-first reader and writer. I’ll put up with a fair amount of nonsense if I love the character — and it is well written. Actually, now that I think of it, I guess I’m a good-writing-first reader…
I would say that a compelling premise grabs me–something on the back cover copy or electronic “review” that screams “interesting” to me. Even if the characters annoy me and the writing’s not great, I’ve sometimes read an entire book just because I want to find out what happens.
If I don’t like the premise, I’ll give a book less than three chapters–more like a couple of pages–and then I scan to see if the characters grab me or if the writing is really clear.
I care about the train wreck least of all. I don’t know why, but I guess it’s because I’m more interested in what happens afterwards (the premise). Thanks for a thought-provoking post.
Yeah, I’m a sucker for a compelling premise too. Not to dismiss craft or character, but I actually think a great idea may be the single biggest factor in selling our work nowadays. Thanks for commenting, Brittany!
For me, even though I’d rather see the best writing without having to scratch my head and wonder how certain misspellings and weird sentence structure got by the editors, in the end that’s not the turn off for me. What I really want is a story that keeps me reading, and wanting to read even if I have to set it down for some time, and characters that are memorable and cause me to root for them or even be disgusted by them depending on what role they play.
A story doesn’t have to open up with “action” in the sense of a train wreck, but someone doing something in the first chapter is action enough even if they are just “setting up office” as it were. Some of the best stories I’ve read have a lot of things “happening” from the beginning, but it’s all there just leading to when the real action occurs. Not to say that what came before was insignificant, after all, how could I have cared what happened to the characters if I hadn’t gotten so properly introduced to them beforehand and have gotten to see how they live their daily lives for this later “main action” to disrupt it so much? I think by skipping character stuff up front a lot of authors don’t cause us to care enough for the characters they’ve thrown into a bad situation.
Good topic, Mike. 🙂
1. Good form
2. Interesting characters
3. Compelling premise
4. Train wrecks
If a book is obviously poorly written then I’d be unlikely to read more than the first few pages (if that) – I have given up on a book after the first sentence.
I enjoy character-driven stories, so if I don’t care about the characters then I won’t care what happens to them, however exciting the plot. There also has to be an expectation of ‘what happens next’, but train wrecks, unless it’s a murder mystery, are more likely to put me off.
The problem is many acquisition editors have bought into the train wreck scenario. It’s the reason I had to change the opening of my MS under consideration by a publisher we all know right now. Their reader’s note to me was – “State it like a TV show.”
Good form and character always keep me in a book. I’ve read some novels with great premise and memorable train wrecks but the style and characters were so thin they just couldn’t convince me to invest any more of my time in them.
I may never sell my novels. I’ve accepted that. I’ll certainly never sell them in the CBA unless there is some drastic change of business model. Because I tend to write different books than those agents and publishers buy.
My books don’t open with…nor do they ever have…train wrecks. Those books that do are fine and meet the needs of some. But I don’t write them. I tried for years to “write commercially” and realize that my stuff works best when I write the kind of story I want to read. 1. Good characters 2. Interesting setting. 3. Development of a central idea.
The books I most enjoy are Bildungsromans or sweeping tales about a place. Think _Sarum_ or _The Name Of The Wind_.
I happen to like train wrecks.
No! It isn’t? Charlie?
The first cut of my manuscript started as character driven but it was suggested during multiple reviews to move a couple of things around so as to put a small “train wreck” of sorts at the very beginning. The “wreck” occurs again throughout the novel to other characters so it establishes a format and is integral to character development, in addition to (hopefully) drawing people in.
I guess it depends on how many constitute a “few” pages but it seems to me like it would be hard to gauge Interesting Premise and Interesting Characters with only Chapter 1.
I don’t blame agents for rejecting something after reading only a few pages. It’s their job to know what works for them. It doesn’t matter if authors think it isn’t fair. It is what it is. If you want in, deal with it. : )
Bill, I agree with you that “it would be hard to gauge Interesting Premise and Interesting Characters with only Chapter 1. ” I think this is why most submission guidelines include other things than simply the first chapter. A synopsis, short summary, character sketch, pitch, comparable titles, etc., help an agent or editor to get a feel for the whole story. The only thing I can imagine a “cold” first chapter doing is to show the level of craft. Premise and characters require much more than just on chapter to unfold. Thanks for visiting, Bill!
Well, I definitely have a very interesting thing happening to my interesting characters in the first few pages. It just isn’t…trainwrecky.
I think compelling premise comes first with me, followed by good writing. The other two are on about equal footing.
This is good, Mike; takes us back to the basics. With all the distracting noise out there we need constant reminding of these.
I think the Charlie Sheen/ one man show is a great example. For me it is compelling premise that keeps me reading. I find that premise in either the story, the author or a strong recommendation from a friend. I do find myself more critical as writer learning the craft than just an interested reader. For my own writing I hope to have all the elements working from the start.
I’m with some others here that prefer command of language, characterization, and premise (in that order), and could do w/o the train wrecks. Books are a different art from other media, and I don’t want my books to be cinematic, or to resemble television shows. TV and cinema are visual, while books are cerebral. That’s a simplistic way of putting it, I know.
“…I don’t want my books to be cinematic, or to resemble television shows.” I wonder if most publishers feel the same way?
I don’t know, but I’m speaking as a reader and not a writer when I say that–my books, as in, the books that I buy (I didn’t mean to imply the books that I write). I would hope publishers care about their readers.
Mike, I like all of those, with the train wreck element at the bottom. There are so many novels and movies that rely on one train wreck after another to carry them that I’ve grown a bit weary of this tool. I think that a suspenseful premise can be done without a full-out train wreck, if carefully crafted. Sometimes the promise of an imminent train wreck is more compelling than a bunch of thrilling scenes.
In addition, a setting that paints a vivid picture is a very compelling element that places me in the story and makes me want to linger. And finally, an author’s unique voice can spur me on to read more, even if other elements are a bit weak. Author Alan Furst comes to mind as an author with a distinct voice, compelling stories, and interesting characters.
Mike, this is a great post. You really hit the nail on the head. This is exactly why I have a manuscript evaluation (and research) service, rather than a line edit/critique service. Many writers are so close to their work that they sometimes can’t see the “big picture” of their novel, and fail on creating continuity with these necessary elements that compel the reader to keep going. It’s easy to spot our grammatical errors or point of view errors, and it’s easy to find people to help us with those things. It’s more difficult to step back and take a look at our work from a distance and evaluate the thing as a whole – which is what I happen to enjoy doing, and like to help others with as well.
Your list of what grabs readers is much easier to apply when evaluating the big picture – which I believe can usually be done by reading around two chapters or 50 pages, (sometimes even less.) I can endure mediocre writing if the overall premise is compelling and the characters evoke emotion. I have more trouble continuing a “good form” novel when it lacks a compelling premise or interesting characters, even if the writing is stellar.
Have to go with good form first, which all comes down to voice. If the author voice grabs me, which it will within a page or two, I am generally good on waiting longer for the other things to development. I totally agree that agents/editors can decide rather quickly if it’s a “no.” Plus they have too. Nobody would get through anything if they had to read much more than that, given the sheer volume of submissions.
I have to laugh at your analogy, because my latest story LITERALLY starts with a train wreck. I’m working very hard to make sure the story line is solid.
Like Jill & Jan, I prefer:
1) Good Form
2) Interesting Characters
3) Compelling Premise
4) Train wrecks
And no, I don’t think it’s unfair to expect authors to display at least one of those four in the first few pages. Show me the first two, and I’ll stick with you through the whole book, even if the last two are weaker.
I tend to give less weight to Premise, because in my experience it’s the least trustworthy. I’ve often been wowed by books that–at first glance–seemed to have a “ho hum” premise. But when I get deeper into them, I find that my initial impression of the story idea was flawed (i.e., it’s much richer than I expected based on a few short blurbs).
Conversely, I’ve been excited by what I *thought* the premise was…only to feel disappointed when the book jacket turns out to be a little–or a lot–misleading.
My answers to that question are almost exactly the same as yours, Mike. However, I would make one change, which I’ll explain below.
1. Good form
2. Compelling story-telling
3. Interesting characters
4. Train wrecks
To me good story-telling ability is quite different from a compelling premise. I would read (and have read) books by authors who can tell a good story. But a good premise only makes me want to read the first page. It makes me open the cover, but it doesn’t make me read the whole book. Good writing (number one) can convince me to read the whole book. To me, books like WINTER’S BONE and THE MERMAID’S CHAIR fall into that category. TWILIGHT and THE SILENT LAND fall into category two. But good characters–much as I love them–and train wrecks never convince me to read a book, unless the book already has stellar form and stellar story-telling.
This is what I was trying to say in another post but you did a better job. Premise can sell me on looking at a novel but it can’t convince me to continue reading. Premise has to be followed by execution and that is the point a majority of writers never achieve.
“As a reader, (1) What grabs you and (2) What keeps you? Are they the same thing or different? Do you agree that a compelling plot can keep someone reading through an inferior opening? Out of the four “opening elements” I listed, what is their order of importance for you as a reader?”
Although I’m answering as a reader, most writers answer according to their perspective of how they intend to write, and ignoring or abiding by all the instructions learned along the way does influence choices but really explains little of the subjectivity in analysis of “good form”.
Judging from a lot of fiction reading, sometimes the agents quit way too soon and are too quick to say no.
What grabs me is voice and characters. What keeps me is the development of characters and sustaining the initial voice if I like it. And, yes, I’m a patient reader and will give an author ample time to resolve any issues IF I like/am drawn to the characters. The premise makes me pick up the book, the characters keep me in the story.
1.Interesting characters
2.Good form/Compelling premise
3.Train wrecks
Geez, where was my editor?! What grabs me “are”; what keeps me “are” . . .
As a Reader’s Advisory Librarian I’ve had 30 years of helping and watching people pick out books. You’re right – what catches the eye and makes the reader pick up a book is definitely not the same as the indefinable quality that keeps them reading. Novels are usually plucked off our crowded shelves based on one thing you failed to mention. Unfortunately it is the one thing we writers have the least power to control: title and cover design. Even so, a compelling cover design and title is only a way of show casing a story premise or an interesting character.
What keeps a reader past the first few pages is different from reader to reader, just as it is from editor to editor. For me all of the last three elements have to be present and working together: compelling premise, interesting characters and good form. Train wrecks are optional.
“…a compelling cover design and title is only a way of show casing a story premise or an interesting character.”
This is a very valid point, Carolyn. My only retort would be that, in the long run, good books can overcome bad covers. However, bad books are only marginally aided by good covers.
WOw, fascinating that good writing is at the top of most lists. For better or worse, I don’t think that’s indicative of the normal population. I only have one friend who cares about the quality of writing in a book. The rest of us just read stuff we find addicting… Twilight and stuff.
Just found your blog through Jane Friedman’s best tweets post, and I’m so glad I did. Train wrecks will not keep me reading. Characters will. I gravitate to romance novels, and without strong characters, I’m not going to continue.
For me, the story has to keep moving. It doesn’t have to be a thrilling page-turner, but it has to move me and keep me interested in what will happen next.
Relating to the character/s is another thing that keeps me reading. If I “meet” characters in a book that remind me of myself or someone I know, I’m inclined to read more. Oftentimes, I WISH I could be like a character–possess their strength, wit, stamina, spun, etc. 😉