Revision/Editing & Story Question

[Keri]

I absolutely loved my opening chapter of my novel, yet found as I was moving through writing subsequent chapters that my main POV character from the prelude or opening chapter is not scheduled to make an appearance again in the near future, possibly not even in the lifetime of this novel. So I’m questioning starting out with a character that is very distinctive and not bringing her back.
I started thinking that was too misleading to a reader and so I’ve currently rearranged chapters and added some things to omit it entirely though it can be alluded to as a back story if need be.
Has anyone ever done this just discarded a whole section of their novel that though appealing leaves too many unanswered questions? I really only have two choices as I see it keep that original opening and let her stick around early on and then have her out in a manner that lets the reader know she won’t be around for awhile, or I continue with the rearrangement.

Which brings up another question about story question. I’m of the opinion that you allude to what is at stake and gradually bring up a readers awareness of what is going on as your character realizes it or maybe slightly before. A good friend of mine here likes it much more concrete thinks it should be very clear at the earliest part of the story to get the reader engaged.

 

[Erin99]

Well, as regards the story question: I always try to bring it in ASAP, otherwise the novel may lack focus and direction. If you know where you're going right from the beginning, everything past that should be relevant and interesting (in theory!). I find it helps me immensely.

As to unanswered questions, I think some are good; it will leave the book open for novel number 2! But yes, I've taken out whole chapters that I love personally, because I realise they're not needed in this particular novel, or I know they don't hook/add anything to the plot at this point in time.

A note to think about: If this great character doesn't make another appearance in this novel, maybe you could save her for the next? That's what I've done with some of my likable characters; I didn't want to bog the reader down with any plotlines that weren't relevant to the major crisis/secondary plots, so I've left them out. In the next book I'll have a whole new blank page to begin their adventure, and thus those characters will have room to grow and expand, since they're not been sidelined and forced into an already-full book.

 

[Leo Medici]

Why would you have a prologue that has nothing to do with the book anyway?

 

[Keri]

What gave you the idea it had nothing to do with rest of book. It has everything to do with rest of book except the Main POV character in it whom I love gets in a big fight scene and is subsequently captured and we really won't see her again for quite awhile.
Other then that Its great for a prologue, it introduces the story and what is at stake. I like the suspense and entertainment of it and others seemed to have liked it as well. Just I'm questioning if it wouldnt be better to bring her into maybe a sequel where there is more action for her. As it stands she wouldn't be free until the ultimate climax.

So either I have to get more complex and integrate into the plot some scenes with her as a captive, that fully contribute to the plot or I omit it and go with a different opening that focuses more on the main characters.

 

[Culhwch]

...I have to get more complex and integrate into the plot some scenes with her as a captive, that fully contribute to the plot...

That's the solution I was gonna suggest before I read your second post, funnily enough. If it is indeed relevant, I can't see a problem leaving it in. I've certainly read prologues that didn't make sense till the end, if at all. But I would suggest tryin to insert elements into the plot that refer to it - either, as you say, scenes depicting her imprisonment, or else mentions of her captivity by other characters...

 

[Susan Boulton]

I would say go in the end with what you feel is right, ask advice, yes, but in the end it is your story. All ways remember that.

 

[Glitch]

I've read a story which is narrated by a character that dies at the beginning, perhaps not the same as the your idea but the character didn't reappear in the rest of the story it was told from their point of view.

 

[Laura Stamps]

So either I have to get more complex and integrate into the plot some scenes with her as a captive, that fully contribute to the plot or I omit it and go with a different opening that focuses more on the main characters.

Or you could keep the opening chapter that you love with this character and then throughout the novel you could have the other characters mention her name and something they are thinking about her or something they remember about her or something she said to them in the past. That way you could weave the thought of her throughout the novel without actually having to write captivity scenes with her in them.

What do you think? Would that work?

As for the first part of your post, oh yes, I have chopped up parts of novels I loved but they didn't fit and added them to a future novel so many times I have lost count. No kidding! If I write something I like (anything) that doesn't work in the original novel I will find a way to use it in a future novel. No way will I ever let good stufff go to waste!

 

[The Pelagic Argosy]

What gave you the idea it had nothing to do with rest of book. It has everything to do with rest of book except the Main POV character in it whom I love gets in a big fight scene and is subsequently captured and we really won't see her again for quite awhile.
Other then that Its great for a prologue, it introduces the story and what is at stake. I like the suspense and entertainment of it and others seemed to have liked it as well. Just I'm questioning if it wouldnt be better to bring her into maybe a sequel where there is more action for her. As it stands she wouldn't be free until the ultimate climax.

I wouldn't know what's best for your particular story without knowing a lot more about it. (For example, first I'd have to see if I agree that the character in question is as distinctive and memorable as you say.)

But, if what you have described in this quote is true, it sounds like you have an ideal prologue. I don't think it is necessarily a problem that this character doesn't make another appearance for a long time or not at all. Readers will trust you that the scene and character have significance that will eventually pay off. Just make sure that you do explain it, one way or another, before the book ends.

I would advise, unless you had always envisioned this book as one of a series, do whatever is best for this particular story and not bring any hypothetical sequels or prequels into the equation at this point.
You can still use this character again, in a sequel or in her own stand-alone adventure, regardless of how much face time she has in this book. So don't worry about that.

***

Regarding your second question about how soon to introduce the conflict...
The problem with introducing the conflict too soon is that the reader doesn't have any reason to care until he is invested in the characters or enchanted by the world. Especially in a longer work, I think you can take a little time to settle in before the fur starts flying.

I prefer "mini-conflicts" at the early stages, that tend to be more personal. For example, before we find out that the hero has to set out on a quest to save the world, maybe we learn he has unresolved issues with his father. The early chapters are also a good time to introduce the romantic sub-plot.

I'll tell you what I personally can't stand: being thrown into the middle of a battle on page 1. Battle scenes are, by their nature, disorienting. This is especially true if I don't know who's fighting or what they're fighting about.

 

[Leo Medici]

Also, if the prologue opens the story as well as you claim, then I would say: Use it. It doesn't matter if the POV ever shows up again if it works. It would be like showing the story from someone else's perspective right away before you got into your main POVs.

 

[JonCG]

Also, if the prologue opens the story as well as you claim, then I would say: Use it. It doesn't matter if the POV ever shows up again if it works. It would be like showing the story from someone else's perspective right away before you got into your main POVs.

Agree, prologues are set ups. They can be fifty years before the main narrative, on another world, in another dimension... All they're doing is giving the reader an insight into the world and, maybe, setting up the story arc. If you've got someone captured and that person needs rescuing or to escape then opening with their capture is almost classic!

 

[Spectrum]

I would say keep it. A prologue that is removed from the main storyline is a good thing, especially if it has cool characters in it.

Look at Eragon (by Christopher Paolini). The prologue, featuring the villain Durza, is the best part of the entire book IMO. And look at the Eye of the World (first book of the Wheel of Time, Robert Jordan), which opens with a kickass prologue set three thousand years before the rest of the story.

 

[Interference]

I've run into a similar problem. I now have three prologues waiting for me to start they book to which they are relevant. The book I originally wrote one of them for now starts very differently, but, I think, equally intriguingly.

Nothing you write is ever wasted (even your rubbish has been important practice), and often you can defer entire chapters until a different book comes along that truly suits it - or short story (?)

So I recommend keeping it for the sequel where this character has a bigger role. It gives you something exciting to look forward to as a writer and it means you can be happy you've already got a strong opener for book 2.

Just one opinion, of course ...

Oh, and check out the other posts about avoiding the slush pile. I have a feeling that what you describe might just be one of the more egregious forms of 'head-hopping'.

And,

I've read a story which is narrated by a character that dies at the beginning, perhaps not the same as the your idea but the character didn't reappear in the rest of the story it was told from their point of view.

... was the story any good? Did the technique start a trend?

I think, in general, I tend to try and avoid anything that might be deemed controversial and will continue to do so until I get published. Then I'll experiment far more, but under informed guidance.

Good luck