Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion

I really dislike opening a sci-fi book to find myself smack in the middle of a gory, action-packed battle scene. It usually takes me about three chapters of confused reading before I can figure out what 'side' I'm on and who to 'pull' for, as far as characters. In books that begin this way, where I'm the newcomer to the scene, and my 'witnessing', perhaps thousands of people dying, and my having no frame of reference as to who they are, confuses me and I find that I have no compassion for them, as they mean nothing to me at this point.
In our book, Space Freighter First Dock: Neo-Eden, we make sure the reader gets to know some of the main characters, some of their background history, etc. before the the action takes place. If one remembers how, "2001: A Space Odyssey" begins, there is a prolonged introduction, placing the readers in a specific setting of time and space, whereby, "we" get to know the characters and begin to care about them. While we do not claim to be as talented as Stanley Kubrick, we much prefer his way of beginning his stories, and try to emulate that particular technique in our books.
I, Cappy, when I write, just let my thoughts flow and let the punctuation, spelling, and even syntax be damned, else the thing would never get writ. I leave that up to my wife, "Pegody", who also has 'clay feet' when it comes to writing, and admits that she makes mistakes. Please forgive us, as we are relatively new to the 'writing game', and it I, Cappy, who has been forging ahead, faults aplenty, to try to get our book 'out there'. I do see your point, Emma, and we will take it to heart. Thanks for your input.
So far though, our book has 7 reviews: six- 5 stars and one-1 star (on Amazon). Six of these reviewers said that they enjoyed the story and character development, while the person who gave us only one star complained that it took too long for the carnage and body parts to begin flying. To me that means we are on the right track. What do yall think?
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B013...

Opening in media res is generally a recommended tactic, though.

You can generally reveal who to root for by correct use of POV.

Sorry to say, but the many typos in your post would make me think twice about reading your book. I'm certainly not perfect, but I try to remember that every post I make is an advertising opportunity.

All typos now fixed.

And yes, like you I'm all about the characters, their emotions etc rather than strictly action/endless world building. 'Hard' science fiction writers might disagree, but we're all different.
Scifi is a huge genre, and personally I prefer books that explore different social situations, different ways of living/thinking, rather than endless epic space battles to save the universe and detailed descriptions of propulsion systems, weapons and space ships.

Emma wrote: "Sorry to say, but the many typos in your post would make me think twice about reading your book. I'm certainly not perfect, but I try to remember that every post I make is an advertising opportunity."

Yes, as Emma said, there are typos. It's "dying" not "dieing."

I do agree with you, Cappy, as a reader,. The last sci-fi I read was utterly confusing due to the lack of character introduction. Suddenly, you're in the story and you don't know who's who. I will let the author remain nameless, but you may be able to tell by my latest sci-fi review. I don't read much sci-fi anymore. I stick mostly to fantasy, though right now I'm reading a time travel book. It is relatively good, with good character development.

Thanks Lenita, and yes, no matter how hard I try, I still make mistakes.
In our first book, Space Freighter First Dock: Neo-Eden, we tried to bring the characters and settings to life. We want the reader to know the characters well enough to laugh with them and get excited when there is danger and mourn with them as well. I love a story that takes me somewhere to a land far, far away; places and people that I miss when the story ends.

I've had a look at your book and there does seem to be an extraordinary amount of up front information. A lot of 'tell' not 'show.' I think that's what the 1 star reviewer is on about.

You can have a huge battle and develop characters and plot all at the same time. They are not mutually exclusive processes.

The best battles is when the characters' faults might lead them to lose, and the reader knows that...

I checked out your book. There are no reviews from Goodreads readers and I always take those comments more seriously than Amazon. I did read the Amazon reviews, but I wouldn't have read the book based on those reviews - too good to be true.

I agree with V.W. and Chrys - I read both the 1 star review and your comments here and it seems obvious that you underestimated your readers. Providing every minute detail leaves little for the reader's imagination.

I was in a training course today and we had to spot all the 'f's in a sentence. I was one of many who did not see the 'f's in 'of'. The brain just skips over them, filling in the sentence anyway. In a similar way, I think we underestimate readers. They can work out many things for themselves, and I think (as a reader myself) I find that more interesting. I particularly like it when, as a reader, I can spot the character's flaws before they become aware.

Chrys wrote: "I was in a training course today and we had to spot all the 'f's in a sentence. I was one of many who did not see the 'f's in 'of'. The brain just skips over them, filling in the sentence anyway. I..."

Happened to me, too, in my book. Luckily, I hired an editor who took care of that. Only when going over his changes did I realize how I sometimes wrote down unnecessary details. :)

With YA being a big thing nowadays, I think it largely depends on the age of the reader whether they're going to enjoy a fast, battle-opening or a slow building story. I guess, similar to movies, young readers prefer less description and want to jump right into the action. (E.g. movies nowadays are cut too fast for my grandmother to follow)
But, as others have pointed out, I don't think it's mutually exclusive. Personally, I like a good balance. I don't mind elaborate description and building characters, but don't make me wait for the inciting incident forever. :)

I'm not certain it's only the age. Audiences are educated on what to expect from a story (whether written or visual) and in the Western world this is becoming more and more fast paced. For example, I'm a 'Doctor Who' fan, and I find it fascinating how a TV series more than 50 years old tells its stories so differently now than back in 1963.

Chrys wrote: "I'm not certain it's only the age. Audiences are educated on what to expect from a story (whether written or visual) and in the Western world this is becoming more and more fast paced. For example,..."

Right, I probably should've said "kids nowadays", because they're "trained" for short attention spans with all the media going on, compared to, like you said, 50 years ago. :)
And I have to admit that it's affecting me, too. The other day I picked up a book which I read when I was maybe 13-14 years old. I don't remember what happened in the book, but I couldn't bring myself to read past the first ~40 pages. It was just too slow. :)

I think it affects all of us. That's why, as much as we might moan about it, we have to bear that in mind when we write. I do hate, of course, the 'cheat' that some authors try to do, by pulling an action scene forward to the start of the book, and then in the next chapter take it back and try to build up more slowly.

I don't care -- I will start with setting the scene and introducing the characters and then build up my action gradually, as the timeless masters of not so long ago (such as Asimov, Bradbury and even Tom Clancy) had done, and if the reader is too stupid to appreciate it, I'll find other readers who will!

James Bond films have always started with an action scene unrelated to the actual plot, although they normally use it to establish how skilled and ruthless 007 is.

In one of my SF Erotica novels the opening scene was both filled with action/violence and served to establish the main character's primary motivations that ran through the novel.

People under pressure often reveal more of themselves than they would in everyday life, so a battle scene can actually be used to show facets of characters that would be hard to reveal while they were having lunch.

An action scene should only be in a novel when it is relevant to the plot and / or character development in some way. And it should appear in the novel where it needs to for the story.
Young readers or any readers should never be generalised as liking 'this' or 'that'. Just write well, invest in your plot and your characters and credit your reader's intelligence. Action, exposition and the big Bond / Indiana Jones / Saving Private Ryan openings will justify and take care of themselves.

Actually I think opening with a battle scene can be very effective when conveying the reasons for it if written correctly. If, for instance, the commander or troops of one side talk of crimes the other side has committed or they simply don't like their culture it begins a frame of reference. Then, later on, you can throw a twist into it and find yourself rooting for the other side, or perhaps hating both sides.

I think that cheating doesn't come into it, you should tell the story that you intend to. If this involves cartwheeling and exploding donkeys in the opening scene then crack on. Stories should be individual and therefore not conform to cliches or expectations.
As for character development I believe that less is more, I cannot stand not being trusted by the author and having to be constantly reminded that the protagonist had a 'tough' childhood.

P.S. feel free to nick the exploding donkeys idea

You could probably start a novel in any way you wanted if it's done right. You can start with an action scene, just as long as it's not simply action for action's sake. If a book starts with a fight/ battle scene and doesn't quickly provide some kind of context or indication of intent then it's probably just being used as a gimmick and should rightly be avoided. Likewise, if you're deliberately avoiding action until all the appropriate characters have been introduced and the world has been established then you run the risk of boring readers with protracted info dumps.

But you can still establish characters and get a lot of world building done through action scenes. Hell, you can probably accomplish these things with literally any kind of scene. Every piece of action, dialogue, of description should be, if not advancing the plot, then at least adding to the atmosphere or the reader's understanding of the characters or the world they inhabit.

Just as long as you maintain balance in your writing i.e. balance world-building with plot advancement and character development, balance action scenes with quieter scenes, balance dialogue with action and description. I think if you focus on getting those elements right, the question of whether to start with action or not becomes kind of redundant.