First or Third, a simple question

I have written third person for a couple of short story competitions, I am contemplating it for a novel I am writing.

However I have a blast writing first person, I don't like being as detached from my story as third person makes me. I like the wonder of being one of my characters of seeing the world from his eyes. It does require a greater degree of inventiveness to find ways to make the whole story to work. A lot of my story ideas and plot came because it was in first person.

I am having fun for my second novel because I writing from the point of view of a different character and getting to observe the character I wrote from the POV of in my first it is fun. I don't think i could hold my interest writing third person long enough to get a whole novel out.

 

yet again, saved by the cog!

he said it all for me...

 

Cog, I agree 100% with what you just posted! (Just in case you thought I never agree with you about anything ...)

 

whether reading someone else's story or writing my own I have no preference.
It all depends on the story. Some stories lend themselves better to first person others to third person.
If unsure which is going to be best for your story, write a short sample from both view points and then decide which one works best.

Trial and error is the answer.

 

I've written four novels so far. The first two were written in the 3rd person; the third was written in the first person; the fourth was written in the first person in the first chapter, with the rest of it in the third person. I did this because the first chapter served as an introduction, but I also wanted to get inside the head of one of the characters and make it very personal. The rest of the novel is flashback, and then catching up to present day. It couldn't be in the first person because of the limitations noted by Cog and others above.

In an earlier thread, Cog suggested that I write the first chapter in 3rd person limited, and I actually went back and started to re-write the chapter. But before I'd gotten very far, I realized that there was an emotional element that would have been lost, and I decided to leave it as it was. The character in question was feeling deep remorse for things he had done years before, things that would later be divuled in the story, and it seemed to be less manipulative for him to set the stage for these things in his own words than for me to do it for him.

I mention all of this because the choice between 1st and 3rd person (or even - shudder! - 2nd person) is not a simple one, and certainly not based on which is easiest to write. I agree with Cog that writing in 1st person is harder than writing in 3rd. But it can be very worthwhile.

 

I agree with Ed - the question should always be which works best for your story. Mine could be written third person but a lot would be lost, the very teenage observations would go etc. I am not so sure as much will be lost with my second so I am writing it first person for now with a possibility of changing it for the final draft.

The writers with talent for imbuing third person with first person like qualities and vice versa are rare. Rest of us have to work out how to tell each story in the best manner possible.

 

Charlotte - just out of curiosity, why would you lose the very teenage observations? I don't have a problem with 1st person POV at all, so I'm not questioning your decision to use that POV. I happen to like a good 1st person story. But I'm wondering about the comment that you'd necessarily lose those observations in 3d person.

 

Perhaps because there is usually an expectation that a third-person narrator has a more mature perspective.

 

Har har har to mature third person narrators. If I'm writing a story 3rd person the temptation to use my own voice is usually resisted, but in one novel lately written, I just couldn't resist, and it's now my favourite thing I've ever written

(I got to make a load of really rude jokes in the narration, leaving the characters to all be really serious -- with me telling it all, I could be the comic relief character, in essence. Like, hey, lol, these guys are angsting so much, aren't they silly? Let's have a sex joke to lighten the mood since one of them's run off crying.)

(that never actually happened )

I usually use a serious third person voice for longer novels, though. Lately I began experimenting in first person. Agree that keeping a plot together is harder - even in my most limited third person, I could point out so many things that a character can't even look at.

So I decided when I was writing my lastest project, it'd all deliberately be about the things the character saw and didn't think about, leaving me free to introduce plot elements with abandon, but keeping his focus elsewhere so it didn't look like I was cramming it in, in the same way you can get away with in third person.

But yeah, there are advantages and disadvantages to telling a story either way. I sometimes get too hung up on plot, so I stopped writing third person a while and just let the stories happen as they would. Probably next year I'll be like, "Argh, I just want to PLOT something and make it all happen!" and it'll be back to 3rd person.

 

Well, it goes without saying that the perspective of the narration can't be any more mature than the perspective of the one doing the writing. I suspect that was what Elgaisma was getting at.

 

I have personally experienced this!

The first novels I began writing (and abandoned) where all like that. I wrote 7000 words for what was supposed to be a small introduction. I found myself rambling on and on about things, and my character had already explained several important things even though nothing had really happened.

What I believe is that as long as you stick to the rule of "show, don't tell", first person should stay under control. My current work is being written in first person, but this time is much different. I wrote a more meaningful first chapter with less than half the words of the above attempt, and told just as much, if not more.

But I really like first person. If your novel focuses on your character's inner struggles, then this is the better narrative.

 

I absolutely agree with you. I have read one book with first and third person perspectives and it confused the hell out of me. I hated it. It may have been done well elsewhere, but it's not something I would ever try to do myself, and if I came across another book written that way I'm not sure I would read it.

 

Thing is I did a basic survey about reading habits at the local library - most readers don't seem to notice what POV or tense a book is written in, and don't care, many avid readers couldn't tell me what POV the book they were currently reading was in they needed to check. All they care about is did they enjoy reading it, was it a good story etc. I should imagine if you choose the wrong one to frame a story they will notice as it won't work or be as good.

Only reason I now know what my favourite books were written in (books I have read over 7 times), is I went and checked when I heard first person and present tense may not be a good choice for my story. I realised seven out of the top ten were written in first person. Have added the God Box to that. Also first person.

 

I'm not really sure I see a problem... There are hurdles inherent with either approach, yes. That is the nature of the beast. Obviously, if this project is "... a very character-based story," you still have the option of writing in first or third. You want to be able to view the world in your story through your mc's eye then, obviously, you will want to choose first person. If, however, there are issues that need to be presented that are outside the mc's ken, then you will need to opt for third person.

As you say, only you know what you need as far as tools to deliver the story. As you say, you know the problems you will face with each approach. Neither is easier to read than the other. It's just a matter of how well it's written. As far as preference for reading? Again, it just depends on how well it's written.

 

I think third person with a lot of use of Free indirect speech/Free indirect discourse could be a golden middle way for you. Its sort of let you slip in some first person perspective and tools into third person texts.

Look it up, here is a quote from wikipedia.

Spoiler

Comparison of styles

What distinguishes free indirect speech from normal indirect speech is the lack of an introductory expression such as "He said" or "he thought". It is as if the subordinate clause carrying the content of the indirect speech is taken out of the main clause which contains it, becoming the main clause itself. Using free indirect speech may convey the character's words more directly than in normal indirect, as he can use devices such as interjections and exclamation marks, that cannot be normally used within a subordinate clause.
[edit] Examples

* Quoted or direct speech:

He laid down his bundle and thought of his misfortune. "And just what pleasure have I found, since I came into this world?" he asked.

* Reported or normal indirect speech:

He laid down his bundle and thought of his misfortune. He asked himself what pleasure he had found since he came into the world.

* Free indirect speech:

He laid down his bundle and thought of his misfortune. And just what pleasure had he found, since he came into this world?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_indirect_speech

 

Wikipedia, as is not unusual, is not entirely correct.

The preferred form for direct unspoken dialogue is without quote marks:

Direct unspoken dialogue may omit the tag (he thought in the above sample) if the context makes it clear. Sometimes, the appearance of first person statements may be enough to herald unspoken direct dialogue:

Indirect dialogue, whether spoken or unspoken, with or without an attribution phrase, is not quoted. Indirect dialogue paraphrases the speech or thought, rather than reporting the literal text.

 

The wilkipedia entry is far from extensive, but one single quote to present the concept and a more extensive search on the internet will turn up more. I got my view on free indirect discourse from TTC lecture seares "The art if reading" by Timoty Spurgin.

Free indirect discourse insnt just about dialoge, and unspoken dialogue but can be used in lot more senses to let character perspective slip in to the narrative.

"Peter looked around the room, and he noted a fat Lady occupying the whole living room couch. He disposed her but she smiled back at him." This is a quite forward third person neutral narrative. The narrator don't voice any strong voice or opinion of their own of the events.

"Peter looked around the room, and a Lady Emma occupying the whole living room couch. Peter glared at her, but Lady Emma was a wise and tolerant old women and smiled back patiently." A third person narrative with a third person offering a narrative perspective of their own on the character they present (which may or may not be an all knowing perspective.) Desperate Housewives, and Dead like me is excellent shows with an narrator that do offer an perspective of their own. Terry Prattchett and Douglas Adams is also writers that have an narrative with a strong voice (but do also use free indirect discourse)

And then if we venture into the land of free indirect discourse we let can let the characters perspective of things gently slip into the narrative.

"Peter looked around the room, and he noted a the obnoxious holier-then-thou fat Lady Emma occupying the whole living room couch with her fat ass. Then she smiled at him like he was some kind of sulking child." This description reeks of being seen through Peters eyes, without actually going into any unspoken dialogue, or stating openly that things were written this way because that is the way that he sees them.