First person / Third person

[Oblomov]

I wonder what the members feel about reading books written in the First person style as opposed to the more conventional Third person? The former obviously looks at everything from the main character's perspective thus has less flexibility in terms of 'other people & situations', but that is not necessarily a disadvantage under a skilled writer. Some of the best classics are in First Person - eg Jane Eyre, Moby Dick etc and many modern thrillers work well in that format. While I have no preference over either style, I do feel that the author needs more skill to write an interesting First person story because of the restricted perspective.

[samgrosser]

Interesting point.

 

My mother always says she doesn't like books written in the first person. I've got no preference - some of my favourite books are written in the first person (A Farewell to Arms and Jane Eyre spring to mind) but like you say, I think it takes a lot of skill to do it well.

 

I've tried writing in the first person and find it incredibly difficult - not so much because of the limited perspective, because I think the format largely makes up for that limitation by the reader's intimacy with the narrator, but because I find it very hard to make it read like anything other than a diary.

 

The first draft of the novel I'm working on at the moment was written in the first person, because I wanted to see if I could do it. It was all right, but not that great. I've now rewritten it in the third person, with 3 different perspectives, and it's a much better novel for it.

 

So I guess it depends on the needs of the particular story, and the skill of the writer.

[Kell]

I don't really have a preference of one over the other - my only problem is when the narrative is in present tense, whether in first or third person:

 

"I go to the shop and I meet Gerald who offers me a crisp from his half-crumpled packet. I decline his greasy offering in favour of a healthier snack - I must watch my figure after all!"

 

or

 

"She goes to the shop and meets Gerald who offers her a crisp... she must watch her weight after all."

 

I think I hate the latter more - it just smacks of contrivance. I'd rather read something in the past tense.

[Freewheeling Andy]

I've never had the misfortune to read third person present tense; but I'm reading a first person present tense book at the moment and it's really, really annoying.

 

For one thing, it feels like a conceit which is designed to allow the narrator to die at the end of the book.

 

I don't mind the "nearly present tense" of a diary format, one which therefore doesn't know what the outcome will be. But the literal present tense drives me insane.

 

But I'm equally happy with first and third person books; they offer different insights, but I don't think one is worse than the other.

[samgrosser]

I've never had the misfortune to read third person present tense;

 

Third person present tense can sometimes work - in The English Patient for example, where it's used sparingly - but generally, I agree with you; I think the writer has to have huge amounts of talent for it to be anything other than very annoying.

[Oblomov]

Present tense narration is annoying whether in first or third person. It may occasionally be interesting in the first person when we know the narrator has a disturbed mind. I think one of the two versions of Daniel Keyes' Flowers for Algernon is written that way.

 

I don't like Third person present tense in any fiction, but it occasionally works well when discussing something chonological - like a timeline of important events during the Depression era or similar.

 

It is interesting how a lot of people quote Jane Eyre as the classic example of a good First person story. I think that it is very deeply impressionable in that sense.

[Janet]

I don't really have a preference of one over the other - my only problem is when the narrative is in present tense, whether in first or third person:

 

"I go to the shop and I meet Gerald who offers me a crisp from his half-crumpled packet. I decline his greasy offering in favour of a healthier snack - I must watch my figure after all!"

 

or

 

"She goes to the shop and meets Gerald who offers her a crisp... she must watch her weight after all."

 

I think I hate the latter more - it just smacks of contrivance. I'd rather read something in the past tense.

I find that difficult to read too, not because it's hard to follow but because it's so damn annoying. I read a book (years ago, I think it was a Freya North) when it jumped from saying "Emma thinks she'll have a cup of tea" to "Emma had a cup of tea" - it was very annoying.

 

As for first/third person - I don't really mind.

[wrathofkublakhan]

I think the first person point of view is a literary convention that works very well when appropriate. Flowers for Algernon is a great example.

 

What comes to my mind is the funky detective novels! The street-wise PI with all the trimmings, "she walked into my life like a dog pissing on her territory." I think when the bulk of the story is character driven, that's when first person works so well. I suppose I mean unusual character driven, knowing how the main person thinks is as important as the events taking place.

[Oblomov]

I know that it might sound daft, but has anyone come across a book, or even a short story written in the second person? Obviously, it will have to be one person's viewpoint of another being narrated to that person. I have heard claims that there are a few stories like that, but personally I have never come across one. Would be quite a feat to pull it off convincingly.

 

One scenario I can imagine is where someone went through a very traumatic experience (say, in a war) and is either in a semi-catatonic state or amnesic. His friend or comrade-in-arms who went through the same experience might then narrate the sequence of events to the victim in the latter's perspective. Difficult, but I think it can be done.

[wrathofkublakhan]

I know that it might sound daft, but has anyone come across a book, or even a short story written in the second person? Obviously, it will have to be one person's viewpoint of another being narrated to that person. I have heard claims that there are a few stories like that, but personally I have never come across one. Would be quite a feat to pull it off convincingly.

 

One scenario I can imagine is where someone went through a very traumatic experience (say, in a war) and is either in a semi-catatonic state or amnesic. His friend or comrade-in-arms who went through the same experience might then narrate the sequence of events to the victim in the latter's perspective. Difficult, but I think it can be done.

 

It'll probably be vilified by this forum but some pornography is written in the second person*

 

*At least, that's what someone told me ~ of course, I'd never venture into that arena.

[Echo]

I just finished Notes on a Scandal and it was written in first person, which was perfect. By looking at the character of Sheba through the colored observations of Barbara, I got a unique view of the story, instead of some omniscient third person voice.

[angerball]

Present tense bugs me, and has put me off reading a book in the past (can't remember which one it was). I've read Flowers for Algernon, but I have to admit that I don't remember it being written in present tense.

 

I'm not too bothered by first or third person perspective; I used to have a problem with books written in the first person perspective, but not anymore. If a book is well written, then I'll gladly read it, regardless of which perspective it is in. However, like I said before, I just can't get my head around present tense. I think it's down to the fact that I like to see a novel as a 'memoir' of sorts and to be written relating to past events. Books written in present tense just somehow make me think of those quest type computer games, full of short sentences that just state facts, rather than indepth thoughts and emotions.

[Oblomov]

angerball;89220 Present tense bugs me, and has put me off reading a book in the past (can't remember which one it was). I've read Flowers for Algernon, but I have to admit that I don't remember it being written in present tense.

There are two versions of Flowers for Algernon. The 25-page 'novelette' is certainly written in the First Person-Present Tense format and is all the better for it. I don't own a copy of the full novel and since it has been some years since I read it, I cannot recall the narrative format.

 

However, like I said before, I just can't get my head around present tense. I think it's down to the fact that I like to see a novel as a 'memoir' of sorts and to be written relating to past events. Books written in present tense just somehow make me think of those quest type computer games, full of short sentences that just state facts, rather than indepth thoughts and emotions.

I think present tense, whether in first ot third person, can work in the hands of a skilled writer. An extreme example is the mixed format sometimes used by Thomas Harris in all his Hannibal Lecter stories. Although the basic format of the novel is in past tense, Harris often switches to present tense while dealing with Lecter's world.

 

What we have to remember is that in most instances the standard "past tense" used by writers is really only a step behind present continuous tense because of convenience (and the manner in which we understand the concept of language). If the sentence says "James Kirkland drove into his garage and parked the car", the event really takes place in the 'present' of the story but is described by the writer to us in past tense as though it was written about moments later. Think about it!

[Polka Dot Rock]

Thinking about it, I think I'm quite a fan of First-Person Narratives. I would never choose a book just because it was/n't in First-Person, but a lot of my favourite novels are written in First-Person: my absolute favourites are Jane Eyre and Nervous Conditions, which are both written from an individual's perspective. And there are others too: Middlesex, Wise Children, Great Expectations... Actually, it's a quite a majority that are in first person! I never realised before!

[JudyB]

I don't mind either - what's important is that it fulfills the writer's intention well ie. that it works. I quite like it when a combination is used - I thought that was a very effective technique in The Vanishing Act of Esme Lennox.

[Hazeltree]

I've not seen anything written on this forum about Diana Gabaldon's books, but she combines 1st person and 3rd person narrative fairly well. The first book is purely first person and the later ones have different sections depending on the person who's perspective you are seeing from.

 

I find her books interesting - the writing is not brilliant and there are several cross continental errors (the writer is American but the characters are British and much of the story happens in Scotland). However, if you can get past that - the characterisation is fantastic! I've read the books several times because I start missing the characters if I've not read them for a while. The errors do show up more though, the more I read them!

[Fiona]

Hazeltree - yeah Diana Gabaldon is a good example of someone who writes first person fantastically well. Her characterisation is spot on and I think that's important and hard to pull off.

 

I do like first person, but as it's been mentioned here, it has to be really good. First person for me should be really detailed and intimate. First Person POVs who come across as flat provides no characterisation whatsoever.

 

I've read more third person, but I think that's just because it is more common. I'm not put off my first person, or third person. I'm put of my present tense though - that's probably harder to pull off then first person because it always sounds so... false and to me - unrealistic.

 

Other examples of books written in first person which I have enjoyed are the Sevenwater trilogy by Juliet Marillier and The Poisonwood Bible by Barbara Kingswood. Those are the ones which come to mind straight away.

[Michelle]

I've not seen anything written on this forum about Diana Gabaldon's books

 

There's a thread here. It is a little old now, but I'd rather that authors only have one thread in that particular section, so feel free to add to it.

[wrathofkublakhan]

Well, thanks to this thread, I'm suddenly all sensitive about it.

My current book, The Privilege of the Sword has the main character in first person and the other three characters in third person (meaning one chapter will all be I, the next will all be he or she).

 

And ... it pretty much blows.

I'll I care about are the I chapters and I'm impatient with the he/she chapters.

 

[JudyB]

It's never stupid to ask questions - it's good that you feel you can.

 

First person is when the character is telling the story themselves ie. I would be used, for example, 'I went out' or 'I caught the train'.

 

Third person is when the character is described by the story teller therefore he or she is used, for example, 'he went out' or s'he caught the train'.

 

In some books the writer will use both or one or the other.

 

Hope that helps.

[pontalba]

I've not really analyzed my preferences throughly, but I'd have to say a combination makes it more interesting to me. We also have to take into account the reliability of the narrator, no matter if it is 1st or 3rd.

I enjoy seeing inside the reasonings of the main character, but to step outside and see him/her from a different perspective can be interesting.

[JudyB]

I've not really analyzed my preferences throughly, but I'd have to say a combination makes it more interesting to me. We also have to take into account the reliability of the narrator, no matter if it is 1st or 3rd.

 

I agree - both offer different perspectives and very often it is the choice of perspective that shapes the story. There's a lot to be said for example, for knowing more than the main character or knowing what the character is thinking so that you (and that character) know more than the other characters. (hmm - hope I haven't made that too complicated!)

[pontalba]

I agree - both offer different perspectives and very often it is the choice of perspective that shapes the story. There's a lot to be said for example, for knowing more than the main character or knowing what the character is thinking so that you (and that character) know more than the other characters. (hmm - hope I haven't made that too complicated!)

LOL I agree, and no you didn't make it complicated, but it is a bit complicated. Anytime we try to analyze enjoyment or non-enjoyment of a novel, trying to take all the ingredients into account sort of spirals.

No one comes to the table with the same life experiences, so cannot have the same feelings, so will enjoy different perspectives, or the same perspectives for different reasons....

See what I mean? It just spirals away from ya.

[Liz]

I enjoy both first-person and third-person perspective books. Both have their good points (which have already been mentioned in the thread, so I won't repeat everybody). Neither style would put me off a book.

[Oblomov]

One of the most remarkable First Person books has to be Ken Kesey's One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. The story is written from the perspective of the Native American inmate Chief Bromden, who is little more than an obscure bystander when looked at from the other character's perspective. Still, his presence and unique narration in the story is what gives it such poignance and power at the same time.