# Too Early for Inciting Incident?



## MatthewCEarls (Mar 22, 2012)

How early is too early for the inciting incident of a novel? I'm currently outlining my YA Fantasy Novel and really need some good advice on inciting incidents. I've heard everything from 10% of the way in to 25% of the way into your novel. 

Luckily, I teach 7th graders and am able to poll them often to see when they want the event. The majority (and we're talking vast majority here) say that they wanted major action to occur within the first chapter if not the first few pages. I understand that this doesn't have to be the inciting incident, but why not this early? 

Any opinions on this or is it another one of those "what fits best with your story" type of answers?

Thanks in advance!


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (Mar 22, 2012)

In my opinion, there's no such thing. I've read novels (good ones) where the inciting incident has already occurred when the story begins, and we hear about it in flashbacks/memory.

Typically, if your inciting incident hasn't happened within the first couple of chapters, though, then you'd better be a _damn_ good prose stylist to keep the reader's attention.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Mar 22, 2012)

Yea my most favorable reviews from my peers have come when the action is going on NOW.


----------



## Devor (Mar 22, 2012)

MatthewCEarls said:


> How early is too early for the inciting incident of a novel? I'm currently outlining my YA Fantasy Novel and really need some good advice on inciting incidents. I've heard everything from 10% of the way in to 25% of the way into your novel.



Too early, for me as a reader, is about the first hundred words.  "Inciting Incident" can mean so many different things, and be employed in so many different ways, that it's impossible to set a rule.  But unless you're very good, at least give me a few paragraphs before I'm expected to have the slightest investment in the plot.


----------



## MatthewCEarls (Mar 23, 2012)

Thanks guys and gals. You just made my job much easier!


----------



## Queshire (Mar 23, 2012)

The faster the action happens the more exciting it is and more likely the reader is to keep reading. It doesn't have to be the inciting incident, but you should have something to hook the readers right away. Or at least that's my opinion.


----------



## Rikilamaro (Mar 23, 2012)

I agree with what everyone else said, but I would add... whatever works with your characters. 

Adding an action scene simply for the sake of an action scene is pandering to the audience and that can be seen as, well, pandering.


----------



## Helen (Mar 24, 2012)

MatthewCEarls said:


> How early is too early for the inciting incident of a novel? I'm currently outlining my YA Fantasy Novel and really need some good advice on inciting incidents. I've heard everything from 10% of the way in to 25% of the way into your novel.
> 
> Luckily, I teach 7th graders and am able to poll them often to see when they want the event. The majority (and we're talking vast majority here) say that they wanted major action to occur within the first chapter if not the first few pages. I understand that this doesn't have to be the inciting incident, but why not this early?
> 
> ...



In terms of story structure, an inciting incident performs a specific function at the very beginning of the story.

If you include an Inciting Incident, it is the first thing that happens.

If you include that very same scene later in the story, it isn't an inciting incident, it's something else.

Think of it as a driver. The very first driver is called an inciting incident (if it meets certain criteria). Later drivers have different names, because you're further along the cycle and navigating between different buoys.


----------



## Devor (Mar 24, 2012)

Queshire said:


> The faster the action happens the more exciting it is and more likely the reader is to keep reading. It doesn't have to be the inciting incident, but you should have something to hook the readers right away. Or at least that's my opinion.



I don't really think that's true. Too much action right away can create a false expectation about the pace of your story. More importantly, readers won't yet care about your characters enough to be invested in what happens.  But then, it also depends on what you mean by action. A wizard rapping on the door of a hobbit hole is action, and an inciting incident, even if it's not a sword fight.


----------



## MatthewCEarls (Mar 24, 2012)

Can I just add that I love the level of respect that everyone has for each other on this forum. It isn't like that everywhere else. Good opinions all around. I greatly respect my writing elders!


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (Mar 24, 2012)

Helen said:


> In terms of story structure, an inciting incident performs a specific function at the very beginning of the story.
> 
> If you include an Inciting Incident, it is the first thing that happens.
> 
> If you include that very same scene later in the story, it isn't an inciting incident, it's something else.



I don't think this is the case; every discussion I've seen of inciting incidents indicate that it's the event that sets the main storyline in motion, but it doesn't have to be the first thing that happens. Most stories have exposition and introduction before the inciting incident. It doesn't stop being an inciting incident just because it isn't the very first thing. (Unless you just mean the first _important_ thing that happens?)

Not that there's any kind of authoritative answer to this topic, but here's a few articles discussing inciting incidents, and all of them explicitly mention that other things (exposition, introduction) can happen before the inciting incident.


----------



## Steerpike (Mar 25, 2012)

Benjamin Clayborne said:


> In my opinion, there's no such thing. I've read novels (good ones) where the inciting incident has already occurred when the story begins, and we hear about it in flashbacks/memory.
> 
> Typically, if your inciting incident hasn't happened within the first couple of chapters, though, then you'd better be a _damn_ good prose stylist to keep the reader's attention.



I agree with this. There is no such thing as 'too early.' You don't have to start with it in the first sentence, but you certainly CAN.


----------



## shangrila (Mar 25, 2012)

The inciting incident is just whatever sets the story in motion. It's what breaks the main character from their "prison" or whatever life they're locked in to. You can't really ever be too early with it.


----------



## Penpilot (Mar 26, 2012)

How fast you get to the inciting incident depends on the story. To spout a cliche, "In late, out early." You want to start the story as close to the inciting incident as possible. Generally speaking, you'll need a little time devoted to setting up the parts of a characters life that matter to the story before it gets thrown out of whack by the inciting incident. BUT if that pre-inciting incident life really doesn't matter all that much, you could probably start right at the inciting incident or really close to it. The only rule of thumb I've come across is the inciting incident has to be within the first 30% of the book.


----------



## MatthewCEarls (Mar 26, 2012)

So, if the inciting incident happened even before we met the main characters, would that be the end of the world or would I be able to pull it off. I just really despise stories that start off slow, but at the same time, don't want to risk not having the reader emotionally involved with the characters. 

It may be somewhat cliche, but my two main characters' parents are killed while the main characters are away. I was simply going to begin the novel with the murder of the parents while the kids are away.


----------



## Penpilot (Mar 27, 2012)

Oh... in this case, the inciting incident isn't the murder of the parents. The inciting incident is the kids finding out their parents have died/have been murdered.


----------



## MatthewCEarls (Mar 27, 2012)

Penpilot - You are correct. See. This is why I love this board. Lot's of quality advice no matter the question and respectful correcting of inaccuracies. 

Thanks again everybody! I feel much more comfortable now starting my novel where I was initially going to start it.


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (Mar 27, 2012)

One other thing to keep in mind from a structural perspective is that the _main plot's_ inciting incident does not have to be the _only_ inciting incident.

Imagine, if you will, a story whose main inciting incident is the murder of the protagonist's parents by evil werewolves, which happens in chapter 3. In the first two chapters, however, we get scenes of a relatively ordinary life--a teenager living in suburbia, dealing with the ordinary trials of adolescence. The very first scene could even be that teenager being confronted by bullies who try to beat him up and steal his lunch money--he escapes by the skin of his teeth. This is not the main plot; it's just a way to introduce us to the character, make us care about him by putting him in (minor) peril almost immediately, and yet let us get used to the world before the inciting incident that drives the main plot.

In other words, everything before the main inciting incident does not have to be peaceful and calm and happy, it just has to be less severe.


----------



## Ireth (Mar 27, 2012)

I typically have the inciting incident happening within the first ten pages of the story, or the first chapter. To take examples from my own novels: the inciting incident in _Winter's Queen_, the heroine's abduction by a Fae prince, begins on page 9 when she meets the prince; he then chases her down for a few more pages until finally catching and kidnapping her on page 18. In _Low Road_, the protagonist is turned into a vampire on page 5.


----------



## Poppy (Apr 3, 2012)

Benjamin Clayborne said:


> One other thing to keep in mind from a structural perspective is that the _main plot's_ inciting incident does not have to be the _only_ inciting incident.
> 
> Imagine, if you will, a story whose main inciting incident is the murder of the protagonist's parents by evil werewolves, which happens in chapter 3. In the first two chapters, however, we get scenes of a relatively ordinary life--a teenager living in suburbia, dealing with the ordinary trials of adolescence. The very first scene could even be that teenager being confronted by bullies who try to beat him up and steal his lunch money--he escapes by the skin of his teeth. This is not the main plot; it's just a way to introduce us to the character, make us care about him by putting him in (minor) peril almost immediately, and yet let us get used to the world before the inciting incident that drives the main plot.
> 
> In other words, everything before the main inciting incident does not have to be peaceful and calm and happy, it just has to be less severe.



No disrespect, but I disagree with this big time.

You can't have an inciting incident in chapter 3. What you're describing is another function altogether - it's not even the Call to Adventure.

Inciting Incident vs Call to Adventure is explained in this youtube video: Inciting Incident vs Call To Adventure - Kal Bashir, 2000+ Stage Hero's Journey - YouTube


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (Apr 4, 2012)

Poppy said:


> You can't have an inciting incident in chapter 3.



Says who? If I have a story with the inciting incident at the very start, and then I add a backstory prologue before it, is it somehow no longer an inciting incident, even though the incident hasn't changed? That doesn't make any sense.

Give me a definition of the term "inciting incident" that would be incompatible with such an incident happening in chapter 3 of a book. In my understanding, the inciting incident is the event in the story that breaks the hero out of his normal world and sets the plot in motion.



> What you're describing is another function altogether - it's not even the Call to Adventure.



That's not very helpful. If it's not the II or CTA then what is it? This kid's normal world is boring suburbia, and then werewolves kill his parents. That sure sounds like an *incident* which *incites* our hero into action.



> Inciting Incident vs Call to Adventure is explained in this youtube video: Inciting Incident vs Call To Adventure - Kal Bashir, 2000+ Stage Hero's Journey - YouTube



That was one of the most vague things I've ever seen. He sure likes to assume that the viewer already agrees with his assessment of things ("...which should be obvious to anyone who's familiar with the Hero's Journey..."). (Also, the "2000+ Stage" thing doesn't really get a lot of respect around here.)

Given that one can find all sorts of articles that describe the inciting incident the same way I do (I linked to five of them in an earlier post on this thread), how exactly do you justify your claims?


----------



## Devor (Apr 4, 2012)

Poppy said:


> Inciting Incident vs Call to Adventure is explained in this youtube video: Inciting Incident vs Call To Adventure - Kal Bashir, 2000+ Stage Hero's Journey - YouTube



I'll accept, for a moment, the definitions offered in the video.  Why not?

There's still no reason the Inciting Incident can't happen in Chapter 3 if the _Ordinary World_ and the _State of Perfection_ have enough conflict in and of themselves.  If the character's life, for instance, is that he's a warrior slaying enemies on the battlefield, then it may be an interesting enough life to devote a few chapters to before we start to incite the plotline.

The assumption, of course, being that interesting conflicts can exist during the so-called _State of Perfection_, and honestly, if they can't, then that's a lousy model to go by.


----------



## Steerpike (Apr 4, 2012)

I don't have a problem with the video, per se, though as noted above it could be more detailed. The thing is, the video relates to stories that follow the Hero's Journey or Monomyth. Not all stories follow this, and for those that don't there is simply no reason that one must apply the principles stated in the video.


----------



## Rullenzar (Apr 5, 2012)

*This is just my personal opinion:*

I find action scenes that are way too early to be bothersome. You haven't gotten a chance to properly get invested in the story, chances are you don't know the character/characters well enough yet to even care if one of them dies during. For instance, I don't have the book here next to me but I think in Game of thrones Bran being pushed off balcony was end of 2nd chapter and that was enough to get the reader interested and opened up all kinds of interesting doors to ponder about. It was very subtle and worked beautifully.

On the other hand if written properly authors can pull off an early action scene but I can't think of one who has off the top of my head and I'm not sure if I could.


----------



## Poppy (Apr 5, 2012)

Steerpike said:


> I don't have a problem with the video, per se, though as noted above it could be more detailed. The thing is, the video relates to stories that follow the Hero's Journey or Monomyth. Not all stories follow this, and for those that don't there is simply no reason that one must apply the principles stated in the video.



He's done a breakdown of all the academy award winners. The argument is that they do ALL follow it.

Which falls in line with the whole monomyth / monostory idea.


----------



## Poppy (Apr 5, 2012)

Benjamin Clayborne said:


> That sure sounds like an *incident* which *incites* our hero into action.



There are lots of "incidents" in a story which "incite" but not all of them are inciting incidents.


----------



## Steerpike (Apr 5, 2012)

Poppy said:


> He's done a breakdown of all the academy award winners. The argument is that they do ALL follow it.
> 
> Which falls in line with the whole monomyth / monostory idea.



The monomyth idea is that all "myths" follow it. Not all stories rise to the level of myth. Even the sample "all academy award winners" is a small sampling of the totality of stories, and it is also not a random sampling because it deals with pre-selected stories that share at least one commonality - an academy award. You can't extrapolate from there to say that all stories follow the monomyth, and I believe even Joseph Campbell would have said that the monomyth refers to certain types of stories (namely, myths). I find the monomyth idea compelling, but I am not at all persuaded that there is a monostory. Not all stories are myths.


----------



## Poppy (Apr 5, 2012)

Benjamin Clayborne said:


> In my understanding, the inciting incident is the event in the story that breaks the hero out of his normal world.



That's the Call To Adventure. 

Sure it's an "incident" that "incites" but it's not the Inciting Incident.


----------



## Poppy (Apr 5, 2012)

Benjamin Clayborne said:


> Says who? If I have a story with the inciting incident at the very start, and then I add a backstory prologue before it, is it somehow no longer an inciting incident, even though the incident hasn't changed? That doesn't make any sense.



It makes beautiful sense.

As I said, there are lots of "incidents" that "incite" in a story and each has a name. It's only called the "Inciting Incident" if it meets certain conditions and placement has a lot to do with it.

It's a story structure thing. It's about pinpointing the  geography of the cycle.


----------



## Poppy (Apr 5, 2012)

Benjamin Clayborne said:


> (Also, the "2000+ Stage" thing doesn't really get a lot of respect around here.)



You need to give it more respect and time, because it's awesome.


----------



## Poppy (Apr 5, 2012)

Devor said:


> The assumption, of course, being that interesting conflicts can exist during the so-called _State of Perfection_, and honestly, if they can't, then that's a lousy model to go by.



OMG

You have repressed conflicts in the State of Perfection. It's Pandora's box all locked up. It's the Gremlins all tucked away safe and sound in the Chinese store.

It's when Pandora's box is opened that the shit hits the fan and the story starts. And you're trying to get all the Gremlins back in the box so you can sleep again.


----------



## Poppy (Apr 5, 2012)

Steerpike said:


> The monomyth idea is that all "myths" follow it. Not all stories rise to the level of myth. Even the sample "all academy award winners" is a small sampling of the totality of stories, and it is also not a random sampling because it deals with pre-selected stories that share at least one commonality - an academy award. You can't extrapolate from there to say that all stories follow the monomyth, and I believe even Joseph Campbell would have said that the monomyth refers to certain types of stories (namely, myths). I find the monomyth idea compelling, but I am not at all persuaded that there is a monostory. Not all stories are myths.



They don't have to be myths. 

Millions of non-myth stories have been found to contain Campbell's stages. Bashir says that all the Academy Award winners contain them and they're not all myths.

Say you go with the idea that ALL stories involve transformation. Then you must have State A and State B. You extrapolate in that way.

If you accept that ALL stories involve transformation then you're already coming round to the monostory idea.

Bashir's awesome because he explains why all of these features must exist.

I used to ridicule his POV but now I think it's the only way. I don't think it's possible to create a story outside this set of parameters.

It's pretty hard to get away from the monostory idea: all stories solve problems, all stories contain a supernatural aid etc etc

Even if you hate the idea, you're next story WILL contain a supernatural aid. You do it subconsciously.


----------



## Steerpike (Apr 5, 2012)

Poppy said:


> They don't have to be myths.
> 
> Millions of non-myth stories have been found to contain Campbell's stages. Bashir says that all the Academy Award winners contain them and they're not all myths.
> 
> ...



Yes, I agree with the idea that non-myths can, and some do, contain these stages. But what I'm saying is that not all stories have them. The idea of the monomyth is that through some collective unconscious, myths around the world are essentially telling the same stories. Non-myths may very well follow the pattern, but not all stories do so. Even Campbell distinguished between myths and stories that were for other purposes. 

I do think many non-myth stories follow the Hero's Journey, whether done consciously or sub-consciously by the writer. I do not think that all stories follow the monomyth idea. Take Nabokov's book Lolita, for example, which is an excellent work. I think you'd have to stretch interpretation of the monomyth past the point of credulity to make it fit that story. Maybe not even then. 

So it is possible to create a story outside the parameters of the monomyth, and in my view many authors have done so. If you open the discussion up to shorter works (short stories) I suspect you'll find even more than do not follow it. These are still stories.


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (Apr 6, 2012)

Poppy said:


> It makes beautiful sense.



**waits patiently** ...And? Are you going to elaborate on that or just make assertions without supporting them?



> As I said, there are lots of "incidents" that "incite" in a story and each has a name. It's only called the "Inciting Incident" if it meets certain conditions and placement has a lot to do with it.



**waits somewhat less patiently** ...AND? Are you going to explain what those conditions are, or not? Eight posts in this thread and you've still given absolutely no details about what exactly you think constitutes an "inciting incident." I have no interest in watching random videos; can't you write a few words of your own to support your arguments?


----------



## Poppy (Apr 6, 2012)

Steerpike said:


> I do not think that all stories follow the monomyth idea. Take Nabokov's book Lolita, for example, which is an excellent work. I think you'd have to stretch interpretation of the monomyth past the point of credulity to make it fit that story. Maybe not even then.



No disrespect, but I don't think you know monomyth or understand it's implications.

Lolita is easily a monomyth. You have the father figure who provokes the child who grows up. Just like in Star Wars you have a father figure who provokes the child to grow up. And that's just looking at it from a million miles away.


----------



## Poppy (Apr 6, 2012)

Steerpike said:


> If you open the discussion up to shorter works (short stories) I suspect you'll find even more than do not follow it. These are still stories.



James George Frazer and Robert Graves are two authors who have examined this issue from the short story / poem perspective.

They make Campbell seem superficial.

They basically get to the same idea that there is only one story.


----------



## Poppy (Apr 6, 2012)

Benjamin Clayborne said:


> **waits somewhat less patiently**



If you want to get shirty about it, you can wait.


----------



## Devor (Apr 6, 2012)

Poppy said:


> OMG



Please settle down.  We're just chatting.




> You have repressed conflicts in the State of Perfection. It's Pandora's box all locked up. It's the Gremlins all tucked away safe and sound in the Chinese store.
> 
> It's when Pandora's box is opened that the shit hits the fan and the story starts. And you're trying to get all the Gremlins back in the box so you can sleep again.



Could you be a little more clear?  What's wrong with taking a few chapters to show the character's life?  If the character's life is compelling, you can easily do so without inciting a plot of any kind.  Isn't it part of the "State of Perfection," which comes first in your video?


----------



## Poppy (Apr 6, 2012)

Steerpike said:


> Yes, I agree with the idea that non-myths can, and some do, contain these stages. But what I'm saying is that not all stories have them.



I know where you're coming from. Really, I do.

But just go with a WHAT IF.

Stick to a field, say movies. And lets say you're writing a novel which you hope Hollywood will make into a movie, so you're bringing in novels too.

WHAT IF  all those movies DID have them (and they DO).

Then you have to ask yourself WHY.

Exploring that leads to some seriously enlightening territory which makes all these "inciting incident" and "three-act" debates seem low-IQ.

Respectfully, I suggest you go on that journey.


----------



## Poppy (Apr 6, 2012)

Devor said:


> Could you be a little more clear?  What's wrong with taking a few chapters to show the character's life?  If the character's life is compelling, you can easily do so without inciting a plot of any kind.  Isn't it part of the "State of Perfection," which comes first in your video?



There's no reason to have an Inciting Incident at all.

You can show a character's compelling life. But then you'll need to get her out of that to move the story on. People are incorrectly attributing that action as Inciting Incident which it is not. That's Call To Adventure.

That's not my video. I'm pointing you to it because the separation between II and C2A is explained well.


----------



## Poppy (Apr 6, 2012)

Just to say, I wasn't planning to get wrapped up in one particular discussion.

Will probably move on.

Easy y'all.


----------



## Legendary Sidekick (Apr 6, 2012)

Here's the last post on page one from the OP:


MatthewCEarls said:


> Can I just add that I love the *level of respect* that everyone has for each other on this forum. It isn't like that everywhere else. *Good opinions* all around. I greatly respect my writing elders!



Let's keep in mind that the point of posting to this thread is to help Mr. Earls. Regardless of what academic terms and writing theories are supported by which famous author, we are all offering opinions to help this author.

Stories have been told for thousands of years, or possibly millions--who knows what those early toolmakers were saying, long before the cave-painters finally started writing stuff down? I can only conclude that there is more than one way to tell a story, and I think the best way to help the OP is the share what works well for you!


EDIT - I started writing before you posted, Poppy. Thanks for deciding to move on!


----------



## Steerpike (Apr 6, 2012)

Poppy said:


> Lolita is easily a monomyth. You have the father figure who provokes the child who grows up. Just like in Star Wars you have a father figure who provokes the child to grow up. And that's just looking at it from a million miles away.



Easy to say, but of course there is much more to the monomyth idea than that. I picked _Lolita_ because it is actually on a list associated with the videos you linked. I expected the response would be one that looked at the story solely as being that of Dolores (which is understandable, as she is the titular character). I think, however, it is also Humbert Humbert's story. At the least, there are two stories here. Humbert's story centers around Lolita, but it is not her story. I expect that finding "supernatural" aid in the story will be problematic as well, unless you stretch the word "supernatural" to the point that is has no meaning.

At some point, it gets to be like numerology. You can see what you want to see. The whole idea of the monomyth because somewhat meaningless, in my mind, if you try to apply it to each and every story in existence. It gets stretched so thin as to have no substance. The more appropriate, and I believe accurate, view is that there are certain types of stories that are remarkably common across cultures that follow the monomyth.

I've read a little of Frazer and Graves, and I don't recall either of them saying EVERY story fit this pattern. I know Campbell didn't - in fact, he said they did not. And all three of them made sweeping generalizations and discounted, out of hand, instances that didn't fit into their theoretical framework. It is all very interesting and I think it gets us to some truth at the level of myth, but if you try and take it beyond that point, it becomes problematic. If you have citations to Frazer or Graves saying the monomyth set forth in the videos you posted occurs in each and every story, I'd be interested in seeing them. From what I've read of Frazer, at least, he never makes any such solid conclusion. Maybe Graves tries to make such an absolute statement, I don't know.

Even Bashir, whose videos you posted, seems to qualify his analysis by saying all "successful" stories use it, which is convenient because if you encounter a story that doesn't follow it you can just say the story doesn't work.


----------

