Hello! Just wondering what peoples' thoughts on this are... I have a story in mind that I'd like to try writing, but I haven't been able to decide between first-person or third-person POV. Normally, I'd just pick one but this particular story is making things hard. I have two main characters that I want to switch between. (every other chapter or something like that) One MC is very personable and outgoing, and will have several important side characters to interact with. I think first-person would feel too trapped in their head and restrict me from working with these other characters as much as I'd like. So third-person seems best in this case. The other MC... doesn't speak and has a very limited understanding of the world; it's kind of an important plot point. I'd like to be able to get in their head so the reader can understand them, and I'm not sure close third-person would be enough to do that. What do you think? Should I just choose one and deal with it? Maybe even choose just one MC to focus on? Or is it okay to mix first and third if it's done by clearly delineated chapters and characters? (I don't want to seem like I'm doing it just to be gimmicky) Thanks!
My initial reaction was 'pick one and stick to it'. However, I think if you're careful, and pay close attention to consistency, using first with just the one character (in his chapters only) could actually work. It would certainly have the advantage of further separating him from the other, more 'normal' characters and how they react with the world. I can see the possibilities in it. I'd be interested to read it and see how it works out.
Hello Barkly, Clive Barker does this in his short story: Jacqueline Ess. The portion of the story that is done from Jacqueline's POV is close-3rd. The portion of the story that is done from Oliver -a support character- is done in 1st. However, there is reason for this. Oliver's narrative is meant to be a confession, a memo, he has written down for others to read. - If you are new to writing, I'd suggest you stick with one narrative mode, and 1 MC to follow. I wish you the best of luck. -OJB
1: I've seen novels use both first and third person, but very few, and it seems risky. 2: You can absolutely get in a character's head so the reader can understand them, in close third person. Can you clarify why you feel that you can't?
Thanks for the advice everyone. ChickenFreak, you're right that I could probably express a lot with close third. But I guess what I'm thinking is... that if the character doesn't talk I can't express their 'voice' in third person without having line after line of "he thought". Does that make sense? Either way, I think I'll be taking a hard look at how I'm doing things to see if I can make something more conventional work. Because even though people are saying I can technically get away with mixing first and third, it seems like everyone's gut reaction is not to.
You can. You absolutely can. You don't need all those "he thought" thingies. I'm making a mental note to try to remember to come back to this thread and elaborate, when I'm not peeling several dozen cloves of garlic.
Returning to offer something that I wr0te for another thread, to demonstrate something else. No "he thought", but IMO it gets pretty snugly into Joe's head. Raining. Of course it had to be raining, on the one day that the car was being serviced. Joe leaned on the post of the bus-stop sign, as if it could provide shelter. And why wasn't there shelter? He'd seen those little glass-walled things in other cities; why not this city? What, the locals weren't worth the money? Probably somebody hadn't filled out the grant application, that was it. He snatched his phone out of his pocket and made a note: "Complain to City re bus shelters." Rain ran over the phone as he did so. Probably going to ruin it. That would be the city's fault, too. "Excuse me, sir?" "What?" Joe turned to glare at--glare down at--the face of the little woman standing next to him. Little woman in a rain coat and a rain hat, little woman looking contented and dry and bleeping friendly. He hated her, just looking at her little contented face and its curls of hair, dry hair, probably warm hair, under the hat. Stupid woman. Didn't she know that she should be angry about bus shelters? "What do you want? I'm waiting for a bus here."
If you can distinct the the two POVs enough so that both you and the reader can understand what you're conveying then I see why not.
Unfortunately (though exciting) it's my own freshly-harvested not-cured crop, and the skins are still flexible. Important gardening tip: when planting a storage crop, think about the storage. I have 100-odd bulbs and nowhere to cure them, so I'm experimenting with frozen pureed-with-oil. (My understanding is that fridged pureed-with-oil is inviting botulism.)
I would personally find it more confusing to have multiple characters speaking from first person; my novel follows two MCs and a couple of other characters occasionally. The 'main' character, who spends the most time narrating, is in first person; everybody else is in 3rd. I've had several people read what I've written so far, and not a single one has complained about the switching of POVs. (complained about a lot of other things, but never that.)
If the story is written in 1st person and past tense, it could be assumed that the POV/MC were aware of a situation that happened after the fact. So I mean, it could work, as long as the reader knows the setting has changed and the POV/MC is not present.
I am going to go with it only works in narrative/diary format. The main narrative is in third limited, and then have first hand accounts to give the former some personal feel. Otherwise I would go with what I was told, and not mix the two. And for the sake of keeping things less confusing only have one MC, lest you put in a ton of extra work to denote a multi-MC story line. Otherwise don't do it.
This. I think some of the best writers are rule breakers. However, the rules must be broken carefully so it looks intentional rather than like a lazy mistake.
It has been done before and I think as long as it is easy to understand and well written then it can be pulled off. however, there is a reason why it is not used all that often (not that I am aware of at least)
Roadside Picnic by Arkady & Boris Strugatsky. alt.human by Keith Brooke. As others have said, it's been done, but I think you need to know what you're doing. Not that I'm suggesting you don't (know what you're doing), of course. Simple answer, if you think you can handle it well enough, then go for it.
I had the same problem. I like to write physiological stories, and I found it difficult to get inside the minds of characters from the third person. I researched how other people had done this. In Dostoyevsky's Crime and Punishment the narration is entirely third person, however, it fully describes the internal thoughts and feelings of Raskolnikov. It also bounces around when there are other main character at play. The scene where Soyna's father dies switches back and forth between them a few times and I was never confused as to who was who, largely because the characters were so different from each other. In Stephen King's Gerald's Game, the third person narrator is not in the characters head, but more of an observer. However, the point of view often switches to the first person in italics when she is thinking to herself. To me it's seamless and allows full immersion into the character by knowing what they are thinking as well as being able to narrate parts of the story that Jessie was not present for. I chose to go in the King direction and mostly use an omnipotent narrator that jumps into people's head as needed. It takes a while to get the wording right, as you want to transition into the person's head and not simply jump into it. Sort of like switching to and from cutscenes in a video game.
I have combined 2nd person present (in one character's voice) with 3rd person past (with a different character) and while I think it worked, it was hard. (The differing tenses actually helped, and I kept to clear blocks in each and tried to make each clearly closed off in the final sentence).
Sadly yes - I know it's a different animal from the first and third the OP is dealing with, and should have made it clearer that I was simply giving it as an example of the possibility - and difficulty - of mixing the different modes....
It drives me insane when I read a book and all of sudden the pov changes. I just find a little jarring. I guess if it's done well and have like italics be the character's thoughts, it can be good. I like what the Song of Ice and Fire books do and have each chapter be a different character's pov bu its done through third person. If you think you can do it, go ahead. Yo do you.
I and @K McIntyre use italics for thoughts, though the POV for that person is close third otherwise. Since that is the POV character, we also have access to what is inside his or her head. @K McIntyre used an interesting twist in her just out "Parham's Mill" in which the FMC is a wolf-shifter. When she is in human form, she is handled as close third. But in her wolf form, she is first person, of course since wolves can't talk! It is all in her head. And she refers to her human persona in the third, someone the wolf persona is aware of, but does not really understand all of her human ways of thinking. Worked surprisingly well!
