|
|
|
|
|
| SFReader Forums > SFReader > Ask The Expert > 1st Person Present POV | Forum Quick Jump
|
| I prefer to write using... | | 1st person present tense - 5.6% | | 1st person simple past - 16.7% | | 3rd person present - 11.1% | | 3rd person past - 61.1% | | a different POV altogether - 5.6% |
| | 35 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 | | [ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> | Show Oldest Post First ] |
| 
R. L. Copple
Acolyte
      
Date Joined Mar 2007
Total Posts : 242
| Posted 3/14/2008 1:46 AM (GMT -5) |   | I understand there are two versions of 1st past. Keeping in mind, with a limited pov like limited third or first person, the "now" is what the character is experiencing as he/she experiences it. That's a pov told that way because present tense tends to be jarring for most people. But the first person pov has the advantage of being able to get deeper into that character's way of seeing things that limited third even. Plus, as mentioned, you can keep the pov character in the dark better. But, the first person allows the writer to have the reader really experience it through their pov, however perverted or error prone it might be, so that you can experience it as that person experiences it. Third person, limited, accomplishes some of that, but not as deep. The reader keeps a more objective view of the events and the narrator can't validly "lie" to the reader, you assume you are experiencing things as they are really happening, aside from some writing tricks where things simply aren't as they seem.
But both third and first have a more omni viewpoint that can be taken, where the narrator, whether first or third, is "apart" from the story as its happening, and can give a broader view of events. In first person's case, by sounding more like a person who has sat down to tell you a story, and occasionally breaks in to comment on what's happening. In third person, like someone telling a story, but also has the freedom to go into other heads or tell about events that none of the characters know is going on.
Either way, the omni view takes the reader out of the story as it is happening (the "now") and you are in the narrator's pov, like Lewis and Tolkien tended to write. While past tense in either first or third allows that omni view to happen, whereas present tense doesn't at all, it is a real "It's happening now" viewpoint, you can restrict them to just what the character knows is happening at the time it's happening in the story, with no narrator breaking in to add commentary. But if you "limit" the past tense pov to what the character knows at the time it is happening, the effect is to have the reader stay in the story, or as I called it, the "now" of the events as they happen.
This isn't to say, "limited, good, omni, bad," but only that both are valid forms of pov in either first or third past tense. But, the difficulty in using a more omni, first person, past, is not only the smoothness of the shifts between "in the story" and "in the narrator's telling of the story" so that they don't jar the reader out of the magic, but also that, like a good story teller, you don't give too much away to keep the tension up, as well as not using it simply as a means to create artificial tension, "If I had known then what this would lead to, I would have run from them like a dog on a conveyor belt." Sometimes, those are difficult lines to find, and why writing a good story in that style is hard to do, especially in these days when that style isn't as much "liked" as the more limited first past and third.
But, one of the reasons I wrote my novella stories in that first person, past (limited) view point was to have the reader experience the story through his eyes. That fact plays a significant role in the novel sequel I've written and am currently editing in a critique group, and I'll be interested to see their reaction to it when we get there. But his narration never assumes he knows what is coming, as if he is outside the story, relating it to us. It's all, "in story."
Anyway, that's the points I was making. While there are other reasons to write in first person past, I don't think they mean that writing in a first person, past, limited, means you might as well do third. There can be valid reasons for using that point of view instead of limited, third, past. All depends on how you want the reader to experience the story, as to what pov you use. And you use the one that will get the job done the best.
R. L. Copple
blog.rlcopple.com
www.raygunradio.com
www.haruah.com
Infinite Realities available at Amazon.com | | Back to Top | | |
 |
Bill Ward
Biblioholic
Date Joined Jul 2006
Total Posts : 1718
| Posted 3/6/2008 11:42 PM (GMT -5) | | First person is only ever limited to 'what it knows at the time' if it is in present tense.
First person, past tense, in presumed to have been written after the fact--by definition it would have to be. It's not a question of omniscient or limited omniscient, its not like 3rd person in that respect at all (ie an observer not part of the action).
The example you give for Lewis doing that is 3rd person is so far removed from a first person narrator saying it as to be a different animal entirely. First person is supposed to play that game, third can't do it anymore without sounding like...C.S. Lewis.
I'd go so far to say that a first person narration in past tense that doesn't take that into account has failed--its supposed to be written from a point in the future, the narrator knows things you as the audience do not, and it should color his narrative. Not saying he should drop a hint about everything, but some of the impact of the events of the story have to be there in the narrative for it to seem plausible. If they aren't, it should have been third person to start with.
And you're more than welcome to seek refuge in that Anthony, 'cause its true! 
...and I'll go even further to say that the only narrative that can't break the 'now' is present tense, however the modern tight third, past, limited has become understood to be a sort of false 'now' that when the storyteller foreshadowing or commentary thing shows up it seems weird now. It wasn't always understood to be so, after all it is 'past' tense, their were no rules saying the 'now' of the story was a horizon the storyteller couldn't see beyond. Modern 3-past has evolved into a transparent narrator, a camera--but a first person narration cannot afford to be transparent like that.
billwardwriter.com | | Back to Top | | |
|
Anthony G Williams
Greybeard
Date Joined Apr 2007
Total Posts : 419
| Posted 3/3/2008 2:35 AM (GMT -5) | |
ScrewMoonshine said...
Anthony G Williams said...
My least favourite to read is omniscient: I really hate it when the all-knowing narrator interposes comments like ""little did he know that this would prove a terrible mistake". I've stopped reading books at that point. Forgive me for digging up such an old post(I've been off the boards for a while), but I had to laugh a bit when I read this because I'm now reading Scales, and I just finished a chapter where you did the same thing in 1st person POV: "'OK, set it up. I don't see how it can do any harm.' That proved to be the most inaccurate judgment I had made for a long time." Furthermore, you ended the very first chapter with another such all-knowing comment: "That was the first indication to me of the difficulties which lay ahead." So I have to ask: Why do you hate this sort of thing so much in 3rd person, yet find it perfectly acceptable in 1st person? If anything, I'd think it would work the other way around, since it's illogical for a non-omniscient narrator to know the future. (For the record, I saw no problem with either of those bits you wrote.) Robert Orme
It's a fair cop guv! 
I'll take refuge in Bill's explanation... 
| | Back to Top | | |
|
R. L. Copple
Acolyte
Date Joined Mar 2007
Total Posts : 242
| Posted 3/2/2008 11:49 PM (GMT -5) | | That would be true of a first person, omniscient narrator type set up. More like the pov person is telling you the story that did happen rather than having it happen in the moment, so they can say things like that. But if your first person is limited to what he/she knows at that time, then it would break that pov as well. Past tense does lend itself more to throwing in omniscient comments like that, but I think that needs to be a consistent practice and an obvious intent, or else it can appear like an accident if it is just done on rare occasion without any seeming need.
Those kinds of comments tend to attempt to foreshadow an impending tension that is coming. But unless it is intentional first person omniscient, it would be better to foreshadow that in the story itself rather than to break the reader out of the "now" of things happening to dish up info. But each person has their own feel for that, when it becomes an intrusion rather than part of the story's flow.
BTW, CS Lewis does this a lot in his Chronicals of Narnia series, he intentionally writes more omniscient third, and frequently makes statements like: "But what Shasta didn't know was..." (My fourteen year-old-son didn't like that, he wanted it to remain a mystery until Shasta found out, if ever. He said it took all the tension out of the scene. I keep asking him if he wants to be a writer, but he says no. He's got the brain for one, though.)
R. L. Copple
blog.rlcopple.com
www.raygunradio.com
www.haruah.com
Infinite Realities available at Amazon.com | | Back to Top | | |
|
Bill Ward
Biblioholic
Date Joined Jul 2006
Total Posts : 1718
| Posted 3/2/2008 5:33 PM (GMT -5) | | ScrewMoonshine said...
So I have to ask: Why do you hate this sort of thing so much in 3rd person, yet find it perfectly acceptable in 1st person? If anything, I'd think it would work the other way around, since it's illogical for a non-omniscient narrator to know the future.
Not to answer for Anthony, but they really represent completely different things in 1st and 3rd person. In 1st, the narrator is a character, in 3rd the narrator is not...unless he starts dropping comments of that sort. In 1st, comments like that represent characterization, in 3rd they represent judgment and commentary, and they break the fourth wall in 3rd person in a way they do not in 1st person narration--which is by, and to, a person. 3rd is, now-a-days, a more objective and 'transparent' voice for narration, it isn't supposed to draw attention to itself in that way.
billwardwriter.com | | Back to Top | | |
|
ScrewMoonshine
Adept
Date Joined Aug 2005
Total Posts : 871
| Posted 3/2/2008 1:49 PM (GMT -5) | | Anthony G Williams said...
My least favourite to read is omniscient: I really hate it when the all-knowing narrator interposes comments like ""little did he know that this would prove a terrible mistake". I've stopped reading books at that point.
Forgive me for digging up such an old post(I've been off the boards for a while), but I had to laugh a bit when I read this because I'm now reading Scales, and I just finished a chapter where you did the same thing in 1st person POV: "'OK, set it up. I don't see how it can do any harm.' That proved to be the most inaccurate judgment I had made for a long time."
Furthermore, you ended the very first chapter with another such all-knowing comment: "That was the first indication to me of the difficulties which lay ahead."
So I have to ask: Why do you hate this sort of thing so much in 3rd person, yet find it perfectly acceptable in 1st person? If anything, I'd think it would work the other way around, since it's illogical for a non-omniscient narrator to know the future.
(For the record, I saw no problem with either of those bits you wrote.)
Robert Orme
Out now:
"Time in a Capsule" in Unparalleled Journeys II (www.journeybookspublishing.com/)
"On the Tree Top" in Ultraverse vol.3 #5 (www.ultraverse.us)
"The Scab, the Man, and the I.V." in Mount Zion Speculative Fiction Review #3 (www.mountzionpress.com)
Coming soon:
"Replacing Someone" in Aoife's Kiss #26, September 2008 (http://samsdotpublishing.com/aoife/main.htm)
"More Than One Way to Protect" in Lords of Justice (www.carnifexpress.net/blogs/) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Ana the Druidess
Stablehand
Date Joined Jan 2008
Total Posts : 7
| Posted 1/29/2008 6:51 AM (GMT -5) | | I have used both first and third pov in writing.
I really like third person (mixed) past pov for SF because then everything/one has a chance to explain their actions/ideas/thoughts etc which so adds to the full spectum of the project's time and place.
Having said that, for quirky crime and humour I really like first person past pov because you are right in there up close and personal. Somehow it doesn't work for me (being the operative word - me) so well in SF as it's more difficult to get the accurate "feel" of that one individual in that very specific time zone *absolutely* right.
But...whatever you're happiest in will work best for you. Good luck! | | Back to Top | | |
|
Anthony G Williams
Greybeard
Date Joined Apr 2007
Total Posts : 419
| Posted 1/28/2008 10:01 PM (GMT -5) | | |
I agree with Gustavo: 1st or 3rd person past.>>
> >
I used 1st person in "Scales" because I wanted to emphasise the intensity of the experience of the main character. In "The Foresight War" I used the 3rd person because I needed the POV to keep switching from one character to another. It's horses for courses…>>
> >
One book I've read recently which plays around with POV is VanderMeer's Veniss Underground: 1st, 2nd and 3rd all in the same story. I posted a review on my blog. >>
> >
My least favourite to read is omniscient: I really hate it when the all-knowing narrator interposes comments like ""little did he know that this would prove a terrible mistake". I've stopped reading books at that point.>>
> >
Tony Williams
Scales (2007), The Foresight War (2004)
Homepage: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk
Blog: http://sciencefictionfantasy.blogspot.com/ >>
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Hermit
Diavhrati Luminary
Date Joined May 2007
Total Posts : 1729
| Posted 1/28/2008 2:48 PM (GMT -5) | | | If you ever want a really horrific example of second-person past, check out Stuart O'Nan's "Prayer for the Dying". It's historical fiction, takes place during a cholera or diptheria epidemic in Wisconsin or Minnesota I think. Chilling and really darned uncomfortable to read. Good story, though.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
tchernabyelo
Acolyte
Date Joined Oct 2006
Total Posts : 457
| Posted 1/28/2008 6:00 AM (GMT -5) | | I've written stuff on all of those and others (I've used future tense on occasion: I've never used true second-person POV, though). Predominantly, I write past tense. I choose presetn only rarely and generally for particular purposes. For instance, I've done some retellings of Norse myth and I deliberately do those in present to give an immediacy that counters the "oh I'm reading stories from a thousand years ago" preconception.
Brian Dolton
Yi Qin stories:
"The Box Of Beautiful Things" - IGMS#3
"The Man Who Was Never Afraid" - Abyss and Apex #20
"At Blue Crane Falls" - Abyss and Apex #25 "Where No Wind Blows" - Staffs & Starships #2 (forthcoming)
"What The Sea Refuses" - Black Gate (forthcoming)
"What The Heart Bears" - Black Gate (forthcoming)
Other Land Of Wind And Ghosts stories:
"The Dragon Path" - Fictitious Force (forthcoming)
"Three Out Of Four" - Sorcerous Signals Feb-Apr 08 (forthcoming)
Stories in other settings:
"The Unicorn Hunter" - OG's Speculative Fiction #8
"Call Centre" - Necrotic Tissue #1
"When Winter Came" - ASIM #32 (forthcoming)
"Cold Fire" - Flashing Swords #9 (forthcoming) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Hermit
Diavhrati Luminary
Date Joined May 2007
Total Posts : 1729
| Posted 1/26/2008 7:16 PM (GMT -5) | | |
agregious language deleted . . .
A well-rounded artist should be able to slip from one to any other POV with subtle shift. This can be done within a work as well as between works. A work (not spec) in progress by the very talented and genius poet Daniel E. Blackston I've been advising on does just this with almost seamless efficacy.
RHFay said...I will say that it often works for my poetry, but I don't think I've really tried it with a story.
Overall, I would say that consistency is most important - but there are always factors that can override that. I like what i call "camera-eye" perspecive, which is a specialized 3rd-person demi-omniscient that rarely goes into the psychological internal aspects of narration except in terms of figurative photo-realism. If you've seen that wierd Jackman film with the Tree of Life thing, you know what I mean. (Can't believe I'm blanking on the name of that film . . .)
"Serpent and the Rainbow" used it to lesser effect.
I am enjoying the first-person of my current novel, but prefer the above-stated 'camera-eye' view. It actually comes from my penchant for photographic portraitism and my motion-picture imagination.
Read me soon in The Return of the Sword!
Blog: http://bitterhermit.wordpress.com
Poetry Blog: http://fringemonkey.wordpress.com | | Back to Top | | |
|
crystalwizard
Forum Moderator
Date Joined Nov 2006
Total Posts : 5004
& |
| | |