I've been thinking a lot about what we as writers owe the reader. On the one hand, it's our story and we have the right to create it however we want. But on the other hand, is it fair for a reader to invest so much time and emotion into a story just to have their expectations go unmet?
As a writer, I am determined to keep my creative freedom. As a reader, it ticks me off to no end when I invest myself in a book and the writer doesn't make good on their promises. I certainly understand that they can write the story however they want, but when my trust is broken I am far less motivated to read more of their work.
So what do we as writers owe the reader? Well, I think it depends. Genre plays a big role. They are there for a reason. People pick up a cozy mystery expecting a certain thing. They pick up a thriller expecting something else. You can push the limits of your genre, but you do have to respect what readers expect going into your novel as well.
Besides genre, what we owe the reader largely depends on each individual novel. I read recently that the first chapter in your book is like a promise to your reader. I think that's very true. It sets up the expectations of tone, conflict, and motivation. Ultimately, it tells the reader what the MC has to do to succeed. And of course we want the MC to succeed.
Even if it takes a long time, even if your MC must go through hell and back, even if they have to lose everything, even if the MC DIES, a reader can accept that if the MC ultimately succeeds at that initial goal in some way. If not, you will probably have some unhappy readers.
I believe this goes for all stories, and it's important to acknowledge the importance of that reader/writer relationship. Breaking reader trust is a serious risk, and if you plan on doing it you better know what you're getting yourself into.
The first chapter of a novel gets a lot of attention from agent advice blogs talking about how that is when they know whether to keep reading the book or not. I like your take on it - very true, and very refreshing! If there is no question or challenge to the character in the first chapter - if the reader can't see where the story is going - then it's starting in the wrong place.
ReplyDeleteThis is a beautiful post. I think you're very right about how the writer and the reader interact through the medium of the story.
ReplyDeleteI would also think that it kind of goes without saying, that if the writer doesn't meet the expectations of the reader, or the promises the writer implied at the beginning of the work, then something has failed within the story. Just my opinion, but if my expectations, as a reader, are not met then I usually feel there's something wrong with the story, and the writer should have taken the time to go back and correct the problems with it before publication.
Sorry if I rambled.
Great post! Thinking that way actually makes it easier to write, doesn't it?
ReplyDeleteI wonder if this "1st chapter = promise to the reader" idea is part of why some people hate prologues... Prologues are often a bit different in tone, and sometimes don't focus on the protagonist.
ReplyDelete(Personally I don't mind prologues at all, but you got me thinking.)
Great post. It's a lot for a first chapter to deliver. I'm struggling with mine right now. But it's so true.
ReplyDeleteI like the way you describe this, and it makes a lot of sense as I consider books I wasn't happy with. So, no pressure with that first chapter, right? ;)
ReplyDeleteHmm. This is a really interesting concept. As a reader I cannot recall ever feeling betrayed or getting upset because I thought an author had broken a promise, but as I writer it certainly is something I worry about.
ReplyDeleteAre you talking about Mockingjay? Because that's exactly how I felt about it. (If not, I'm sorry! I know it was on your reading list!)
ReplyDeleteI need to reread it and see if I feel as crushed the second time around.
Becky, I am talking in general, though depending on how you look at it I suppose Mockingjay can fall into that category.
ReplyDeleteBut tomorrow I will be talking about what you need to do if you do decide to break promises. Because it can be done, but you have to replace it with something else.
This may be true for commercial fiction but there are a great many books that are exciting because they are eclectic and free. They make and break promises as a matter of course.
ReplyDeleteTake, for example, Ulysses or Infinite Jest or Gravity's Rainbow. These books are language as art and any expectation you carry into them is bound to be demolished. Does that make them bad stories?
Tobias, I was referring mostly to genre fiction. And I never said that breaking a promise makes a story bad—I only said it would make readers unhappy.
ReplyDeleteNow, if your goal is to bring up those feelings, then of course you'll be breaking promises.
Natalie, that is such a great way to look at chapter one. I've never thought about it as you describe. You are soooo right! I always want the MC in a book to either meet the goal or get out of the conflict that is set up in the all-important chapter one.
ReplyDeleteOK, you've got me going. Time to re-read my re-written CHAPTER ONE to see if it makes a promise that is kept later on in the book.
The first chapter is definitely important. I've read first chapters that introduce conflicts that seem really interesting, but then all the action related to those conflicts are only glossed over later in the story. It's as if the writer was in a hurry to get to the ending, and pushed all of the action offstage, so to speak. So I think that any conflicts or issues that come up in the first chaper should be fully explored throughout the novel; otherwise, why bring them up?
ReplyDeleteNice post. It's such a fine line between surprising the reader and breaking his or her trust.
ReplyDelete