I don't read present tense stories except in specific circumstances (like one is chosen for a book club I'm in). I struggled for a while to articulate it; it seemed to me to suck the tension out of a book, but I couldn't explain why. Then I read this article and Philip Pullman articulated my thoughts perfectly: It's the "monotony of texture" and "claustrophobic" phrases that really resonate with me. Present tense writing feels so flat to me (the 'lack of tension' I mentioned). It makes me feel stuck in a particular time in a way that past tense doesn't. I note this article about Philippa Gregory: I assume The Hunger Games was written in present tense for similar reasons: so we wouldn't know if Katniss died at the end or not. That attempt failed with me. For a start, of course it didn't take away my historical knowledge. For a second, it made the characters feel less real because people in my culture, at least, don't tend to tell stories in the present tense. Other readers, of course, like present tense, and there are certainly plenty of present tense books being published. I bought and read both The Hunger Games and The Other Boleyn Girl, and I believe I gave both of them 3/5. I also believe I would've enjoyed them more in the past tense. (As an aside, I read both before I was writing fiction, and was bothered by the flatness that I can now identify as present tense. I don't believe the claim some writers make that only writers care about tense and readers don't - I just think readers don't have the terminology to describe what bothered them.) So, what effect does present tense have on you? Do you even notice it and, if so, did you grow up with novels that used it? The fad started well after I was reading adult books, and it seems to be concentrated in YA, so maybe it just sounds wrong to me in the way that talking about Twitter is alien to my 90-year-old grandfather.
I honestly don't find any effect from it at all, one way or another. I don't even notice it. The discussion reminds me of the idea some writers have that First Person is somehow more immediate or intimate than Third Person. I just don't think that's true. First Person can be remote and distant, Third Person can be very close and personal. It's just a set of grammatical conventions, to me. Same thing, for me, with present tense. It's just--a tense. Just a way of telling a story. I think the level of familiarity is definitely an element. I've read a lot of present tense books, so I'm used to it. But if I read it for the first time, now, I guess it might feel weird? I'm not sure about the parallels to oral storytelling. Partly, I'd say, because I think people in my culture do often tell stories in Present Tense... ("So I'm at the mall, right? And these guys come up to me--it's me and Shelly there, together--and they just start YELLING at us about something we can't even figure out..."). But even without this... there are so many other conventions of written storytelling that aren't shared with oral storytelling (all the descriptiveness, the back story, the flash backs, even the literal dialogue, etc.) that it seems weird to hold up oral storytelling as the model for how written stories should be told. I don't write in present tense much anymore because there ARE people who object to it, but... I'll read it quite happily, if I even notice it at all!
A very distressing and hurtful broadside at the present tense minority. I hope you feel good about your cruelty, @Tenderiser. PS I am removing 6 years of 'likes' probably this afternoon.
First and third also have different 'textures' to me, although I don't dislike either in the way I dislike present tense. It's not about intimacy or immediacy, but they certainly feel different. I probably need Philip Pullman again to articulate why... Tenderiser apologises profusely for any hurt caused. Look at her embrace present tense like a lover. Leave the likes alone.
Pullman's a hack. I think part of it may be that I'm not really a very 'sensitive' reader? I just want the characters and the story and I guess there are some words there, too, but it's pretty rare that I notice a specific turn of phrase or even details about a style of writing, unless I'm really concentrating on "studying" the writing instead of reading for pleasure. I think the writing style probably hits me subliminally, if at all, but... it just kinda washes beneath all the stuff I really care about. And I can get characters and story just as well from present and past.
I'm pretty un-fussy about writing style, too. I only notice it if it's a) so good I'm jealous or b) jerking me out of the story, which is the category present tense falls into.
I wondered why matwoolf was responding to Tenderiser when it was clearly ChickenFreak who had started this thread. I just don't know what to think anymore.
I agree with Sir Phillip Pullman, Hack. (I am presently re-reading his collection of essays, Daemon Voices, and I love it!) I'm not crazy about Present Tense either. Okay, when you're relating a short event to somebody, you might say, "Here I am, sitting in the bathtub, and who walks in?" But you also might say, "I was sitting in the bathtub, and guess who walked in?" Unless the writer is going for short-term humor, I prefer the past tense. It seems more natural for storytelling. However, I would certainly give a present tense story a chance to grab me. I'm sure a few of them have done, in the past. I just can't remember any. I would struggle to keep focused if I had to read an entire novel in present tense, though. If it's common in Y/A fiction, fair enough. I'm an O/F. Just edited this ...brain fart. I meant Present Tense not First Person! Good idea not to press that send button, eh?
I thought present tense served me well for my short story Not Pink but its a real tricky tense. I've only bumped into it occasionally in published form but on other writing sites people seem to love it for YA. I was critiquing someone's piece the other day and my issue is when they get to dialogue and there are these curt back and forth tags that sound like stage directions. He smokes, he smiles, he stands. You really have to lengthen them and get the balance right or drop them all together. Also sometimes words can leave ideas hanging when they're in present tense it's like - He runs to the store versus He ran to the store. In past tense there's a feeling of arrival whereas in he runs you're still caught with the sense of him running and if that's not addressed it can result in jarring transitions. I don't think it's a bad tense but I think the idea that it's more immediate than past is false and in the wrong hands can turn good prose into something kinda cheap.
I love present tense. I feel like I can really get into my writing and write faster when using present tense. It sort of feels easier, and I think that has to do with the monotone feel of the prose in this tense. There is sort of a natural rhythm that comes out. However, it can lead to too many short, chopped sentences and come across a bit juvenile if not handled with care. It can almost start to feel gimmicky when it's not done well. I also think it works better in short stories and essays compared to novels. Most of the short stories I've sold have been in present tense, but the majority of short fiction in these publications is in past tense. I made the decision to write my novel in past tense because I know it's more popular and I believe it will lend itself to a better story. Still, I think present tense is more fun to write and I feel like it's easier to play with subtext. I think present tense is often less sophisticated than past tense can be. As far as first vs. third. I see it as more than just grammar. A first person narrator has a stake in the story so they are going to present the story in a way that best suites their purpose for telling it. A third-person narrator has no stake in the story. They aren't even in the story. We can believe what a third-person narrator is saying because there is no reason not to. In first person, we know there is some relevant reason this narrator wants to tell this story. We can't always trust a first-person narrator, which just by having them tell the story can add a lot in terms of character development. Sure, there are cases where it could be switched over by only grammatical changes, but if that's the case, I think the author might be missing an opportunity to really work the choices they've made to tell the story.
Obviously story telling is about telling anout events that have alresdy happened not which are currently happening. In this respect it makes sense that it can feel a little awkward. Look at this: The wind is still and a cat is stalking stealthily across the lush garden grass. Her eyes sparkle and dart about seeking prey among the small clutch of birds merrily feeding in the flowerbeds. Jerry walks out onto the porch slamming the door. The birds disperse and the cats posture expresses something akin to annoyance at his sudden interuption. It’s just plain weird to have this commentary because it if as if the narrator is in the garden observing like some unearthly presence - for this reason it can/could be used to good effect in horror novels, or as a means to make the reader feel awkward for whatever purpose you may have?
To my way of reading, that "weirdness" you're feeling is more from the omniscient/distant third POV rather than the present tense? Would it actually feel less detached in the past tense? The wind was still and a cat was stalking stealthily across the lush garden grass. Her eyes sparkled and darted about seeking prey among the small clutch of birds merrily feeding in the flowerbeds. Jerry walked out onto the porch slamming the door. The birds dispersed and the cat's postured expressed something akin to annoyance at his sudden interruption.
For me, yes. Maybe it is a subjective viewpoint? To me it seems much more distant/awkward because stories are generally historical reports.
I'm with you. Doesn't make much of a difference to me. You can write a present-tense story that is effectively little different from the exact same past tense story. It's just a stylistic preference--I think Pullman is making too much of it.
I think present tense is harder to write. Or at least to write well. When I'm reading an anthology and I hit the present tense story (there's always one), it's typically the most amateur of them all. It always seems to be trying too hard. It'll be the story with structural crutches and awkward sentences. It'll be smeared with imagery. Its problems are unrelated to tense, but it's is if the present tense draws them out. I don't know if it's a catalyst or just an indicator. But a lot of the best stories I've read are present tense too. Really. I mean absolute genius, godlike stories that knock a reader backwards and then they WISH they could have written it themselves. IMO, present tense tends to the extremes. Maybe just because the author is taking chances? Their risk may or may not work?
I hate present tense. It makes me want to stick my face in a bandsaw. I liked Hunger Games, but kept wondering how Katniss had time to narrate the story while dealing with all those distractions.
I don't take present tense to indicate a character is contemporaneously reciting events, any more than I take past tense to mean a narrator is reciting past events. If the author sets up the book so it is supposed to be one of those things, then sure. Otherwise, I don't personally read them that way.
Yeah, I dont either. But it feels that way to me sometimes. Something about it just irks me. Affected? Pretentious? Not sure: Homer finishes his beer and orders another. The bell above the door rings and he sees his buddy Josh walk in. He pretends not to see Homer. Homer stands up to stab him in the liver. An awed hush blankets the bar like an early November snow.
Thank god I'm not alone with this. I cannot stand present tense. I try to avoid it wherever possible. I think past tense is more natural and it simply reads better as well.