It’s a typical pet peeve of editors and agents: Stories that begin with dialogue.
In the latest Glimmer Train bulletin, author Benjamin Percy explains why a dialogue opening is so often ineffective:
When a reader first picks up a story, they are like a coma patient—fluttering open their eyes in an unfamiliar world, wondering, where am I, when am I, who am I? The writer has an obligation to quickly and efficiently orient.
Which is why writers should avoid opening with dialogue. I know, I know—you can think of ten thousand awesome stories that do exactly that. I don’t like any of them.
Read more of Percy’s essay at Glimmer Train.
Jane Friedman has spent nearly 25 years working in the book publishing industry, with a focus on author education and trend reporting. She is the editor of The Hot Sheet, the essential publishing industry newsletter for authors, and was named Publishing Commentator of the Year by Digital Book World in 2023. Her latest book is The Business of Being a Writer (University of Chicago Press), which received a starred review from Library Journal. In addition to serving on grant panels for the National Endowment for the Arts and the Creative Work Fund, she works with organizations such as The Authors Guild to bring transparency to the business of publishing.
The coma analogy is by far the best argument I’ve seen for not starting a story with dialogue. Makes a great case for setting the scene first.
Have to disagree with this. Starting with dialogue is often a great choice. For one thing, it forces the writer to open in a scene and not in the often fatal over-descriptive opening, or character-alone-thinking opening. For another, it invites instant conflict (see, e.g., The Last Coyote, perhaps Michael Connelly’s best book).
Readers may be in a coma but they’re not brain dead. They will wait for information if caught up in something that’s happening. Dialogue is happening. Thus, a reader can wait for the seventh paragraph of Tom Sawyer to know who is speaking. There is no confusion, no disequilibrium. It’s a great opening because we are caught up in it.
This peeve is not one of the pets, IMO (not like “don’t open with the weather” and “don’t open with a dream.”) No agent or editor worth their salt shaker is going to toss a MS just because it begins with dialogue…IF it’s good. That’s the key.
And here’s something else I teach, and stand by: dialogue is the fastest way to improve a manuscript. If you know what you’re doing, and the editor or agent sees that early, it greatly increases the chances of more pages being read. So if you’ve got it, flaunt it. Yes, even start with it.
As you say, Jim, the key is GOOD dialogue.
Yes, GOOD and BRIEF and full of inherent CONFLICT. Then it works.
I’m with you, James!
Don’t you think it all depends on what the dialogue does for the reader? I’d much prefer to discover the emotional tone, the urgency of the situation, and be a part of something that let’s me imagine a setting without reading a long descriptive (or even short) paragraph. Good dialogue with well-placed beats can do that. I just don’t believe we have to spoon-feed our readers.
I refer you to Jim. I think it depends on the skill of the person writing dialogue.
I have to say that I might disagree as well. To say that one style of writing is not good is like saying we should all talk the same way. I like the challenge of figuring out what is going on and sometimes find it boring when books and television or movies describe too much. Older movies and books left us to figure out things, making us feel so much smarter!
It seems like more people are disagreeing rather than agreeing, which is good. It might help us have an even more meaningful discussion.
Percy, probably like myself, has read more manuscripts than he’d like where a dialogue opening failed. If you’re actively teaching in the classroom, or critiquing manuscripts, then one of the biggest problems to tackle is the unclear, confusing, rambling, and/or boring opening.
So Percy’s advice to give the reader her bearings—make the protagonist and conflict apparent as early as possible—is a principle I’d stand by. I don’t think this is an issue of dumbing things down for the reader. Rather, it’s about being a good storyteller.
Add one more to the “Disagree” column, Jane, for reasons already cited. May I close with a great quote: “There are no rules.” (For those who MUST have one, try this: The first sentence must compel the reader to the second, then the third, etc. to the end.)
I don’t know. There is always White (even without Strunk):
“Where’s Papa going with that ax?” said Fern to her mother as they were setting the table for breakfast.
Well, Michael, it’s funny you should comment by quoting that particular story opening, because it’s the EXACT same thing Benjamin Percy quotes in his article. I leave it to you to click through to his essay to find out why he quotes it.
I wonder if people disagree so violently with this post because no one has bothered to read and understand what Percy says!
Sorry Jane. I was in a rush, but I have posted a more thurough explanation above.
I read his article thoroughly. I don’t disagree violently. I just disagree that it’s a blanket rule. As Percy pointed out, it can and has been done well. That alone means don’t accept it as gospel.
Posted before I finished)
Just this: it doesn’t mean it can’t happen again.
I disagree as well. Opening with dialogue pulls the reader immediately into the
story. It’s active, and it helps to identify the genre. Readers who usually make quick decisions may use that initial introduction in their buying decision.
I’m not saying that making a sale is more important than quality. I believe opening with dialogue can do both.
And of course it should be well written, But that’s true with narration as well, isn’t it? I guess if an author can’t write good dialogue, the they probably can’t write narration either. (S)
Now that I am not rushing, let me explain. It may have just been me, but I read the article as do this, don’t do that, whereas I never say never. White rather shows that it can be done if done well — as you keep saying.
Apart from that, I feel there is too much emphasis these days on the first page, first paragraph, first line. I recall L’Engle’s first line from her award winning “Wrinkle in Time:” “It was a dark and stormy night.” In other hands, in another time it might have elicited certain death. But I never say never.
http://goo.gl/SzpBH