I've never been able to make first person work for me. I seldom read first person work, though; it has to be from a writer that I trust will sweep me into the story despite my irritation at the form.
I do both, depending on how I want to describe the story. Every story has its own aura and style, and in order to bring that out properly I wander in between different experiments. However, it is a known opinion that first person is effectual when the views and ideas of the person are more important than anything, while the third person works well in all other situations. Where second person is hardly used. My opinion would be: whatever suits you. I find both styles, both pleasant and unpleasant at times. Since my characters are a part of me, it's like a activating a chunk of my head when I write about them. It depends upon the emotions they activate in me when I think of them. Do they make me giddy, or serious? Rude, or loving? And so, it drafts out the style I'll adopt.
I prefer to write in first person most of the time, I think that if you are writing something that takes place over a large geographic area (such as the Lord of the Rings trilogy) I would use 3rd person just to incoporate more people's opinions.
I think the reason people write first person - and I'm going to be frank - is because they think it's somehow "easier" than third. I see this a lot with new writers who write in first person. I'll read a story that should have been written in third, and I'll ask, "Why was this in first?" It's unusual because the only discernable difference between first and third is the use of "I." First person is supposed to be very personal, yet I see all the time first person writing as if it were an ambiguous narrator, i.e., "I walked here," "I saw this." There's no sense of character in these narrations. No internal insight. Just a relay of events that could have just been conveyed through a third-person narrator. I find first person to be an extremely difficult form of writing. I think the industry is a little biased against it, too.
It is very common to see first-person narratives as an element of third-person narratives - i.e. when a character describes what just happened to him or her - though I would wager that it would be hard to find an example of a third-person narrative appearing within a first-person narrative (unless the main character happens to be reading a book). First-person narratives lend themselves very poorly to movie scripts (as compared to third-person narratives), which may explain the relative scarcity of mainstream first-person literature. Third-person is inarguably more difficult to write, if taken to its logical conclusion - rather than being an individual experiencing the imagined elements of one's story, one must fully visualize the world in which one's imagined story takes place. If you are looking to transition from first-person to third-person narrative (or just for the sake of a fun thought experiment), try sitting in a busy public place for a few minutes and taking a mental snapshot of the people surrounding you. In a first-person narrative, the most you could hope to accomplish would be a description of each person and perhaps a conversation; comparatively, a third-person narrative allows you to pen in everything that happened to each person in this crowded setting, perhaps even their life stories (if you feel so inclined).
I keep reading this is a bad thing. why? Some of my favorite books were head hopers. I enjoy that style, I Dislike first person actually, find it a bit limiting as a writer and a reader. In my Novel I have two heads I Jump back and forth but only when they are apart, I stick to the main when together. It works really well and my test readers like it. I Just can't see how the story Could have it's flow without it.
Given the description given by the OP, I'm going to assume that head hopping is when there is a change of narrator in the story or from first person to third person, or a mix of the like? If this is that case, China Mieville uses this writing style to good effect, but it has to have a reason, otherwise I think it's a cheat in order to tell a part of the story that the point of view chosen simply cannot tell.
Sounds like interweaving a bunch of first persons in a single narrative to try to get around the limitations of the first person POV. I wouldn't think it would be all that effective in doing so, but would just be likely to sound muddy and fragmented. And I am assuming, like Wreybies, that it is spelled with a double P. At least, here's hoping it is!
OOOOOH Head Hopping. It depends if you set up the story in 1st or 3rd person and whether it's limited or omnicient. I think 3rd person omnicient is the least disorienting to hop from one character to the next becuase it's fully okay with in the set up. If, however, you have two first person limited POVs, then it can be jarring to hop back and forth. I'd set up the pattern right away so people understand it's how the story will work.
Yes it was hopping, it was early, sorry about that. I guess it is just an influence of the type of book I like. I will use Stephen King's The Stand. You bounce from head to head and one experience to another until in the end thier lives unite. I just enjoy that style. I have seen many other books do this as well, I don't know if it is a cheat to get around a story, never really thought about it. I do try to learn from the authors I read, it was just something they did that I enjoyed and tried to capture the talent. I will have to go back and see if I am using it as a get around, or using it to enhance the story. It's food for thought. Though I do write in third person, I wouldn't be able to pull off a first person that way, I wouldn't know where to start. thanks.
It all depends on how you manage it. The book I'm reading now (The Scar) is written primarily in TPO, but the auther (Mieville) does sometimes 'hop' into a character's head to give a real feel of what is going on from that person's perspective. He could easily tell the same in TPO, but it would not have the same intimacy. He 'hops' into most of his character's heads in this work and in Perdido Street Station and it works really well because it lends a personability to his characters; it makes it easy to feel with and for them in the quick snippets of FPL.
Head hopping can be highly annoying if not done the right way. It jars the reader and all we end up doing is rolling our eyes. If done the correct way though, in a fluid motion, everything is fine. The key to proper head hopping is to be subtle about it, don't let the reader know. If you want to have multiple POV's from certain characters, then fine, but watch out for the head hopping. POV's should not change during a single scene. They should be spaced out, a new paragraph when someone else's POV comes into view. Don't slap us in the face. Such as, for instance, you're in a bowling rink with a couple of friends. Think of it as a story. You only know what you're thinking, not what the others are, although you can guess. For different chapters, or page breaks, you can add in another character's viewpoint, but until those times, it's best to stick with one character. Baaad, foreshame on you!: Yay! We learned something!: See the difference? XP ...So lame, I know, aughhh. Hopefully you guys can see the point in the examples o_o
I like POV switching in third person, but only if it's from chapter to chapter or section to section - not during a single scene like Kaij noted.
There's a difference between having several POVs and head hopping One is the right way, the other is the wrong.
So I have a story I'm working on and there are two characters that I'm using as the POV characters at various points in the story. I've started it in third person because that seemed the best idea at the time and it was the way that it came to me as far as what to write at the moment. However, now I'm rethinking that and I'm trying to decide between third person and first person. And I'm trying to think of the pros and cons of this. Right now here's what I got: For 3rd person: -already have about 7 pages of 3rd person -more objective description of places, people, things -can kind of view from a character other than the two main characters -can intersperse the two story lines within one chapter (until they meet up of course) instead of separating one from the other For 1st person: -can delve into each character's view a bit better (personally, i find it a bit easier to get into a character's head in first person) -more colored view of what's going on, biased (which isn't a bad thing) -need to have distinct voice for each character (separate the views by chapter) -need to separate what I know will happen from what the character knows (they don't know everything and so it could create more suspense) So if anyone could help me by telling me their own personal experiences they have with each view and possibly things to watch out for or why you prefer one to the other that would be a big help. Thank you for reading this and any discussion is appreciated.
If you're working with more than one POV, it's usually best to stick to third person unless you really know how to do first person really well. And even then, first person with more than one POV can get confusing after a while. It usually comes down to what kind of story you're writing. Detective stories and psychological thrillers work really well with first person, but epics and stories on a more grandiose scale work best in third person. With the multiple POVs, I recommend third person, but I think you might need to tell us a little more about your story or post a short excerpt for the best advice.
Thank you for the advice. I'll tell you some more about my story. Its a modern fantasy setting. It will have some thriller and horror and fantasy elements. The gist of it is that there are non humans living among humans every day. The government knows about them and kind of watches to make sure they stay hidden from the main population. A fraction of the non humans create a group that doesn't want to take hiding what they are anymore. So they take some humans hostage to make a point and try to get what they want which is recognition, fear from humans and a more direct control in the human world. That's the short summary of it. One of my view point characters is one of the hostages. He isn't human either but he doesn't really agree with the group at least not the way they're going about it or what they want. He keeps what he is a secret and tries to help the humans get out which causes a whole lot of problems for him. The other view point character is also a non human and she was taken by the group shortly before this hostage situation. She ends up becoming a member of the group and helping them out not necessarily out of agreeing with them but out of wanting to stay alive. She ends up needing to make a choice between her life and the other view point character's life. Does that help any?
Since you put yours in a list, here's what I've gotten from 3rd v. 1st person experiences in a list of my own. Third Person Wide variety of "types" of third person, ranging from third omniscient (very distant) to third limited (more intimate) Able to use wider range of vocabulary and sentence structure as long as it is "in character" for the viewpoint character. Easier to jump from one character to another. Easier to understand different characters and the dynamics between them because of relative narrative distance. Seen more commonly in published works and therefore may be easier to read (ie--readers are used to it). Able to create a more literary work because of a lack of personal narrative voice (ie--the character's not recounting the story in his/her voice). Descriptions are easier to create. Pacing is easier to master because there isn't a personal narrative voice who may or may not change pacing with his/her personality. Can get bogged down in description. Third person is more prone to suffer excess from narrative summary. Characters can only (professionally) be conveyed through their behavior, and/or are colored by a third-person limited's character, or even the own author's bias. (Ie--I like Bob, so Bob gets the better description and treatment.) Better for serious stories. First Person The ultimate intimate narrative voice. Gets right inside the character's head. Can use different voices (ex--a "snarky" voice). Greater freedom in tenses (ex--it's a little more acceptable to use the word "you" inside first-person fiction). Harder to create descriptions because of a narrator's voice. If a narrator wouldn't call the mountains, "verdant, jagged peaks" it's not going into the story whether you like it or not. Risk of trapping your readers in the character's head through interior monologuing, excessive or not. A character with a bubbly or bouncy personality may ruin flow with his/her voice unless the writer is very skilled. Some writers run into the trap of starting too many sentences with the words "I" or "my". Suspense can be intensified. Can also be ruined if the narrator tends to interior-monologue too much. Very personal. Readers tend to get attached to first person narrators, especially those with good voices and an interesting story to tell. Better for humorous stories. Emotions and actions can be inflated until they're melodramatic. From my experience, this is what I've found. Most writers will tell you to avoid the first person POV if you can. It's too difficult to sustain a good voice, pacing, and to characterize more than just your narrator. However, third person does have its pitfalls as well, as you can see. For most stories, I recommend third person. Most tragic stories are in third person because it's hard to write them in first person because of the high emotions. (First person tends to make them sound melodramatic.) If the story is a very personal one that relies on the narrator's comments, thoughts, behaviors, and/or personality(ies), then first person is usually the way to go.
Thanks for the advice and the list It's definitely something I'm going to have to get a lot of thought and probably I'll write a some parts of the story both ways and see what happens. Perhaps I can put up what I write from doing that and get some feed back later on. You have helped out a great deal by telling me how you look at it. And given me quite a bit to think on.
Piers Anthony did this interesting thing on "On a Pale Horse" where it was in third person, but in a way that the MC's thought were being expressed almost as good as if it was in 1st person. It would often delve into the MC's mind, explain it's point of view as the MC perceived it (without changing POVs) and even ask rhetorical questions without it coming out as awkward. Great book : p.
Hi all, I know this question has been made millions of times, but I'm too confused to look through past threads right now. In the chapter I've been working on there are two women who are in an emergency waiting room. One is the mother of the MC (who has attempted suicide), the other woman is the MC's best friend. Both of them are waiting to have news on the guy. The two women have met just once in the past and they hate each other, so they just sit waiting but don't talk to each other. What I want to do is to switch POV from one to the other 4 or 5 times through the chapter but I don't really know how to. The MC's mother's name is Lydia, and the other woman is called Pat. So far I referred to one or the other just by using their name, but I'm not sure I can do that when passing through the character's close POV. So for Pat, Lydia wouldn't be Lydia, but Tommy's mother, and for Lydia, Pat wouldn't be Pat, but "that woman". My main doubt is how to properly use this trick, I'm afraid it may sound weird or confusing to reader. Any suggestions?
