I was a journalist for 15 years on trade magazines, and not surprisingly journalist training pays a lot of attention to story leads.
One thing that the post neglects to say is: "it depends entirely on the type of article you are writing" a hard news story will have a different lead to a feature, column or colour piece.
Most traditional news stories are structured so that can be 'cut from the bottom' - get the salient facts into the first sentence and broaden out from there, so that if your piece gets cut for the sake of space, the sub knows that (s)he can safely cut the bottom paragraph first, then if more space is required, cut the paragraph before that, and that, so that if at the end of the day, your previous page 1 lead has been trimmed to a 1 sentence news in brief, the original opening sentence will still get the story told.
With the demise of paper, 'cutting from the bottom' isn't so relevant, but the same discipline still holds true when writing a story for the busy reader.
All that said How do you write the opening sentence? For a news story, or press release, my first editor gave me the best advice I ever received:
"Imagine you're walking into a pub to meet your friend and the story you're writing has just happened. Your friend is intelligent, inquisitive, but not necessarily an expert in your detailed field. You sit down, pick up your pint and say: "You'll never guess what - XXXXXXX"
That XXXX is your opening sentence.
... or at least it's the first draft. The exercise is good way of immediately revealing what your mind thinks are the most important elements or a sometimes very complex story.
This 'cut from the bottom' structure is maybe necessary but really fatiguing.
When I was learning Chinese, we had to read such news articles. When you have to analyze it word by word, it becomes evident that the authors is just diluting the sauce, adding more water every paragraph.
Maybe it is one of the reason for journalism to be a living dead. Interesting writings, the ones that hook their readship, are just the opposite: the more you read, the deeper you are immerged in the story (for fiction), the more you understand and discover (for non-fiction).
BTW: Just checked a bit pg's papers: they are not 'cut from the bottom', not at all.
I don;t understand why you think it's fatiguing. With a news story, the idea is that you should only have to read the first sentence to get the gist and to decide whether you want to read further.
Each subsequent sentence adds further detail, with the most salient facts always coming first. So you stop reading when you have as much detail as you want, safe in the knowleddge you're not missing anything too important.
If the author is diluting, simply repeating things already written at greater length they're not doing it correctly.
Just to reiterate, PG's articles aren't news stories so there is no need to follow this pattern. There are many other kinds of journalistic leads - the colour intro, the delayed drop, etc.
Iain Banks manages to provide both one of the most memorable opening sentences:
"It was the day my grandmother exploded."
and my favourite opening paragraph (or two):
"Two days ago I decided to kill myself. I would walk and hitch and sail away from this dark city to the bright spaces of the wet west coast, and there throw myself into the tall, glittering seas beyond Iona (with its cargo of mouldering kings) to let the gulls and seals and tides have their way with my remains, and in my dying moments look forward to an encounter with Staffa’s six-sided columns and Fingal’s cave; or I might head south to Corryvrecken, to be spun inside the whirlpool and listen with my waterlogged deaf ears to its mile-wide voice ringing over the wave-race; or be borne north, to where the white sands sing and coral hides, pink-fingered and hard-soft, beneath the ocean swell, and the rampart cliffs climb thousand-foot above the seething acres of milky foam, rainbow-buttressed.
Last night I changed my mind and decided to stay alive. Everything that follows is . . . just to try and explain."
From The Crow Road and Espedair Street respectively.
For my money, you can't beat Dickens. My favourite two:
"Marley was dead: to begin with"
"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way"
Love the Gibson one. Another classic opening line, one of the few that I can still quote verbatim, is from Gabriel García Márquez's One Hundred Years of Solitude:
"Many years later, as he faced the firing squad, Colonel Aureliano Buendía was to remember that distant afternoon when his father took him to discover ice."
The Gibson opening line is great, but it's been a long time since it was common to see dull grey static on dead channels. Now, the color of a dead channel is bright electric blue. I wonder if in the future Neuromancer will need footnotes to explain the imagery, like Shakespeare editions that explain that "quick" used to mean "pregnant".
"William Gibson's Neuromancer: 'The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel.'"
That is one of my favorite openers, too, but it has seemed weirdly anachronistic for a while. Does anyone under the age of 30 remember television static? Will anyone in Gibson's future?
We do still see static if we accidentally switch to the analog terrestial receiver built into our TV. And given the general quality of Samsung's software and UI engineering, that accident happens quite often.
>Does anyone under the age of 30 remember television static?
I do. In fact I've seen it in the past 24 hours. I want to at some point hook up a microcontroller to an old TV with a coax cable and subtly manipulate the static until a shadow person emerges from the spotty mist. I figure it would make a cool demo. [0]
Since we're doing great opening lines I'm going to throw two odd ones into the mix (which are still great!):
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
- Douglas Adams 'The Restaurant at the End of the Universe'
and...
"Mr. and Mrs. Dursley of number four Privet Drive were proud to say they were perfectly normal, thank you very much."
- Harry Potter (right below the opening chapter name called "The Boy Who Lived")
So humble and small compared to the journey you're about to go on.
Most people stop reading something after the first few sentences. In that crucial 10 to 15 seconds, a book (or essay, or article, or blog post) has to make, and win, a subconscious appeal to your attention. Your reader's attention span is like a snotty doorman at a hot club. Your opening sentence needs to grab his interest and sneak the rest of the piece into the door.
Consider the following examples from fiction:
"It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen." --George Orwell, 1984
"It was a pleasure to burn." --Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
"As Gregor Samsa awoke one morning from uneasy dreams he found himself transformed in his bed into a gigantic insect." --Franz Kafka, The Metamorphosis
Or these examples from nonfiction:
"Air-conditioned, odorless, illuminated by buzzing flourescent tubes, the American market doesn't present itself as having very much to do with Nature." --Michael Pollan, The Omnivore's Dilemma
"I like to take my time when I pronounce someone dead." --Jane Churchon, "The Dead Book"
"Out of nowhere I developed this lump." --David Sedaris, "Old Faithful"
This is not to suggest that opening lines should be pure gimmickry, or that they should be conceived entirely apart from the rest of the piece itself. Provocation for provocation's sake is a game of diminishing returns. Rather, the opening line should immediately intrigue the reader by establishing a compelling tone -- one that the rest of the work will follow.
Compelling does not necessarily mean brief, though in modern practice, the two are frequently corelated. That being said, some of the best opening lines in literary history are long and winding. The key is setting up intrigue, however many words that may take.
To my knowledge I don't know anyone who picks up novels, reads the first few sentences, then throws them away. Maybe people do this in airport bookstores, but I don't think Orwell, Ray Bradbury, or Kafka wrote with the ADHD audience in mind.
On the other hand I know that many readers hate to put a book down without giving it a fair shot.
The "catchy opening" design pattern is present in a lot of art where the audience has almost no chance of leaving, like Beethoven's 5th Symphony, or that famous opening shot with the star destroyer in "Star Wars". It's an artistic effect. Conversely, the "Harry Potter" novels have a mundane, slow first few chapters, and they did pretty well.
Actually, I think Harry Potter has a pretty strong opener:
Mr. and Mrs. Dursley, of number four, Privet Drive, were proud to say that they were perfectly normal, thank you very much. They were the last people you'd expect to be involved in anything strange or mysterious, because they just didn't hold with such nonsense.
"To my knowledge I don't know anyone who picks up novels, reads the first few sentences, then throws them away. Maybe people do this in airport bookstores, but I don't think Orwell, Ray Bradbury, or Kafka wrote with the ADHD audience in mind."
Browsing is (was?) incredibly common in the bookstore era, and will become even more so in the modern era and beyond. Especially as digital sampling becomes more prevalent, and as the barrier to entry (price) comes down significantly. If anything, we'll see even more buy-and-then-browse behavior. And for what it's worth, book returns were prevalent in the heyday of the B&M bookstore, and they're a significant factor in Amazon's business to this day. (In fact, I'm willing to wager that quite a few people, even the highly literate ones, haven't read the majority of the books sitting on their shelves.)
Regardless, I'm not talking about the opening line as a sales proposition. I'm talking about the opening line as a gambit to get someone to keep reading when they first pick up the piece. How many times have you bought a book, or picked up a magazine, or clicked open a blog post, and simply lost interest after the opening paragraph? I'm not saying you immediately regret picking it up, but rather, that you think to yourself "Meh, I'll skip this one and read something else. Maybe I'll come back to it later." This behavior is pretty common, and by nature, the human attention span in limited. In no way am I talking about the "ADHD audience" here. I'm talking about basic human wiring.
As for Kafka, Orwell, et al., bear in mind that their initial audience was a reader at a publishing house, journal, or newspaper. Oftentimes, your first target reader is the one who decides whether or not to publish you in the first place. This person reads thousands of pieces a week, and getting his or her attention has been a crucial task since the invention of the printing press.
I think most novelists write with the intent to be read after they have some years of experience. It's the next, natural step. Whether that reader is at a publishing house or not is a little hard to know, especially in Kafka's case.
From what I've read and studied at university, Kafka wrote for his friends a lot. He shared his writings with them and they had a laugh. His pieces were known (by his friends) as dark comedies. Whereas in Western Europe and North America, they are read as existential pieces.
Kafka doubted many times that his novels and stories would ever be published because of their 'immoral' content. So, I'm interested in any further info you have that might suggest otherwise.
"Kafka doubted many times that his novels and stories would ever be published because of their 'immoral' content. So, I'm interested in any further info you have that might suggest otherwise."
To be frank, the subject of Kafka's authorly intent or personal inclinations is a bit tangential to my original point, and I'm not sure how we arrived here. I can tell, by your username, that Kafka is a subject of great personal interest. I share a love of his work, though I do not have any particularly privileged or scholarly insight into his history. I simply brought his name up because he wrote a great opening line to a great work, and because he wrote in an era in which readers' attention spans were every bit as precious as they are today.
I think my original point has been sidetracked: namely, that great opening sentences capture the reader's attention, and that the reader's attention is at a premium. That's the only point I ever set out to make in this thread. And I think the point remains valid.
Those opening sentences have a particular kind of urgency. By contrast, the equally memorable openings of Lolita and Moby Dick could never be called urgent, but they do instantly establish an unusual first-person narrator. What they all share is density. If instead you want to fill up the page with ink while wasting the time of your readers, you start your book like Dickens did in A Tale of Two Cities.
Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins. My sin, my soul.
and
Call me Ishmael.
and
It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way - in short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only.
The old joke about Dickens is that he got paid by the word, and he wrote accordingly. (There's probably some truth to it; he did serialize many of his novels, and was paid by the word for them. But he was paid very handsomely, and was considered something like his day's equivalent of John Grisham or Stephen King. It's doubtful he was seriously trying to nickel and dime his publishers by being verbose).
That said, I quite enjoy that opening line. It's satirical and snarky, and it plays on the sort of common hyperbole that's still very prevalent in today's society.
Dickens wrote many great sentences by my reckoning, but that one has always annoyed me. It is a workaday piece of prose that long overstays its welcome, finally admitting its own irrelevance to this or any other book. That punch line witticism is an insufficient excuse for its pride of place as a starting sentence.
> "It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen." --George Orwell, 1984
I think I've frequently heard this called a great opening line, and I've never worked out why. It doesn't tell me anything that I care about, it doesn't seem especially clever, and I don't notice myself having any other discernible emotional reaction to it.
In addition to the excellent points others have made, the description "bright cold day in April" is filled with strong contrast. April is usually a warm month or, at worst, cool. It isn't typically cold. Similarly, bright days tend to be more warm than not so sunny days. So it strongly evokes unusual weather, which has a long history of being associated with abnormal events of significance to humans.
This is part of why the weather is a popular topic and something modern humans have put substantial effort into predicting, broadcasting, etc. The opening line signals an atmosphere ripe for unusual, important events that you wouldn't typically expect. It is a means to suggest the calm before the storm without admitting directly that a storm is coming. It is the kind of thing which causes one to prick their ears up, a cross between curiosity and threat assessment.
Real life examples: The year Krakatoa exploded, there was enough ash in the air to cause an abnormally cold summer in Europe. (This cold summer led to a story writing club which resulted in the original "Frankenstein". It was too cold for normal outdoor summer activities.) The night of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake, people were manic and still up after midnight when the quake finally hit. And stories of historical (pre modern weather prediction) weather disasters typically start with comments on the unusual atmosphere which weirded people out beforehand but failed to tell them exactly what was coming.
So I think the line evokes that sense of being on edge and expectant even though you aren't quite sure why because there is no explicit threat inherent in a bright cold day in April. Still, there is implicit threat of something coming that you can't quite put your finger on. When it was written, people were likely more in touch with the weather than a lot of people in developed countries today, so it would have been more strongly evocative for that audience.
The word 'April' tells us it's a time and place similar to today.
Clocks striking thirteen tells us it's somewhere different.
Thirteen is a traditionally unlucky number.
It's a classic science fiction method of establishing setting. We're someplace similar to today but a little different, all transmitted in very few words. The effect is a tiny bit unsettling... if they changed the clocks to chime on thirteen, what else is wrong?
It's similar to Heinlein's famous way of indicating we're in the future in a single line: "The door dilated."
It sets the scene really well: "A bright, cold day in April" is evocative of exactly that. It's not pretentious and it immediately puts a setting in the readers mind.
"and the clocks were striking thirteen." is an immediate juxtaposition of something non-intuitive. The first reaction is "Clocks don't strike thirteen! They strike a maximum of twelve!". It's just nonintuitive enough without necessarily being obviously nonsense. And so the reader is engaged to read the next sentence to find out what he means by thirteen. Get the reader to read the next sentence enough, and you've tricked them into reading the book ;-)
My first reaction is more like "okay, so it's one o'clock". I never really noticed that it was weird before, though now it's pointed out I can see that it is.
The 24 hour clock is still not universally adopted in the UK. No English speaker says says "thirteen O'Clock" the way one might say "treize heures". English speakers might say "thirteen hundred hours", but only in restricted circumstances (e.g. in the military).
I think the point of the first line isn't to say anything, be clever, or to give you an emotional reaction. It's to prompt questions that make you want to read further. Questions like:
* Why is it a cold day in spite of the fact that it's spring, and bright out?
* Why are the clocks striking thirteen? Did the earth's rotation become slower? Or did some bureaucrat change the system of time to match his whims?
In my mind, it alludes to the fact that this is a world that is ok with blatantly inconsistencies, but forces you to verify that allusion by reading further.
The first thing I did was apply this recursively to the article itself.
"When I was a 25-year-old Senior Editor of The Mother Earth News, I did a lot of rewrite editing."
Not bad! Started with an anecdote that got me interested. And it worked—I was interested enough to continue reading. Great article with some excellent writing suggestions for anyone.
Given the title of the link, I approached the article with intent. I answered the question "What does the opening line do for me?" before continuing. Here are my results:
* It is straight forward and obviously relates to the title, giving me the impression "An article about writing by someone who may actually know about it".
* It piqued my curiosity: "Is 25 young to be doing this job?" "I bet this was formative... how so?" "WTF is rewrite editing?"
* It nicely sets a tone of "here's some experience for you to chew on" (and the rest of the article keeps it decently.
Note: my opening sentence is a poor mimicry of calinet6's opener and of TFA's opener. Seems I need some practice :)
Just wanted to add that this advice will necessarily change with the times. Something sounds trite and cliche if you've heard it (or something like it) too much. Most of the things that sound trite and cliche now sounded great the first time you heard them. That's how they got repeated enough to become trite and cliche in the first place.
If everyone followed the advice in this article, the advice would be terrible. Most people don't, so it's probably pretty safe for now. The general advice though, is to pay attention to what feels overdone and then don't do that. And don't stop paying attention, because it will definitely change.
A coworker of mine (25ish) had seen a lot of movies, but not Casablanca. So I loaned it to him. He said "my first reaction was 'this is so cliched' and then I realized that it rather was where many cliches came from"
The same is true of another great movie, Citizen Kane. It invented many elements of the modern movie (cinematographer Gregg Toland's contributions especially -- http://magazine.creativecow.net/article/depth-of-field-gregg...), but since those elements have all become standard parts of mainstream filmmaking they don't shock audiences they way they did when it came out in 1941.
For the same reason, it's impossible to listen to the music of Debussy and Delius in the same way it was heard when it was new. Then, the parallel chords of stacked thirds, modal harmonies, and blurred harmonic rhythm were new and exciting, but now, they've been done so much that it's in every movie's scene in the mist, and every other feminine hygiene product ad.
I think beginning an academic or a research paper with a question or something like "Some people say..." or "Recently" or "Nowadays" is often a very good strategy even though it might be clichéd, because telling the reader exactly what is going to follow in the text is very much expected. When I read with the sole intention of finding a specific piece of knowledge, I want to be able to tell from the introduction (or the abstract) whether I will find that piece of knowledge in the given text.
That being said, I think all other kinds of texts should be as story-like as possible, in the sense that they should be gripping and interesting from the very first sentence -- I want to be a little bit lost and not know where exactly the writer is taking me. In this case, I really like the idea of jumping straight into a scenario (or anecdote), I remember having been suggested by my teachers in middle school to do so. Having opened the text with a scenario, you can also use it in the conclusion to wrap things up and let the reader know how the story ended, given the conclusions reached in the body of the text.
"Some people say..." openings can be problematic, because they can get the reader wondering, who? Who says that? Which pulls them away from the point you're trying to make. Better to start with a specific example of someone saying it: "John Smith thought men couldn't get breast cancer. On April 5, he found out he was wrong."
I really like the idea of jumping straight into a scenario (or anecdote), I remember having been suggested by my teachers in middle school to do so.
Yeah, this is an effective technique that's nearly as old as storytelling itself. It's called in medias res:
The name is Latin for "into the middle of things," which describes the idea: throw the reader into the middle of the story first, revealing earlier events later on where necessary. This lets you open on a dramatic note right away, which grabs the reader's attention, while setting up little enigmas -- who is this person? Why is she doing what she's doing? What does she want? -- for the reader to solve, which keeps them involved.
Here's one of my favourite opening lines (all right, make it paragraph!)
The Peacemaker Colt has now been in production, without change in design, for a century. Buy one today and it would ne indistinguishable from the one Wyatt Earp wore when he was the Master of Dodge City. It is the oldest hand gun in the world, without question the most famous and, if efficiency in its designed task of maiming and killing be taken as criterion of its worth, then it’s also probably the best hand-gun ever made.... When a Peacemaker Bullet hits your leg you fall to the ground unconscious, and if it hits your thigh bone and you are lucky to survive the torn arteries and the shock, then you will never walk again without crutches.. And so I stood motionless, not breathing, for the Peacemaker colt that started this unpleasant train of thought was pointed directly at my right thigh...[1][2]
This article inspired me to go back over the posts on my blog and look at just the opening sentences. I found lots of ones that are, in retrospect, duds. But here's a few that I still like:
> You would think iteration, you know looping over stuff, would be a solved problem in programming languages.
> Every now and then, I stumble onto some algorithm or idea that’s so clever and such a perfect solution to a problem that I feel like I got smarter or gained a new superpower just by learning it.
> Ever since I decided to mesh the worlds of static and dynamic typing together in Magpie, I’ve been wondering when the gears would really grind together and halt. Today is the day.
> My little language Magpie has a feature that may at first seem really limiting: all functions take exactly one argument and return one value, no more, no less.
I spend a lot of time thinking about this because I think with blogs you have a very narrow window of time to get the reader's attention before they "TL;DR" your post and move on. I usually write about programming languages, which isn't known to be a riveting topic, so this isn't easy. Going back over them, I think there is a pretty strong correlation between having a strong start and getting decent traffic.
Absolutely loved this post. The opening sentence is just as important as the headline and subheadings. Great copywriters (and blog editors, evidently) know this. Coming up with original, compelling opening sentences isn't always as easy as it sounds.
In my limited experience, subheds often act as a crutch when the writer doesn't know how to move the piece forward onto the next point in a more natural fashion. At Uni, we were advised to avoid them wherever possible.
This kind of reminds me that, although I'll read a lot about programming and startups, I haven't learned anything about writing (formally) in many many years.
Does anyone have any good recommendations for books about writing non-fiction? The OP refers to a few book about writing fiction, which sound interesting (and that may be helpful), but I was wondering if there was something similar that targeted maybe copy-writing and just general business writing.
How do you write an opening sentence that makes me keep reading the next few sentences, really?
Microscopic attention span - that's what will characterize most online readers if you're writing something online. In this context, any thought of "literary value/quality" is useless. As opposed to the OP, most are writing for maybe readers that have not real intention whatsoever to keep on reading. I know people that when they see an email longer than 5 lines of text on their display from someone unknown, they just throw it away without bothering to read it at all!
The questions I'd like answered are:
- How can you write an opening sentence that the reader's semi-conscious mind decodes even before he decides to keep on reading or not (with a 90% probability of the second outcome), and makes him change his mind and keep reading instead?
- Should I just add a "TL;DR" section on top of every long article I write because most people will not read it anyway, and hopefully at least this short message will get across? Or will this be a spoiler and make all readers just scan the "TL;DR" and nobody will read the full article now?
- How to prevent the "scan to see how long it is and decide not to read it if its too long regardless of title or content" way of thinking of a larger and larger portion of the population (and not necessarily the most ignorant: a very smart person told me that we won't read something longer than a paragraph because "if you can't summarize it in a couple short sentences, the I'll assume you don't know enough about what you are writing for me to worth investing the time and attention to read it") So then, are we all condemned to write only "elevator pitches"?
- Will overdoing it by using interesting "reader engagement tactics" just make the reader believe that I'm actually trying to sell them something and stop reading because of this assumption?
From reading good writing, and by looking at opening sentences specially I came to the conclusion that the best way to start a chunk of text is by starting to say what you want to say. Just say what you have to say and don't think about it as an "opening sentence". By thinking of structure you lose perspective of the most important thing in any writing, the message.
My favorite writers get to the point quickly and effectively. Adding cruft is unnecessary and disrespectful to readers and usually only serves to make you feel better about your writing.
“Perfection is achieved not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away” – Antoine de Saint-Exupery
>My favorite writers get to the point quickly and effectively.
It's not so simple. If the reader is interested in comprehending a large amount of technical or objective information quickly, then yes, by all means, start with the point, hold no cards above the table, and get to it.
But even this article demonstrates that sometimes, a different approach is appropriate. "When I was a 25 year old editor" -- what the hell is a 25-year old doing being an editor of a paper? What kind of a paper is this anyway?
That - strikes my interest. That makes me want to continue reading. It draws me in. This is why I read - to shed the dust of everyday life - to be drawn in and whisked away to a fantasy world much more exciting than my own life.
The way to start a chunk of text is to be keenly aware of who your audience is, and what they want. And, equally, the way to begin reading a chunk of text is to either adapt to the the mold of the intended audience or simply reject the writing. It's not valid to say that starting a book in a coy, crafty, inviting way is somehow illegitimate because it doesn't get to the point right away. Some people prefer and enjoy that type of opening.
I always liked Jay McInerney's opening sentence from Bright Lights, Big City: "You’re not the kind of guy who would be at a place like this at this time of the morning."
Of course writing fiction (for entertainment) is different from writing nonfiction (for information). For excellent fiction first-sentences: "Doro discovered the woman by accident when he went to see what was left of one of his seed villages." --Wild Seed, Octavia Butler. It introduces the main characters, and shows you their relationship and their relative importance to the plot of the novel.
Thank you. I worked for the tech magazine for a couple of years and can recall pretty much the same experiences. Which is strange, since language was not English. However that problems and solutions listed seems to be language-agnostic.
I think what the OP says is great advice. The list is especially useful for beginner writers, because it gives them a specific guide to follow.
I was taught the value of an introductory sentence and paragraph differently. I was told to simply "Be specific!" If you have a look at his dos, this simple phrase is put to use in all of them. The don'ts are the opposite: they're vague. I default to this be-specific phrase when I write.
Having said that, writing is such a tricky thing. All throughout my academic history, I've been taught the 'principles' of style only to have to unlearn half of them and adapt to a new 'standard'.
As a few people have written, context matters.
In the end (and in practice), you have to consider your audience, how much time you have to write (if it is your job, because there are hundreds of content mills), develop your own style (this itself is a trite/clichéd remark), but most importantly, have a reason to write that word or punctuation. This last concept is what I adhere to, which is why I only write short stories and poems. Novels are a completely different beast, though I am working on one slowly but surely.
I can read Shelley and Keats and love every expressed emotion. Most people will tell me, "But it's soooooo cheeeesy!" Damn right it is. So? What's your point? Context. Business writing is not creative writing is not poetry is not a short story is not a novel. Likewise, romanticism is not modernism is not postmodernism is not magical realism is not anything.
If you think about it, writing is a very depressing art form. It is one of few skills that has a low price tag in a society yet is valued by everyone. "Oh, he's a great writer! Found his book for cheap at a used bookstore! $1 for a classic!" The only writers that make a good chunk of change are the Stephanie Meyers or the sci-fi writers that pump out a book a month. Author mills. It is rumoured that it took Ezra Pound about six months to write a three-verse poem. Can people even tell the difference? Some say they can.
It's difficult to go in to an interview and act like I really know how to write. My use of grammar and style is poor. I edit a lot. Revise, revise, revise. It takes me an hour or more to write a short paragraph. It doesn't come naturally to me. The only thing I do better than others is spell correctly.
There is an ongoing joke that is repeated pseudosincerely: the worst thing you can do is take advice from a writer.
So what do I know.
PS: One of my favourite opening sentences comes from Camus's L'étranger:
Aujourd'hui, maman est morte. (Mother died today.)
This one is from Kafka's Der Prozess:
Jemand mußte Josef K. verleumdet haben, denn ohne daß er etwas Böses getan hätte, wurde er eines Morgens verhaftet. (Someone must have been telling lies about Josef K., he knew he had done nothing wrong but, one morning, he was arrested.)
Like that time someone told us how to design a well-designed site in 30 minutes, I decided whilst clicking through "How to Write an Opening Sentence" that I would read the first sentence and then decide whether I should listen to the guy on "how to write an opening sentence".
It read:
>"When I was a 25-year-old Senior Editor of The Mother Earth News, I did a lot of rewrite editing. "
I decided against it, so I didn't read any more of the post.
I will, however, tell you how you could write that sentence well:
"When I was 25, I spent three weeks figuring out how to get my articles to stay at a low reading angle, instead of getting flung back in my face by an impatient editor: the experience was invaluable, and it's time I shared how to write a good opening paragraph."
One thing that the post neglects to say is: "it depends entirely on the type of article you are writing" a hard news story will have a different lead to a feature, column or colour piece.
Most traditional news stories are structured so that can be 'cut from the bottom' - get the salient facts into the first sentence and broaden out from there, so that if your piece gets cut for the sake of space, the sub knows that (s)he can safely cut the bottom paragraph first, then if more space is required, cut the paragraph before that, and that, so that if at the end of the day, your previous page 1 lead has been trimmed to a 1 sentence news in brief, the original opening sentence will still get the story told.
With the demise of paper, 'cutting from the bottom' isn't so relevant, but the same discipline still holds true when writing a story for the busy reader.
All that said How do you write the opening sentence? For a news story, or press release, my first editor gave me the best advice I ever received:
"Imagine you're walking into a pub to meet your friend and the story you're writing has just happened. Your friend is intelligent, inquisitive, but not necessarily an expert in your detailed field. You sit down, pick up your pint and say: "You'll never guess what - XXXXXXX"
That XXXX is your opening sentence.
... or at least it's the first draft. The exercise is good way of immediately revealing what your mind thinks are the most important elements or a sometimes very complex story.