First Person vs Third person?

I wouldn't say that one is better than the other either. I've used both, successfuly (or so I've ben told), and I try as much as I can to balance out the amount of writing in both. 1st person gives a chance for character voice, rather than narrative voice. The quirks of speech, dialiect, and yes, some inner dialogue are more easily portrayed. Trying to write "wordily" in the first person, though has never gone well. "My eyes widened in surprise" is something like that - who in the WORLD has the self-awareness to feel their eyes when something jumps from around the corner at them?
Third person, for me, has always fell into place when I'm writing something "action-packed". And yes, multiple perspectives comes into play as well (though I don't ever write more than one perspective in the same chapter...it goes against the feel of following a character). You can write a novel entirely of first person perspectives from different characters as well, though that'd probably be like schizophrenia. If you hae 5 different characters in your head at once, by all means, let them out!

I just finished reading William Gibson's "Pattern Recognition", which had a FANTASTIC way of combining the tones of both first and third perspectives. It was written in third, and so well-attuned to the character's feelings and actions that I actually though I was reading first person, and was instantly reminded of my mistake when I'd open the book. It's a great example.

Thanks for the thoughts!

Opening

 

there's nothing wrong with disagreeing politely with what someone says in a post, lightman, but rude personal attacks are not allowed on this site... i might want to call some things you say 'frankly moronic' but i wouldn't, as it's not courteous conduct... and i don't know you well enough to be able to tell if you're a moron, or not, anyway...

[mods: if anything i've said in this post oversteps the bounds of acceptable site conduct, please edit it as you see fit]

 

I understand what she was trying to say. When first person is written well, you really actually do not feel as "immersed" in the world as you would in third person. Solely because you feel like you are in someones head watching the story from their angle and nothing else. Whereas in third person you are watching the story from all angles and feel like you are there and part of everything happening.

I am not saying one is better than the other. I am just pointing out (what I think) her point was. And if I got her point correctly, than I agree completely.

On the other side of spectrum, I think first person is more intense and "fly by the seat of your pants," in feeling, as you read a story done that way (which is a good thing since it is all happening in "real time"). Both styles offer different and just as good things.

 

I'll agree with Lightman on this one. If the POV is handled well, then first person and third person can be just as effective in terms of immersing the reader in the story. There is no objective reason that I can think of why "I" would pull the reader out any more than "he" or "she," as all of these reinforce that the story is happening to someone else. And as an aside I might add that novels that make the reader think the story is happening to them seem to be to be few and far between and I'm not at all sure it is the route you want to take. Anyone reading a story will hopefully realize that they are not the characters.

In any event, getting back to the subject at hand, I've found both first person and third person equally immersive if done well. I think the distinctions come down to subjective preferences more than anything else.

 

I think that first person is better when you know your novel is going to be centered in just one character and you know that you're not going to want to see the world through any other character's eyes down the road. It's better when you want your readers to have a strong connection with that pov lead character. In my case , first person doesn't work for me. Last novel that I started writing I had like 6,000 words more or less and I had to start from scrach because I just couldn't do it. I like the flexibility that 3rd person gives you. You can see the world through any character's eyes, and I don't know, I just makes the character creation more entertaining in my opinion.

 

Yeah. I think people are really trying to place one over the other when they are simply tools for an author to use at different times. If the story is basically being told from one perspective, you might as well go first person with it, even if the perspective isn't from the main character. To Kill a Mockingbird was told from some little girl's perspective when she wasn't really a primary actor in the plot. Most of the Sherlock Holmes stories are written from the perspective of Watson.

 

Where was the personal attack? An attack on your statement is by definition not a personal attack.

 

Neither one is better than the other, as you say they're just tools. I think the story itself will dictate the right one to use. If an author does't know, or is not sure of which one to use at the time to begin a story, you can be pretty sure the answer will be clear down the road in the writing process regardless of the point of view he or she had chosen.

 

yes, you did, jh... thanks!

lightman:
if you say that a person's 'comment' is 'frankly moronic' what can that be but a demeaning of the person who made it, since the comment could not have made itself, could it?... thus, it's a 'personal attack' whether you want to admit it or not... 'nuff said... i'm hors de combat on the issue from here on...

 

Many of my favorite books are in first person, and many are in third person. Both have their pros and cons-- I use first person when trying to get into a single character's head and third person when focusing more on a group as a whole. There have been times when I've gone back and changed everything just because I thought it flowed better in first person or vice versa. I don't consider one as being 'better' than the other.

 

I disagree with this statement. I have no problem being drawn into a first-person story just as much as I am into a third-person story. I fall into imaginary worlds, imaginary situations, empathizing with imaginary people, perhaps too easily. I think most other people do the same - empathy, I think, isn't really dependent on whether one is reading first person or third person.

If a reader isn't as drawn into the story because it's in first person, I would think that would indicate a failure of imagination on the part of the reader, not a problem with the point of view the author chose to use.

 

That isn't what she is saying, you guys are not understanding at all. All she is pointing out that is first person has tunnel vision and third person has a much broader vision. She isn't trying to denounce first person at all. Just stating why third person is used a lot more than first person.

And honestly, you cant say she is wrong. Because there is no denying first person is a story told from one angle and third person is told from all angles. Also, no one is trying to say first person sucks.

 

Oh jeez, this is what I get for sleeping days at a time.
Just got around to making my way back to this site and I'd like you thank you all for your responses; they've helped a lot.
I think I really do know the legit pros and cons of first/third person now, but you've all helped me with more than just that haha.
Man, sounded really petty just now, anyway, I wanted to say thanks =)

 

H.P. Lovecraft was a master of the 1st person story. I can't imagine an editer telling him 3rd person would have been better.

 

I am understanding. Read the specific statement I disagreed with. It goes:

"in first, the readers aren't drawn into the story as they are in third, because all those 'i's and 'me's keep reminding us that it's someone else it's all happening to..."

I said I'm drawn into a first person story as much as I am into a third person story. The 'i's and 'me's don't change that at all for me.

She did not say, in that statement, that first person has tunnel vision and that third person has broader vision. I singled out that one statement of hers as the one I disagree with specifically. I didn't say she was denouncing first person. I didn't say she said first person sucks. And I never said first person sucks. I said that I'm bad at writing it, but I specifically said that wasn't a problem with first person, it was a problem with me.

I also disagree with this statement of yours: "Because there is no denying first person is a story told from one angle and third person is told from all angles." This is not always true. Sometimes stories are written in first person from several points of view, with a different character taking the POV in each chapter. Also, in third-person limited POV, the story is told from one character's viewpoint, almost as though it was in first person. Third person is not always told from all angles.

 

That is still one viewpoint at a time. Which is one angle through their eyes.

Whereas third person, even if it is told through one POV, is still like being "zoomed out" on the entire picture. Instead of "zoomed in" on one thing. You can see and feel everything going on around the character(s). Whereas first person is only what one character can see and feel at a time.

You are missing my point as well, so I will clarify further. I was not talking about how many POV's there may or may not be in a first person/third person story. I was talking about how they are written. The number of POV's is irrelevant. We are debating on writing style. Not POV count.

 

I disagree with your friend. First person makes a story more personal. However, it is limiting in that you can only tell that person's point of view. I like third person because you can tell more than one point of view. I read a novel recently that switched between first and third person, and that left me confused. I kept thinking when it was third person that the main character was talking, or if not, did he know what the others were thinking? That was totally weird.

There are times for both. I wrote a story in first person about someone with multiple personality disorder (or dissociative disorder), and when the main character was one of his alter egos, I switched it to third person because it was as if the main character was describing the others' thoughts and behaviors. I was experimenting with POV in the story, and I think it was successful. However, it was difficult to make obvious.

 

That just means it wasn't done well. Some great novels have switched between first and third person -- The Wide Sargasso Sea immediately springs to mind.