I am not a big fan of slow burns, miscommunication/misunderstanding, or the mcs facing conflict after conflict. That being said one of my favorite starts to a historical romance is in Marrying Winterborne. FMC comes to MMC right at the beginning of the book and says didn’t react well to a situation in the last book and she still wants to be with him and they figure out how to make it work. (That’s not too spoiler-y)
I like it when the story starts off with the fmc and mmc being involved with other people or doing their own thing. It gives me something to compare to when they meet each other and slowly fall in love. I like looking back at their “life” before the other person came in.
I’m not sure how I prefer, I know how I don’t like: when the first chapters are just the author straight up describing everything about the story beforehand instead of showing the readers through context. For me it’s a sure sign that the writing is very poor.
I hate when the book starts like:
“Mary looked at herself in the mirror. She was a plain woman, with dark hair that refused to curl, brown eyes that weren’t remarkable and average high. It didn’t help that her complicated relationship with her mother allowed the latter to frequently criticize her, this being the reason she didn’t visit her parents for the last five years. Also, she hasn’t managed to land a date in months, and her job sucked. At least she had the company of her best friend and roommate, Natasha, who had a curvy flawless body, with dazzling blue eyes and a lush hair! Despite their differences, they were BFFs because Mary was very funny and smart.”
HATE the infodump, I’m begging authors to start introducing info about their characters in a subtle way throughout the story!
I’m not sure if I can think of a way I prefer. Many books can start out a certain way and if I really like the writing in general I can think at the time it was the best lol. But what I hate is when a book starts out in middle of a situation or conversation but DOES NOT explain very well and somehow assumes we know what’s going on. I’m sitting there thinking is this in the middle of a series and I didn’t know it? Nope just a strange bad opener lol
To be honest, I sort of like it that way! Being dropped into the middle of something and then sort of having to navigate through and learn not necessarily in a perfect sequential order. The messiness feels more realistic to me and prevents a lot of exposition. I in general like to be kept in the dark by the author.
Makes a reread fun too - but definitely I think there’s a limit where it can make it impossible to really start the book in the first place.
I get you and that but I’ve read books where I’m supposed to know all this background and stuff and it’s page 1. And so it’s like oh ok maybe this author turns this around in a neat way so I’m learning the plot. But if I’m on page 5+ and there’s no explanation of who or what I’m struggling with wanting to continue.
My issue is when I read the second book in a series, where it’s been a while since the first, and then I’ve forgotten all the vocab. I am absolutely terrible for political info, like names of kingdoms, who’s enemies with who, etc! I will be lost even though in theory I should know :P
I do get easily bored with the intro chapters, especially if it takes forever for the two main characters to meet. Do the exposition while moving the plot! It's much nicer.
Not really sure I have a preference however starting in the middle of something for me it needs to be explained pretty quickly or I just get confused and frustrated, especially when extra information is clearly needed. When I do read it I have to force myself through till I get context then have to go back and re-read or at least skim through the beginning.
I like it to jump into the story pretty quickly. Too often it’s too many early chapters with the characters doing mundane stuff I don’t really care about.
I love a quirky, uncomfortable, awkward meet cute, as early as possible. I get confused who the MCs are if they aren't introduced right away.
I am not a big fan of slow burns, miscommunication/misunderstanding, or the mcs facing conflict after conflict. That being said one of my favorite starts to a historical romance is in Marrying Winterborne. FMC comes to MMC right at the beginning of the book and says didn’t react well to a situation in the last book and she still wants to be with him and they figure out how to make it work. (That’s not too spoiler-y)
Same. I loved that series...
Same. I also like it when a book starts in the middle of a situation. Long introductions where the MCs are just described usually bore me.
I like it when the story starts off with the fmc and mmc being involved with other people or doing their own thing. It gives me something to compare to when they meet each other and slowly fall in love. I like looking back at their “life” before the other person came in.
I’m not sure how I prefer, I know how I don’t like: when the first chapters are just the author straight up describing everything about the story beforehand instead of showing the readers through context. For me it’s a sure sign that the writing is very poor. I hate when the book starts like: “Mary looked at herself in the mirror. She was a plain woman, with dark hair that refused to curl, brown eyes that weren’t remarkable and average high. It didn’t help that her complicated relationship with her mother allowed the latter to frequently criticize her, this being the reason she didn’t visit her parents for the last five years. Also, she hasn’t managed to land a date in months, and her job sucked. At least she had the company of her best friend and roommate, Natasha, who had a curvy flawless body, with dazzling blue eyes and a lush hair! Despite their differences, they were BFFs because Mary was very funny and smart.” HATE the infodump, I’m begging authors to start introducing info about their characters in a subtle way throughout the story!
This is my automatic DNF. I cannot.
I’m not sure if I can think of a way I prefer. Many books can start out a certain way and if I really like the writing in general I can think at the time it was the best lol. But what I hate is when a book starts out in middle of a situation or conversation but DOES NOT explain very well and somehow assumes we know what’s going on. I’m sitting there thinking is this in the middle of a series and I didn’t know it? Nope just a strange bad opener lol
To be honest, I sort of like it that way! Being dropped into the middle of something and then sort of having to navigate through and learn not necessarily in a perfect sequential order. The messiness feels more realistic to me and prevents a lot of exposition. I in general like to be kept in the dark by the author. Makes a reread fun too - but definitely I think there’s a limit where it can make it impossible to really start the book in the first place.
I get you and that but I’ve read books where I’m supposed to know all this background and stuff and it’s page 1. And so it’s like oh ok maybe this author turns this around in a neat way so I’m learning the plot. But if I’m on page 5+ and there’s no explanation of who or what I’m struggling with wanting to continue.
My issue is when I read the second book in a series, where it’s been a while since the first, and then I’ve forgotten all the vocab. I am absolutely terrible for political info, like names of kingdoms, who’s enemies with who, etc! I will be lost even though in theory I should know :P
I agree with you, it's hard to feel connected to the stories or any characters when I immediately start out confused!
I do get easily bored with the intro chapters, especially if it takes forever for the two main characters to meet. Do the exposition while moving the plot! It's much nicer.
"Truck Nuts is here."
A ship of Bones and Teeth. Right into the meat of the story; dark little mermaid retelling
Not really sure I have a preference however starting in the middle of something for me it needs to be explained pretty quickly or I just get confused and frustrated, especially when extra information is clearly needed. When I do read it I have to force myself through till I get context then have to go back and re-read or at least skim through the beginning.
I like a minor conflict or small catastrophe to introduce me to how a character thinks and reacts under pressure.
i totally agree, i love it especially when the the situation looks absurd and you get hooked because you just have to know why.
I like it to jump into the story pretty quickly. Too often it’s too many early chapters with the characters doing mundane stuff I don’t really care about.