The "start with a very specific scene" feature open

If you're trying to capture someone's personality for the reader and the scene paints a picture of that person's personality, I think it's useful.

I once did a feature on a football coach at a prep academy. I met him after practice and it was raining so he suggested we jump in his car and drive over to his office where we could talk (his office was on the other side of the campus). When I got in the car, I was mortified by what I saw. Fast-food wrappers, diet coke cans, empty tins of chewing tobacco, crumpled up papers and trash just all over the place. He had to clear trash off the seat before I could get in. When we got to his office -- same thing. Looked like a garbage dump. But as we got to talking I learned that he kept very meticulous notes on everything about his players, practices, games, workouts, everything. I'm sure all coaches keep notes but this was bordering on obsessive compulsive. And the notes were very clean and organized.

So right then I knew I had an angle to work with --- the guy was a mess everywhere except with his coaching. Throwing away junk from his car wasn't important but recording his kicker's success rate in away games when the temperature was below 50 degrees was. I did a scene-setting lead starting with the car ride and then into his office. I felt it really helped paint the picture of the guy's personality, which was the goal.

Now, Pete Carroll listening to John Mayer and talking about his bathroom? I dunno. Didn't read the rest of the story. Maybe it worked. But if it put a visual image in the reader's head that will help develop the character you are trying to capture than I think it's a great tool. But if the scene is irrelevant to the story or the subject's personality it can often just be wasted copy.

 

Golf, you just said what I said, only better.

 

Rolling Stone was the first mag that popped into my head when I read this thread-title.

I've come to suspect there is some kind of terrible punishment for the writers there if they don't use a lead like this in every article.

I understand why these are used. They're a way to create a very specific image and draw readers into a story while hopefully conveying something about your subject.

But they aren't always appropriate and, if they're used when the 'scene' is just banal and not very telling, they serve no purpose.

 

I think it's important to note that, at least in my opinion, the "scene" lead isn't bad by any means. But the "This is how and where I met this celebrity" lead certainly is. A story about Christian Bale in, I think, Rolling Stones comes to mind. While it was an interesting story because Bale is an interesting guy, the lead was something along the lines of meeting Bale in a fancy restaurant in a fancy part of town and he ordered this somewhat fancy meal. It sort of screams to me, "Oh, look! I'm a writer that gets to chill with Christian Bale!" It's more than that, too. It could be to either a) show how truly human this celebrity is or b) show how much of a celebrity this human really is, depending on which way you go with it. But, regardless, it does seem way overused and a cop-out.

 

I suspect you missed the irony of her lede. I did not.

Pete Carroll chastised Jim Harbaugh last year for having a bathroom in his office. Made a big friggin point about going down the hall with everybody else.

 

If that's the case, the lead should focus on the bathroom. This is a clear violation of Chekhov's Toilet.

 

Any Maxim readers here? In the most recent issue there was a feature on Guy Fieri (the Food Network guy). Here's how it begins:

"I'm inches away from Guy Fieri's crotch, and I need to clarify something: 'I'm staring at your skull bracelet, not your penis.'"

How's that for painting a picture in your readers head? Instead of "Oh look at me I'm a writer who's hanging out with a celebrity" it's "Oh look at me I'm a writer who's inches away from a ...... "

 

I'm a believer in the style that defined GQ in the early to mid 2000s, before it became obsessed with teen idols, which could loosely be defined as "This is what it was like to spend these several days with this person we know you find fascinating."
I think the Gary Smith style, which claims to unlock to deep psychological secret to every subject, is more than a reach when we see what we find out about people who are well-known but not known well -- Tiger Woods being an obvious example.
As such, putting the reader in Pete Carroll's corner office is a fine device. I think she did this really well.

 

I actually agree. I just think that's part of what she was doing. If it's me, I go this way.

<i>RENTON, Wash. -- Pete Carroll's corner office has a bathroom in it. And huge floor-to-ceiling windows that overlook Lake Washington and the Seattle Seahawks' practice field. As John Mayer croons on an IPod nearby, Carroll slumps on his couch and thinks, well, this place is pretty sweet, huh?

Until Jim Harbaugh installs an elevator or valet service in his 49ers abode, anyway. </i>

Anyway, it's not a good story. I mean it isn't. Smith seems to have written it before the Seahawks' last two wins, but after that happened....hey gotta change the story. It can't be a tale of Seattle's season. It has to lead with the biggest NFL Playoff Upset in years (since Vikes knocked off Niners in 1987 or Jags over Broncs in 1996) and deal backwards from there. I get that it's a "USC" story because it's for ESPN LA, but it simply needed to be reworked.

Shoot, I'd start with the Marshawn Lynch run, dial it back to the great 2005 Bush runs, using Carroll as a witness to both. Find some way into the story that isn't just: Here's an image, now let me do chronology from there.

 

Joe Owens laid peacefully in his silk-lined coffin, enrobed in a Ralph Lauren charcoal pinstripe suit, a black fedora and black shoes whose shine forced you to avert your eyes. As mourners walked past his weathered oaken casket to pay respects to the man they called Jo-O, it was hard to not to juxtapose the rigors of his life to the rigor mortis of his once-warm body.

On his sheer white linen dress shirt, right above his heart, was a pink golden crucifix and the right half of a platinum locket, placed there by grieving lover Jane Smith. Under the jewelery was a heart dashed by a .38 caliber hollow-point bullet fired by Barney Smith, Jane's wife, on Sunday morning as Jane fixed Owens' breakfast.

 

Several days ago, Joe's body was on an autopsy table. Now, it lies in a coffin.

 

I have no idea why I'm suddenly throwing up in my mouth... lol