Keys Ways to Begin A Story – First Page Critique: The Young Lieutenant’s Dog

Jordan Dane

National Archives and Records Administration [Public domain]

One of my last First Page Critiques for 2019 and of course it is about a dog. Please enjoy this anonymous submission for your consideration – The Young Lieutenant’s Dog. My feedback will be on the flip side, after my thoughts on book introductions.


The history of humanity is held in the fragile palm of our stories. When they are lost, a part of us leaves with them. Perhaps that is why, even as a young child, I treasured the stories my father told us. Although a born raconteur he was, however, oddly reticent to discuss the most dramatic story of his life: his role in WWII.

With an older brother and sister on the cusp of adolescence and I still engrossed in childhood, we were too young to understand the brutality of war. Thus intrigued and naive, we cajoled him mercilessly to tell us about his life in the army during those years, especially when the tales spoke of life-and-death adventures.

Unlike his other stories, which were invariably charismatic and often humorous, those from the war were meant to serve, like Aesop’s Fables, as a moral lesson for his children to learn. I didn’t grasp this until many years later when it was too late and my father was gone, felled by a heart attack. By then, the stories he’d told were either forgotten or punctured with holes, the remaining threads barely clinging to our fragile childhood memories. But one remains, fixed with absolute clarity as if it had been related just moments ago.

I always assumed that I remembered this one because it was about a dog. But, of course, it was much more than that.

In light of the horrendous events of WWII, many have forgotten that in the early years of the war, the United States stood staunchly isolationist. Our country was still struggling to recover from WWI and a cascading depression. On September 3, 1939, Great Britain declared war on Germany. Our President, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and his staff, watched with mounting concern the steady onslaught of Hitler’s armies and knew that it was not a question of “if” the United States would enter the war, but “when.”


Keys Ways to Begin a Story

There are many techniques to begin a novel – from an intriguing first line that triggers questions in the reader’s mind, to the paragraphs that draw the reader into a mystery or suspenseful action or a compelling story.

A good hook gets to the point quickly to raise a question or shock the reader into reading on. If a story begins in the voice of a narrator, that voice must be intriguing from the start. Successful openings raise unanswered questions or they describe intriguing actions/events or they highlight odd or troubling scenarios of intrigue or suspense.

Here’s a few types of intriguing opening lines:

1.) Teaser Line:

“I was born twice: first, as a baby girl, on a remarkably smogless Detroit day in January of 1960; and then again, as a teenage boy in an emergency room near Petoskey, Michigan, in August of 1974.” Jeffrey Eugenides – Middlesex

2.) Autobiography

“Whether I turn out to be the hero of my own life, or whether that station will be held by anybody else, these pages must show.” Charles Dickens – David Copperfield

3.) Dialogue

“‘Where’s papa going with that ax?’ said Fern to her mother as they were setting the table for breakfast.” E. B. White – Charlotte’s Web

4.) Announcer/Omniscient POV

“The year 1866 was signalized by a remarkable incident, a mysterious and inexplicable phenomenon, which doubtless no one has yet forgotten.” Jules Verne – Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea

5.) Scene Setting

“It was a queer, sultry summer, the summer they electrocuted the Rosenbergs, and I didn’t know what I was doing in New York.” Sylvia Plath – The Bell Jar

The Next Paragraphs – Following a solid first line or a quick and compelling intro, the next paragraphs must draw the reader deeper into the story with more questions. This is where storytelling comes in and patience. Make the reader ask, “Who? What? When? Where? Why?” Think about an interesting, seemingly unimportant detail of a character or setting that can become symbolic to your story’s larger themes. In the case of our story for submission, that detail is brilliantly the dog.

No matter how great the first line is, if the paragraphs that follow don’t draw the reader deeper into the story, that great opening is deflated and reads like a gimmick.

Below is an example of an intriguing opening line from Paula Hawkins – The Girl on the Train, followed by paragraphs that draw a reader into the story as questions are raised by the author.


She’s buried beneath a silver birch tree, down towards the old train tracks, her grave marked with a cairn. Not more than a little pile of stones, really. I didn’t want to draw attention to her resting place, but I couldn’t leave her without remembrance. She’ll sleep peacefully there, no one to disturb her, no sounds but birdsong and the rumble of passing trains.


One for sorrow, two for joy, three for a girl . . . Three for a girl. I’m stuck on three, I just can’t get any further. My head is thick with sounds, my mouth thick with blood. Three for a girl. I can hear the magpies—they’re laughing, mocking me, a raucous cackling. A tiding. Bad tidings. I can see them now, black against the sun. Not the birds, something else. Someone’s coming. Someone is speaking to me. Now look. Look what you made me do.

This introduction leads into a morning where the reader meets the narrator – Rachel. It’s a short intro written with patience that raises lots of questions and paints a mystery in the reader’s mind. There are ominous visuals like a secret grave, the disturbing rumble of passing trains, the muddled mind of the narrator, and the bad tidings of magpies. There’s no real action, but since the intro is short and very much to the point, without diversions into backstory, this opening works well.


My notion of critiquing is to provide feedback that’s in keeping with the essence of the story the author submitted. I don’t want to rewrite lines as much as I want to give a 30,000 ft view of the overall beginning and analyze it for impact.

I liked what the author submitted. It was well-written and unfolded a story I would be curious to read, but I wanted to provide an alternative way to take the essence of this story and reorganize it to tell a tighter narrative. I truly want to know about this man and his dog story. I also like the title. It hints at the mystery of the story. Who doesn’t love a dog in wartime story? There are so many ways to parallel the innocence of a dog with the horrors of war and the potential for the redemption of humanity through the eyes of man’s best friend.

My thoughts, without knowing where this story is going, is to intrigue the reader’s mind with questions about the mystery. I also love stories that start in the present, but delve into the past for answers to a mystery. Hence, the ending that implies a grown child had been intrigued enough to dig into his father’s most memorable story to uncover the truth. That definitely would hook me. Why is the dog story the one this narrator couldn’t forget? How will the mystery unfold? Whose life will be changed by the reveal? What’s the journey of this book? The author has teased us with a wonderful mystery with lots of promise. Kudos.

Tighter Narrative for Mystery Setup

Although a born raconteur, my father was oddly reticent to discuss the most dramatic story of his life: his role in WWII. His tales of life-and-death adventures in the army became an enticing mystery for my brother, sister and I, as curious children. His stories from the war held even more significance after he died of a heart attack years later. After we realized his stories were meant to serve as moral life lessons for his children to learn–like Aesop’s fables–they became a message from the grave that kept him alive in our minds.

One treasured story remained, fixed with absolute clarity as if it had been related moments ago. I never forgot it and always assumed that I remembered this one because it was about a dog. But, of course, it became much more than that–after I uncovered the truth.

As rewritten, this rearranges the original submission to a first line I thought held a particular mystery to pique the attention of any reader. It focused on a story-telling father who played a particular role in WWII that he held back. Why? What role?

I then picked out a tighter narrative with a flow that is more direct and leads quickly to the point of the introduction – to set up the mystery of the dog. I added my own interpretation of the narrator uncovering a truth about the story so the reader gets hooked faster. I also chose to leave out the history lesson in the last paragraph. After the author has the reader focused on a mystery about a dog during wartime, the back story deflates the mystery and slows the pace. That morsel could be saved for later, along with the character development of the surviving children.

As written, this story may leap back into the war to tell the story of a young Lieutenant’s dog. That’s fine too, but if that’s true, why begin with a child’s memory and a son as a narrator? I made an assumption that this story will be woven between the past and the present. I don’t have enough to go on with the first 400 words, but my intention is to show an alternative intro that perhaps is more complicated by weaving in a mystery that straddles the line between past and present.

This story could be like Bridges of Madison County where surviving children uncover a mystery in the life of a deceased parent and the story unravels that truth. That’s my assumption.

The rewrite is similar to the Paula Hawkins excerpt for The Girl on the Train. It’s laser focused on the essence of the story and creates questions in the reader’s mind, before it starts telling the actual story through the eyes of the storyteller.


Please provide your constructive criticism of this compelling submission, TKZers. How do you see this story unfolding?



The Legos Theory of Storytelling as Applied to Turkish Television. Seriously.

Happy 2017! I spent the holidays reading almost nothing, writing a lot, and engaging for better or worse in self-reflection.  I concluded that the best thing I could do for myself and for my work was to go back to basics.

What follows is aimed more at those folks in our audience who are struggling with getting that first novel done. It is easy enough to explain in the context of childhood: rather than struggling to build a motorized crane using an Eitech Erector Set, I need to grab a box of Legos and start building little cars and and people and such, working my way forward by starting with the small and simple and building gradually, but steadily.

I came to this conclusion after watching two television series. You’ve almost certainly heard of one, and probably have never heard of the other. Our own Kathryn Lilley discussed Westworld on this blog a few weeks back. It was beautifully filmed, intricately plotted, startling, and full of surprises. The major rub against it was that it was difficult to understand what was going on from episode to episode. I still have a little callus on my thumb from rewinding it to pick up certain plot nuances that I missed. There were several — maybe a dozen — plot lines that spun off in different directions, some of which were relevant to the story, others which seemed to have been included simply to create a mood. All of them were interesting, but only a few minutes were devoted to each at any one time. Characters? More characters had been introduced by Episode Three than I could keep track of. I found it to be worth working through it — it raises some stunning and yes, frightening issues concerning reality, mortality, and other areas — but the general consensus seems to be that it arguably is a series that more people heard about than actually watched.

The anti-Westworld, if you will, is a series available on Netflix called Kacak (“The Fugitive”). If Westworld  is the result of the Eitech erector set I referenced at the beginning of this post, Kacak comes from the basic box of Legos, and it is wonderful. Kacak is a genre-blurring television series produced in Turkey, throwing together elements of thriller, suspense, romance, drama, and yes, a bit of comedy to create a slow-boil story that sucks you in and doesn’t let you go. It is subtitled, but the story is simple enough, and the acting is good enough, that one could glean the context without it. It begins in a remote Turkish village where a man named Serhat operates a tea shop. He is loved by everyone around him, and one gets the sense of “why” from his interaction with his clientele and another shopkeeper. For his own part, Serhat is devoted to his wife and their young son, who somehow in a few moments becomes the cutest little guy to ever walk the face of the earth. All of this communicated with a few minutes of interaction here and there over the course of a day or so. Just when you think you’ve stumbled into an episode of Lassie, however, Serhat interjects himself quite forcefully into a dangerous situation. He is immediately hailed as a hero throughout his village; when news of Serhat’s heroism spreads to Istanbul, however, a danger from his past — a past of which even his beloved wife knows nothing — quickly intrudes and irrevocably blows up Serhat’s perfect life. Does this sound familiar? Sure. The movie A History of Violence explores a similar theme, as does Charles Dickens’ A Tale of Two Cities. Kacak goes further, however. Serhat vows revenge. As Serhat carries out his plan — and attempts to put what is left of life back together — the audience learns about his past, in dribs and drabs, not in meal courses but in tapas or dim sum, small portions which are easily digestible and brought out over the course of the very long meal, where the surprises keep coming. To put it another way: just when you think you’ve reached the smallest Russian nesting doll, there’s another one within.

Kacak does all of this without a big budget, or, interestingly enough, without nudity, graphic sex, or (much) gratuitous violence. Some of the acting is a bit stilted, and there are momentary but noticeable lapses of continuity, to the extent that on occasion the series is unintentionally funny. That is part of the charm of it, however. It isn’t subtle or nuanced for the most part. What it does, however, and does very well, is tell a story.

I will be the first to acknowledge that I am not much of a teacher. If I have a strength in the area of education it’s the ability to point people to something that will illustrate, quickly, how something is done. If you are having trouble getting your story off of the ground, or that you are getting bogged down under the weight of your own plot, or are having trouble keeping your characters straight, hijack the family Netflix account from your teenager and watch at least the first few episodes of Kacak. I have watched the first ten — Netflix lists fifty — but you can learn a lot just by watching and studying the first three or four. I think, however, that you will want to eventually watch the whole series, which takes that little box of Legos and slowly builds from it, using just a few parts at a time.

My question for you: is there a television series you use to jumpstart your writing, to clear the cobwebs, whatever? My own answer: in addition to Kacak…True Detective: Season One, which I have practically committed to memory (time, indeed, is a flat circle). You?



Six Writing Tips From The Master

By Mark Alpert


If you’re reading this post, you’re probably interested in writing commercial fiction, which can be loosely defined as fiction that has the potential to make some money because it’s entertaining. So you should pay special attention to the works of the foremost master of commercial fiction, a novelist whose exceptional books garnered oodles of cash and millions of rabid fans and an international fame that will probably endure for as long as our species does. No, I’m not talking about James Patterson or J.K. Rowling. I’m referring to Charles Dickens, the veritable Father of Commercial Fiction, the patron saint of all who hope to make a living from this crazy business.

I recently renewed my acquaintance with Dickens after I noticed a paperback copy of Little Dorrit sitting on one of the bookshelves in my living room. I honestly don’t know how it got there. The residents of my apartment building often leave their cast-off books on a table in the building’s lobby, next to the bank of mailboxes, and my wife sometimes picks up one or two of the freebies, so that’s a possibility. The paperback was old and worn, and the cover was dour, all black except for a cameo of a plain-looking woman in nineteenth-century dress. The novel was quite long too, almost 850 pages including the textual notes and appendices. I hadn’t read any Dickens since plowing through Bleak House in the early 1990s, an endeavor that took several months to complete. But I opened Little Dorrit anyway, and now I’m very glad I did.

After three weeks I’m only halfway through the novel, but every night I eagerly look forward to the fifteen or twenty pages I read before bedtime. And as I’ve followed the adventures of Amy Dorrit, Arthur Clennam and all the other characters in this sprawling story, I’ve taken mental notes on the techniques Dickens employed to capture and hold the reader’s attention. Although the book was written more than 150 years ago, it offers some very useful tips to today’s novelists:

  1. Writing an outline can be helpful, but it doesn’t have to be too detailed.

Dickens was an outliner. He had to be. His novels were published serially in British periodicals, some of them monthly, some of them weekly. Most of his books appeared in twenty monthly installments, and when the first installment came out he was usually at least a year away from writing the last chapter. He couldn’t afford to go down blind paths in his narratives, because he didn’t have the luxury of revising earlier chapters. So he made plans and followed them.


Luckily, the outline for Little Dorrit has been preserved at the Victoria and Albert Museum in London (and a couple of handwritten pages appear in an appendix in my paperback; see the photograph above). What’s remarkable about the document is how sketchy it seems. Dickens’s plan is far less meticulous than the massive 60-page outlines written by James Patterson and other 21st-century novelists. For each planned chapter, Dickens scribbled ideas for scenes and characters on the left side of the page (Waiting Room? French Town? Family and two daughters?) and on the right side he marked his decisions about whether to include the proposed elements in the chapter (Yes. No. Slightly. Not Yet). For some chapters he noted the inspiration for a character (the clarionet-player I saw at the Ambigu in Paris) and sometimes he jotted down an inspired metaphor that he planned to insert into the manuscript. (House like a bottle of smell. When the footman opens the door, he seems to take the stopper out.) But there are few detailed blueprints of the plot. In most cases Dickens gave himself only generalized instructions. (People to meet and part as travellers do, and the future connexion between them in the story, not to be now shewn to the reader but to be worked out as in life. Try this uncertainty and this not-putting of them together, as a new means of interest.)

Dickens had some practical reasons for not planning his books in minute detail. Sometimes he changed the course of his novels in response to his readers’ reactions to the installments; if his audience seemed to adore a particular character, for example, Dickens would make sure this character played a large role in future chapters. But this strategy is a wise one for all novelists, even if they’re not publishing their books in monthly magazines. It’s a good idea to keep the outline rather sketchy and leave room for changes and surprises. If a writer is surprised and delighted by a plot twist that unexpectedly occurs to him or her while drafting the manuscript, then the odds are good that the readers of the book will be delighted too.

  1. The key to suspense is not telling your story too soon.

I was struck by how many times Dickens scrawled Not Yet in the outline for Little Dorrit. He knew what he wanted to write and was anxious to write it, but he deliberately held himself back. At the end of one of the chapters, an ancillary character named Mr. Pancks makes a shocking discovery, and Dickens describes the amazement of the other characters when they learn the truth. But Dickens doesn’t reveal the nature of the discovery until later. It’s an old trick but it works. I certainly wasn’t going to put the book down until I learned what Pancks had uncovered.

  1. Provide clues to something terrible that happened in the past, and intimations of something terrible that will happen in the future.

At the beginning of Little Dorrit, Arthur Clennam suspects that someone in his family once committed a horrible crime that he needs to atone for. When he asks his invalid mother if that’s the case, she denies it, but at the same time she raises her arms over her head as if to ward off a blow. So the reader knows for damn sure that Clennam’s suspicions are correct. I still don’t know what the crime is — I haven’t gotten that far in the book yet — but it probably involves Amy Dorrit’s family. Maybe Clennam’s parents somehow caused the downfall of Amy’s father, sending him to the Marshalsea debtors’ prison for twenty-five years. That might explain why Mrs. Clennam hired Amy as a seamstress.

You see how intrigued I am? I just have to know. And I won’t stop reading till I find out.

In the early chapters Dickens also introduces a sinister Frenchman named Rigaud who apparently murdered his wife but somehow evaded the guillotine. Over the course of the novel Rigaud turns up in England under an alias and begins to lurk among the Clennams and Dorrits. The guy is patently evil — he even has a Snidely Whiplash mustache — and yet it’s a delicious thrill to see him biding his time and concocting his plots. The coming catastrophe is so inevitable, it’s like watching a car crash. The reader can’t turn away.

  1. Don’t be afraid to express strong opinions.

Dickens had an agenda. When he was twelve his father was sent to Marshalsea debtors’ prison, and the boy had to live apart from his family and work in a shoe-blacking warehouse. Although Dickens later became very rich from his novels, he never forgot the trauma and injustice he faced when he was poor. He realized how extreme poverty could warp the body and soul. In Little Dorrit, he frequently mentions how the walls of the Marshalsea cast shadows that continue to darken the characters’ lives long after they leave the prison.

But Dickens wasn’t a radical. As any reader of A Tale of Two Cities can attest, he was horrified by the French Revolution. No, Dickens was a moderate, a believer in sensible reforms, and he used all the tools of fiction to expose England’s inequitable society and prod it to do better. My favorite part of Bleak House came right after the wretched death of Jo, the young, homeless street sweeper. At that moment Dickens abruptly abandons his measured narrative voice and directly addresses the reader:

Dead, your Majesty. Dead, my lords and gentlemen. Dead, Right Reverends and Wrong Reverends of every order. Dead, men and women, born with Heavenly compassion in your hearts. And dying thus around us, every day.

This political agenda didn’t reduce the appeal of Dickens’s novels. On the contrary, it gave them power and importance. It elevated them from soap opera, turning trivial family dramas into heart-wrenching universal stories. It’s why we still read Dickens today. He believed that violence and social disruption stemmed from injustice, and that the violence would grow worse until society stopped torturing its weakest and poorest. Isn’t this the same message we’re hearing today after the riots in Ferguson and Baltimore?

  1. Don’t be afraid to portray strong emotions.

Dickens is equally good at describing the more personal, intimate varieties of heartache. In Little Dorrit, the 40-year-old Arthur Clennam resolves most emphatically that he will not fall in love with the 20-year-old Minnie Meagles, better known by her parents’ affectionate nickname for her, Pet. He makes a point of harboring no ill-will toward the caddish young man who woos Pet, the arrogant Henry Gowan. But Clennam doesn’t feel the full impact of his sacrificial resolve until Pet announces that she and Gowan would soon be married:

At that time, it seemed to him, he first finally resigned the dying hope that had flickered in nobody’s heart so much to its pain and trouble; and from that time he became in his own eyes, as to any similar hope or prospect, a very much older man who had done with that part of life.

  1. Memorable descriptions can make your characters come alive.

The plots of Dickens’s novels are famously convoluted and sometime creak under the weight of so many events. I spent all that time reading Bleak House, and twenty years later here’s the only thing I can recall of the plot: It’s about a lawsuit. But I’ll always remember Dickens’s characters. He had a knack for using memorable phrases and metaphors to fix a character in your mind, nailing it down as firmly as a butterfly on a pin.

Take the minor character of Mr. Pancks, for example. He’s a rich man’s rent collector, and Dickens illustrates Pancks’s nonstop subservience by comparing him to a tugboat that’s always pushing his master’s ship from harbor to harbor. Better yet, Pancks is constantly snorting like a tugboat’s steam engine. It’s a funny description, but it also makes him come alive. I can picture the guy. I can hear him snorting away as he badgers the poor tenants of Bleeding Heart Yard. He’s a real jerk.

Another great example is Tattycoram, the foundling who’s adopted by Mr. and Mrs. Meagles to serve as their beloved daughter’s maidservant (and as a substitute for Pet’s twin sister, who died in infancy). Although the Meagles are practical people who believe they did a very charitable thing when they adopted Tattycoram, the girl ultimately grows resentful of their charity and condescension (not to mention the ridiculous name they gave her, which seems like an insult in itself). Mr. Meagles tries to control her eruptions of anger by repeatedly urging her to “count to five-and-twenty,” but that just make her even more furious. Her character is encapsulated in her cry of frustration and despair: “But I am ill-used, I am ill-used, I am ill-used!” (I like this sentence so much that I’ve adopted it as my new mantra. I mutter it under my breath when I have to wait in line at the supermarket or the drugstore.)

But enough with the literary criticism. I’m looking forward to reading another twenty pages of Little Dorrit tonight.


I can’t resist sharing the news that my soon-to-be-published Young Adult novel, The Six, just got a starred review from Booklist. You can read the review here.