# The story in first person...



## iralangstein (Apr 23, 2012)

I think the narrative in first person is the most engaging
form......and done properly, can capture the reader best.
What say you all?


----------



## iralangstein (Apr 23, 2012)

Agree or disagree?


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

I don't think I have a preference. As long as it's not present tense.   


Mike


----------



## Jan Strnad (May 27, 2010)

First person narrative sucks you in and gives you a story from a certain perspective, which means the narrator may be reliable or unreliable or some mixture thereof. Those are powerful techniques, but they aren't the best choice for all stories.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

This topic. . . . . person and/or tense. . . .comes up every 3 or 4 months.  I'll say what I always say.  I don't notice it. . . .unless of course the writing is really bad.  But I probably don't attribute the problem to either person or tense.  I attribute it to bad writing.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Ann in Arlington said:


> This topic. . . . . person and/or tense. . . .comes up every 3 or 4 months. I'll say what I always say. I don't notice it. . . .unless of course the writing is really bad. But I probably don't attribute the problem to either person or tense. I attribute it to bad writing.


^What Ann said.


Betsy


----------



## intinst (Dec 23, 2008)

Ann in Arlington said:


> This topic. . . . . person and/or tense. . . .comes up every 3 or 4 months. I'll say what I always say. I don't notice it. . . .unless of course the writing is really bad. But I probably don't attribute the problem to either person or tense. I attribute it to bad writing.





Betsy the Quilter said:


> ^What Ann said.
> 
> 
> Betsy


/\ /\ What Ann & Betsy said  /\ /\


----------



## Sean Patrick Fox (Dec 3, 2011)

I won't say that I don't notice, because I do. But there is no "best" POV. Some stories lend themselves to being told in first person, some to third person. They allow the reader to see different things, and I enjoy them both.


----------



## marianneg (Nov 4, 2008)

I tend to prefer first person because it feels more intimate, more like I am actually the main character living the adventure. I also tend to dislike the "god" perspective, where we know everything that's going on with everybody. That's not to say that I don't like third person, though. Some of my favorites are third person, so I guess I really agree with Sean that the main thing is the skill of the author in using the person to the best effect.


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

It is just one of many tools to use like a screwdriver or a drill or a hammer. You are also limited by the accuracy of what that person is telling you. It can be very limiting, but it can be engaging.


----------



## dalya (Jul 26, 2011)

In Year of the Flood (Margaret Atwood), one POV character is in 1st person and the other is in 3rd. I loved to book, but I didn't like that choice. I actually kept mixing the characters up.


----------



## Not Here (May 23, 2011)

I don't have anything against first but it can be limiting at times. I guess it really depends on what kind of story is being told and how much I want to see from others perspective. Sometimes a close 3rd gets things across better and allows more flexibility. I will say, I'm not really a fan of present tense. It's just too exhausting to read.


----------



## George Berger (Aug 7, 2011)

The thing about first-person is that it really needs to be an interesting and unique character with a real, and strong, personality, and who _actually does stuff_, whose head you're in. I know, I know, it'd be nice if all characters were interesting and unique and had real and strong personality and did stuff, but...  But if you look at, say, Zodiac by Neal Stephenson - Sangamon Taylor _makes_ the book, full stop. He's an abrasive, cynical putz, but, well, he's got personality, and he drives much of the main plot. It works. The Kate Connor books, by Julie Kenner? Eh, not so much. They'd lose a lot of their charm if they were written in the third person, but Kate is kinda... two-dimensional and less-than-memorable, to the point I kind of wish the later books in the series had been written from the POV of her daughter... or even her _neighbor_, for crying out loud, and later on in the series she's barely even the main character, just following what's-his-face and Father whatever around, being reactive rather than proactive. James Alan Gardner had a thing for writing SF in the first person, and was sometimes more successful than at others. Faye Smallwood (the protagonist of Vigilant) is a much more compelling first-person narrator than Festina Ramos, the protagonist of Expendable, because her personality is a lot stronger and she _actually does stuff_. Festina, alas, spends 90% of Expendable basically following other, slightly more interesting, people around, occasionally coughing up an infodump or angsting about her dangerous non-sentience.

It's one of my big complaints about the Haruhi Suzumiya series that the first-person narrator pretty much _never does anything_. Okay, he's the "one sane man" in a band of supernatural weirdos, and entertainingly sarcastic, but he's pretty much the gopher and errand-boy, especially early on. By book three or four he actually gets to "do stuff", but, still...


----------



## Ben White (Feb 11, 2011)

George Berger said:


> It's one of my big complaints about the Haruhi Suzumiya series that the first-person narrator pretty much _never does anything_. Okay, he's the "one sane man" in a band of supernatural weirdos, and entertainingly sarcastic, but he's pretty much the gopher and errand-boy, especially early on. By book three or four he actually gets to "do stuff", but, still...


I'm kind of both with you and against you on this, because when Kyon actually DOES do something it seems all the more impactful. On the other hand his sarcastic schtick gets old pretty fast. And to be honest I mostly read it for Yuki.N anyway.


----------



## scottmarlowe (Apr 22, 2010)

Robin Hobb's Farseer books were done in 1st person to great effect. It made it so the ending of the first trilogy had that much more of an impact.

If done right, it can be a powerful mechanism to draw the reader in.


----------



## William Woodall (Jun 8, 2009)

Like others have said, I really think it depends on the story.  I think Robert Heinlein has a wonderful way with first-person narrative, for example.  The danger of writing a story this way is that the success of the whole book depends on how well that one character is portrayed.  If that character is colorful and engaging and lovable, then first person can be an awesome way to tell a story.  It creates a level of intimacy between the character and the reader which soon makes us feel like best friends.  That's powerful.

Some of the characters I've met this way still stick with me, even years later.  I remember Kip Russell from "Have Space Suit: Will Travel", for example.  The book itself wasn't all that great, actually, but Kip was such an awesome character that he carried the story all by himself and I kind of wish he were really real so I could talk to him in person now and then.  

On the writing side of things, I've tried using both first- and third-person point of view.  I wrote my werewolf hunter series in first person, because it was built around a strong central character with a lot of personality and so that POV worked really well.  I'd never done anything like that before, but I think it was almost as entertaining to write such a thing as it would have been to read it.


----------



## ShanaMars (Apr 29, 2012)

I don't like first-person plural ("we"), like that book about the jobs and the layoffs, from a few years ago. I can't remember the title. I didn't finish it.

And I don't like second person ("you"). Although it didn't stop me from reading _Bright Lights Big City_ back in the day, it would stop me from reading anything else written that way now.

Apart from that, first, third, present, past; it's all good. As many have said, it's up to the skill of the author.


----------



## LCLarson (Jan 3, 2012)

As long as the author is consistent and plausible, I don't mind 1st or 3rd person. I probably prefer the omniscient third person with access to the private thoughts of all the characters as I like to get to know what they are thinking and what motivates them.


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

D. said:


> In Year of the Flood (Margaret Atwood), one POV character is in 1st person and the other is in 3rd. I loved to book, but I didn't like that choice. I actually kept mixing the characters up.


It's becoming an increasing trend to switch between 1st and and 3rd or to swap between two 1st POV. I typically don't like it. I think if you want to have more than one POV, just use 3rd person!



Sean Patrick Fox said:


> I won't say that I don't notice, because I do. But there is no "best" POV. Some stories lend themselves to being told in first person, some to third person. They allow the reader to see different things, and I enjoy them both.


Ditto.


----------



## laurie_lu (May 10, 2010)

The books and series I've enjoyed the most have been written in first person.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

I read'em both.  I don't care.  Present tense ... meh.  I do notice it and tend to shy away from it, but used occasionally within a book it usually fits well to make something immediate or to stand out.

A well-written story is a well-written story.  It's going to speak to some people and yet there will always be some people who don't like the tuning.


----------



## lmyrick (Feb 23, 2012)

Great if done well, horrific if done not so well. I think it is hard to do first-person well, and more than a few writers fail at it. I think the key, as others have said, is to have an engaging first person character who stays in character for the whole book.


----------



## That Weird Guy.... (Apr 16, 2012)

I am good either way, but form some reason, if the book is a certain genre (mystery horror) having it be in first person kind of takes away some of the suspense since you know that person telling the story "lives" at the end (in most cases... See Mr. X by Peter Straub!)


----------



## Sean Patrick Fox (Dec 3, 2011)

T.J. The Diva (but not really...) said:


> I am good either way, but form some reason, if the book is a certain genre (mystery horror) having it be in first person kind of takes away some of the suspense since you know that person telling the story "lives" at the end (in most cases... See Mr. X by Peter Straub!)


That's not necessarily true. It can be a first person narrative and the MC dies at the very end, or dies and then there's an epilogue from the POV of another character. First person certainly has some limitations, but not being able to kill off the protagonist is not one of them.


----------



## D. Nathan Hilliard (Jun 5, 2010)

The main character is always critical to any story, but when a story goes into the first person perspective who s/he is becomes crucial. Because now everything is being filtered through this characters outlook, biases, and perceptions...s/he has now taken on the added role of "window" to the writer's world. So for me, a first person perspective is great as long as the writer really thinks his character through, and takes that added role seriously.

And as has been pointed out elsewhere, first person characters can (and do) die in books.


----------



## JFHilborne (Jan 22, 2011)

I prefer enjoy books written in first person. I don't enjoy reading those written in present tense.


----------



## Nancy Beck (Jul 1, 2011)

jmiked said:


> I don't think I have a preference. As long as it's not present tense.
> 
> Mike


I don't care about the tense (or tenses; I've read books that had both 1st and 3rd) as long as it reads well.

Present tense CAN be done well, but it's hard to pull off; I agree that most present tense stories I've attempted have failed miserably. However, there was a short story I read about 3 years ago (wish I could remember the name of it, darn it!) that pulled it off beautifully...which goes to show it can be done if the writer knows what to do.


----------



## imon32red (Jun 15, 2009)

I normally don't like first person books, unless they are really well done.  I think it is a lot easier to notice flaws in first person books, and they seem to stand out much worse.  If the book is good however, after a few pages I usually forget it is in first person.  

One advantage that first person gives you is the feeling that you are personally involved in the story.


----------



## Amy Corwin (Jan 3, 2011)

Nancy Beck said:


> I don't care about the tense (or tenses; I've read books that had both 1st and 3rd) as long as it reads well.
> 
> Present tense CAN be done well, but it's hard to pull off; I agree that most present tense stories I've attempted have failed miserably. However, there was a short story I read about 3 years ago (wish I could remember the name of it, darn it!) that pulled it off beautifully...which goes to show it can be done if the writer knows what to do.


You can pull off present tense in short sections or short stories much easier than an entire book. I can take it as a small section, but I can't (as a reader) tolerate it for an entire novel because it starts to sound too "Dungeons and Dragons-like" (I see a door and wave a magic wand and...). Just my opinion, of course. 

I like first person because it's like listening to a friend relate a story. Again, just my opinion. I tend to gravitate to first person or third person, past tense. Those are always my preferences. And if an entire book is in present tense, well, I just put it aside and find something else to read.


----------



## soyfrank (Feb 2, 2011)

I prefer writing in first, but enjoy reading either. I hate second person, however, except in Walter Kirn's Up in the Air.


----------



## Geemont (Nov 18, 2008)

I have to admit to loving unreliable narrators: characters to lie or fail to tell the whole truth, and it's up to the reader to understand what really happened. Not all stories will work this way, but the payoff for success can be great.

I don't need narrators to be a friend, feel close to them, or even be someone I'd like, but they need an engaging perspective. I'd also disagree that they need to _actually do stuff_. Philip Roth, for example, is a master of the narrator who observes and barely effects the story.

Also, I think authors do better when constrained or restricted; first person can force the author to focus on certain elements while other issues are going on outside the narrator's knowledge. Hemingway once said (I paraphrase) good writing is like an iceberg, but you only see the 10% at the top, but you need to know about the other 90% without seeing it directly. First person can drop you right into this mode.

First person present tense only works for stream of consciousness, IMHO.


----------



## Joseph_Evans (Jul 24, 2011)

I actually avoid first person narrative stories - I really prefer third person and I will go out of my way to read them exclusively. I've tried to work out why this is, and the only thing I can think of is that I need my personal space and being inside a character's head is just too close for comfort maybe. With third person, it's like I can sit back and enjoy the action unfold before me.


----------



## LilianaHart (Jun 20, 2011)

I'll read anything as long as it catches my attention and the writer has a great voice. I've read books using just about everything, and you hardly notice after the first little bit once the story grabs you.


----------



## John A. A. Logan (Jan 25, 2012)

One of my favourite novels, Knut Hamsun's HUNGER, is told in the first person, and it works to stunning effect, the interior of the main character's soul is laid bare. 
Another of my favourite novels, John Kennedy Toole's A CONFEDERACY OF DUNCES, is told in the third person, and it works to stunning effect, the interior of the main character's soul is laid bare.


----------



## Jon Olson (Dec 10, 2010)

I used to like first person, but now I find if you can see the protagonist from outside, you get a fuller picture of him/her.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson (Aug 25, 2010)

I usually prefer third person, but at least with first person you know the MC is not going to die at the end (otherwise they couldn't be telling the story   )


----------



## smallblondehippy (Jan 20, 2012)

scottmarlowe said:


> Robin Hobb's Farseer books were done in 1st person to great effect. It made it so the ending of the first trilogy had that much more of an impact.
> 
> If done right, it can be a powerful mechanism to draw the reader in.


Hobb's books are a great example of first person working. But for me, these are the exception to the rule. I generally don't like first person. I like to be able to see a story from other character's perspectives and find first person quite limiting. In fact, sometimes if I pick up a book and see it's first person, I'll put it back. My loss I suppose because I'm probably missing out on some gems!


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

Geemont said:


> ...Also, I think authors do better when constrained or restricted; first person can force the author to focus on certain elements while other issues are going on outside the narrator's knowledge....


I think this is one of the reasons I often enjoy 1st person novels (though I by no means consider either 1st or 3rd to be "better"). I find that 1st person tends to constrain the author to telling a single story, rather than being seduced by the temptation to write huge, convoluted stories with multiple sub-plots distributed amongst several primary characters and switching perspective every chapter (or more!).

That's not to say I can't enjoy big, multi-plot/character novels: I do when they're done well; but often they seem to get bloated, confusing, and ponderous, leaving me a need to cleanse my palette with a shorter, more concisely and cleanly told story.


----------



## Darlene Jones (Nov 1, 2011)

I've read some great books in first person. I think it takes a particular talent to tell the story from the one pov and admire authors who can do so.


----------



## Picky Cat Editing (Dec 26, 2011)

I prefer writing in first-person because it allows the reader to become part of the story, and I enjoy reading first-person for the same reason. However, I've read third-person books that I couldn't picture as first, as well as some that were first-person but would've probably been better off as third. Like previously mentioned, if the MC isn't interesting, then first probably isn't the way to go.


----------



## Tony Rabig (Oct 11, 2010)

First or third are fine with me.  Past tense preferred, but depending on the work in question present is okay too.  Maybe it's just me, but I find present tense (thought by some to lend immediacy to a story) creates a feeling of detachment somehow and keeps the reader at arm's length.  When writing I've been using first-person past for short stories, and for the novels I'm trying to whip into shape it's third-person past.  In one short story, "Anonymity," I've used first-person present, because I wanted that feeling of icy detachment for that protagonist and those events and first-person present seemed like a good fit.  (Not exactly self-promotion, that -- the story's in a collection that I unpublished a few weeks ago.)


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

Tony Rabig said:


> (Not exactly self-promotion, that -- the story's in a collection that I unpublished a few weeks ago.)


Sure it is. 

Mike


----------



## RichardHein (Jun 8, 2011)

I used to really dislike first person, but The Dresden Files broke me of that. It made first person an enjoyment to read. Since then, I've found it a bit easier to dig into some other first person novels, though present tense still puts my teeth on edge a bit.

I can't say why I used to dislike it, though. Some people say it's more intimate, but I think a well written third person narrative can expose just as much of the point of view character's thoughts and feelings - not to mention if it's a multiple POV book, you might get some external insight into a character that you simply can't in first person. I think it's mostly about a cinematic feel for me. Third person feels like a large and epic movie unfolding before me, while first person tightens that narrative up to a much smaller world. It's irrational, and not even true in many cases (I'll admit I have a very shallow reading pool), but that's been my experience.


----------



## Tracey Ivy (May 7, 2012)

I am working on a novel in first person right now and it is so very different to write.  I am enjoying the challenge but it isn't easy.  I love reading a good first person narrative but they are difficult to write without becoming too too interior.


----------



## Mata (May 7, 2012)

I have to agree, first person is much more intimate and you get into the action much faster although I wouldn't say I have a "preference".  It all depends on the story, the writing.  A good story told in 1st or 3rd person is great!


----------



## Guest (May 8, 2012)

Amy Corwin said:


> You can pull off present tense in short sections or short stories much easier than an entire book. I can take it as a small section, but I can't (as a reader) tolerate it for an entire novel because it starts to sound too "Dungeons and Dragons-like" (I see a door and wave a magic wand and...).


No, no. If this was "Dungeon and Dragons" it would read:

"I see a door and ask the rogue to check for traps."

Never use a wand on a door before checking for traps. Unless, of course, it is a wand of detect traps.

Sorry, my geek is showing...  

It requires a certain level of professional maturity to do first person well. Most writers just starting out are gods-aweful at first person. I reject the majority of first person narratives submitted because they are so poorly done. Whiny or uninteresting narrators. Head-hopping. Longwinded monologuing. Mary Sues (ye gods, the Mary Sues...).


----------



## Boatie (May 8, 2012)

jmiked said:


> I don't think I have a preference. As long as it's not present tense.
> 
> I like present tense - but only in thrillers - I like past tense everywhere else. If a thriller is written in first person, present tense, then I feel like I'm really along for the ride.


----------



## George Berger (Aug 7, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> It requires a certain level of professional maturity to do first person well. Most writers just starting out are gods-aweful at first person.


I read a first-person story in the present tense. It is made of fail. I facepalm, sighing. If only there was a way to harness the power of stupidity for good, I think. Then I realize that if it _could_ be harnessed for good, it wouldn't _be_ stupidity, and I start to itch. It's like I'm breaking out in hives, having another bad trip that isn't going to end well. My feet twitch and spasm, my arms feel like they're crawling with spiders, and my tatas itch like I've been wearing the same bra for three days straight. I reach for my soda, wishing it was something stronger, and find it empty. #FML. I need something, anything, to brighten my day. I reach for my cellphone, half-consciously. I could call Bobby, I think. Well, no, he's at work, isn't he? I could text him. A part of me wants to harass him, troll him because he's a no-good two-timing jerkface. Another part of me wants to invite him over, tell him to pick up some Riesling on the way. Thinking about what would happen after that makes me want to kill someone, though, so I turn off the Internet, wheel myself over to the television, and pwn at Modern Warfare for a couple of hours. I'm finished, for now; my wrists are burning and my thumb is numb. If I hurry, I can make my way to the toilet in back before The Late Late Show is on. I have to rush things a little, so now I'm watching a stuffed animal with a strange accent say strange and mostly obscene things


Spoiler



while I have no pants on


. That's okay, though;


Spoiler



they


 wouldn't have


Spoiler



stayed on much longer


, anyway. Normally, the idea that Craig


Spoiler



can see me naked through the television does it for me


, but the idea that this strangely foul-mouthed foreign animal thingy


Spoiler



can see me in my birthday suit is enticingly perverted


...


----------

