# First person or third person? Which way do you prefer a book to be written?



## Katie Jennings (May 7, 2012)

I saw this question asked on Facebook yesterday and my answer to it hit me like a bolt of lightning.  Third person, of course.  But then again, more and more these days we are seeing novels written in first person (Hunger Games, Twilight, one of my personal favorites The Dresden Files, etc).  

So what do readers really prefer? Or is it about even?


----------



## scottmarlowe (Apr 22, 2010)

First person can be tough because you only see the world and are told the story from that single character's viewpoint. Robin Hobb did an excellent job with a first person narrative in the Farseer Trilogy. I can go either way, but generally I prefer third person. What I can't stand is stories told in present tense.


----------



## Matthew Lee Adams (Feb 19, 2012)

No preference. The story just needs to be good.

I did a post about the advantages and challenges for each of those two points-of-view last week, if anyone would like to peruse it: http://matthewleeadams.com/2012/05/first-person-or-third-person-point-of-view/

Both points-of-view can make certain kinds of stories a little simpler to create a connection. But neither is absolutely the only way.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

Though a lot of my favorite books are written in third person, I think my preference is for first person.

Reading first person just makes me feel more like I'm *in* the story.

Mostly, I just go for the story, but when I pick up a sample of a book written in first person, it does get a bit more time to pull me in than one written in third.


----------



## Todd Young (May 2, 2011)

I like close third person. I prefer to read books written in that style, and (so far) that's what I have written.

I can enjoy a first person book, but sometimes the narrator can get on my nerves, depending on his/her personality. Anyway, I think I'll have a go at writing one sometime. See if I can overcome this problem myself.


----------



## Gone 9/21/18 (Dec 11, 2008)

Depends on the book. Some of my favorite mysteries are first person, but I don't like it when it's mixed with third person or where there's more than one first person narrator.


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

Uhh...we just had this conversation last month (and that was far from the first time it's shown up here  ).


----------



## Geoffrey (Jun 20, 2009)

I'm always amazed when this conversation comes up that so many people have an opinion on it - and some have rather adamant opinions on it.  (not to say that anyone here is adamant ... just sayin')  

I could care less if it's 1st person, 3rd person, multiple 1sts, 4th person, 2nd dancer from the left .... I've read them all and enjoyed all and read some from each that I've hated.  Its one of those things that I just count as variety being the spice of life.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

It's all about the voice.

A great first person narrator has got to be as good of a storyteller any author.  That's why it works so well in hard-boiled fiction -- the narrator is usually a character who is very good at reporting events.  It might be a detective or reporter, but in both cases, they are people who professionally notice things, and can dispassionately interpret them, even if the events shook them up at the time.

But whether it's first person or third, the writer has to develop a great storytelling voice.

Camille


----------



## Linjeakel (Mar 17, 2010)

I think generally I prefer third person - but mainly because I think first person is much more difficult to get right. But if the author does get it right, I don't mind reading it.

I agree with an earlier poster though - I really couldn't read a whole book written in the present tense, no matter how well it was done. *shudders*


----------



## Ciuri Di Badia (May 3, 2012)

third person...one gets the story well.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Geoffrey said:


> I'm always amazed when this conversation comes up that so many people have an opinion on it - and some have rather adamant opinions on it. (not to say that anyone here is adamant ... just sayin')
> 
> I could care less if it's 1st person, 3rd person, multiple 1sts, 4th person, 2nd dancer from the left .... I've read them all and enjoyed all and read some from each that I've hated. Its one of those things that I just count as variety being the spice of life.


I agree with Geoffrey. . . but must add that I _especially_ enjoy the point of view of the 2nd dancer from the left.


----------



## The Hooded Claw (Oct 12, 2009)

As I've said before in these threads, I can be happy with either method. Some stories are probably better written one way than the other, and some authors just do better with one than with the other.

An interesting experiment some authors have done is to take an established series with a viewpoint character, and write another story in the series with a different viewpoint character, or in third person. The Sherlock Holmes stories are famous for being narrated by Doctor Watson, but two of them are narrated by Sherlock Holmes (see "The Lion's Mane" for an example). Unfortunately, neither of these stories are among the favorites for me or for most Holmes fans. I believe there are one or two Holmes stories written in third person, but can't remember examples now (probably a sign that they weren't memorable).

A more successful example (though written in third person rather than first person) is C. S. Forester's Horatio Hornblower series, which is one of my favorite bodies of work by any author. Generally they are written from Hornblower's viewpoint in third person. But in one book, Lieutenant Hornblower, he wrote the novel from the viewpoint of Hornblower's recurring friend and ally, Lieutenant Bush. The result is one of my favorite Hornblower stories.


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

Ann in Arlington said:


> I agree with Geoffrey. . . but must add that I _especially_ enjoy the point of view of the 2nd dancer from the left.


Sometimes I think i AM the 2nd dancer from the left. Or maybe the 3rd.

I'm still trying to figure out what 4th person is....


----------



## George Berger (Aug 7, 2011)

telracs said:


> I'm still trying to figure out what 4th person is....


Second-person future imperative, possibly. 

First person: "I went to the speakeasy to see a guy about a horse. Vinnie was there with some of his pals, itching for a fight, so I took off before they worked up the courage to turn Mrs. Smith's favorite son into vegetable puree."

Second person: "You head down to the speakeasy, wanting to see a guy about a horse. Inside, you see Vinnie and several of his pals. They look even more menacing than usual, and you start to sweat, nervously. Are they itching for a fight? Is Vinnie still mad about his sister? Screw it, you decide to leave, lest your own dear mother, bless her heart, needs a DNA test to recognize you."

Third person: "Smith swaggered to the speakeasy, intending to talk to a guy he knew about a horse. Inside, Vinnie and some of his thugs were hanging out, swilling cheap beer and harassing the hired help. Looking nervous, Smith sneaked out before anything regrettable could happen to him."

Fourth person: "You will go to the speakeasy to speak to a guy about a horse. There, you'll see Vinnie and some of his friends, who won't be in a particularly friendly mood. Their palpable animosity will make you nervous. You will leave before they cheese you."

Fifth person: "You will have gone to the speakeasy to speak to a guy about a horse. There, you will have seen Vinnie and some of his friends, who will not have been in a particularly cheerful mood. Their radiant evil will have made you nervous. You will have left before they decided to use you for a human pinata."

(I kid, I kid...)

And is it the second dancer from stage left, or the other left?


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

George Berger said:


> Second-person future imperative, possibly.
> 
> First person: "I went to the speakeasy to see a guy about a horse. Vinnie was there with some of his pals, itching for a fight, so I took off before they worked up the courage to turn Mrs. Smith's favorite son into vegetable puree."
> 
> ...


I think fifth person should be rewritten in Yoda speak....

And it's which ever left you're NOT looking at.


----------



## George Berger (Aug 7, 2011)

telracs said:


> I think fifth person should be rewritten in Yoda speak....


Second-Yoda future imperative, then? 

"To a speakeasy you will have gone, to have spoken to a guy about a horse, yes? Vinnie and some of his friends you will have seen there. Hmm... Not pleased to see you they will have been. Made you nervous, the radiant darkness of their Force will have. Terror? Pants-wetting fear? nervousness? A Jedi knows not these things, but leaving you will have been anyway, PDQ, before they decided to use you for a pinata, yes yes."


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

George Berger said:


> Second-Yoda future imperative, then?
> 
> "To a speakeasy you will have gone, to have spoken to a guy about a horse, yes? Vinnie and some of his friends you will have seen there. Hmm... Not pleased to see you they will have been. Made you nervous, the radiant darkness of their Force will have. Terror? Pants-wetting fear? nervousness? A Jedi knows not these things, but leaving you will have been anyway, PDQ, before they decided to use you for a pinata, yes yes."


exactly! Thanks George.


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

Charles Stross actually has a couple novels out written in 2nd person present tense -- with multiple viewpoint characters (so the "you" meant someone else in succeeding chapters). I read the first book and managed to like it overall in spite of that, but never really got to the point where I stopped noticing it. While there was a certain rationale I could see for using it, for me it was still a case of the author's technique getting in the way of the actual story.


----------



## Geoffrey (Jun 20, 2009)

George Berger said:


> Second-person future imperative, possibly.


Isn't that "You must go to the speakeasy and you had better see a guy about a horse .... "


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

George Berger said:


> Second-Yoda future imperative, then?
> 
> "To a speakeasy you will have gone, to have spoken to a guy about a horse, yes? Vinnie and some of his friends you will have seen there. Hmm... Not pleased to see you they will have been. Made you nervous, the radiant darkness of their Force will have. Terror? Pants-wetting fear? nervousness? A Jedi knows not these things, but leaving you will have been anyway, PDQ, before they decided to use you for a pinata, yes yes."


Top marks!

Now. . . . .diagram the sentences!


----------



## George Berger (Aug 7, 2011)

Geoffrey said:


> Isn't that "You must go to the speakeasy and you had better see a guy about a horse .... "


Mm, I suppose so. I wasn't trying to think too hard about this.  One of my stranger joys is the convoluted linguistics of time-travel, which always comes to mind when discussing these sorts of things. _"If you like, next Thursday we can be having had spaghetti for dinner on my birthday two years ago. If you're busy on Thursday, then Sunday afternoon we can be having had spaghetti for dinner on my birthday two years ago on Thursday instead. Just let me know, okay?"_

I'm pretty sure that time travel will be the thing that finally kills journalism, as reporters travel back in time to warn themselves not to pursue careers that will one day have seen them consulting an AP Style Guide that's four-thousand pages long...

I also worry why nobody has yet created a neologism for neologisms that haven't been created yet, but that's an entirely different matter...



Ann in Arlington said:


> Now. . . . .diagram the sentences!


Eep!


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

*hands george a chocolate to shut him up before my head explodes from his philosophizing*


----------



## dmoonfire (May 7, 2012)

Most of my stories are third person limited, simply because that is what I find the most comfortable to read. I do have a number of stories in first person just because I find snarky a lot more enjoyable with "I" than third person.

Most of the urban fiction I've written seems to be first person while most of the fantasy and sci-fi is third. For some reason, I see that as a genre trait (not 100% just a trend in the books I have).

Second person... I haven't found one I liked.

In the end, it is the voice that sells me.


----------



## OwenTobias (May 12, 2012)

I see a lot of replies to this along the lines of "it doesn't matter -- the story is what counts." I'm afraid I'd have to disagree. The point of view does matter, and it matters a lot. What I like about first person POV is bias, and seeing the fictional world through the eyes of a fictional person. It's fascinating when it's done right. Think about classic novels like _The Great Gatsby_; can you imagine how different that book would be (and how dreadfully boring) if we didn't see things the way that Nick Carraway does?

I also like books that occasionally change the point of view, even if it's just for interlude scenes. I'm thinking of ones like Patrick Rothfuss's Kingkiller series (_The Name of the Wind_ and _Wise Man's Fear_). These books adopt the 1st person POV except for very short chapters that help to maintain the fiction that the protagonist is telling his life story while sitting in an inn (it's a framed tale). A novel like this would be a considerably different (and weaker) read if it was told from a 3rd person point of view.

So my contribution is that yes, story does matter, but some stories cry out for a particular point of view.

[Edited for spelling. Why can I never spell occasionally right the first time around?]

Just my $0.02 worth...


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

All I can say is, it doesn't really matter to me in the sense that it's not something I consciously think about when I'm reading, nor something I look for -- or to avoid -- when choosing a book.  

I'm not a writer, so I can't really speak to whether one is easier than another. But, obviously, how the author chooses to tell the story -- and the skill with which they do so -- may make a difference as to how well it is told, but I'm not going to either choose or reject a book solely because of person or tense. 

I suppose if a particular tense/case/person style caused me to have trouble getting into the story, I might notice that as the thing that's causing me trouble.  Which would probably be a clue that it wasn't well done.  

Anyway, I'm pretty sure I've enjoyed novels of all sorts -- and also NOT enjoyed novels of all sorts.


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

OwenTobias said:


> I see a lot of replies to this along the lines of "it doesn't matter -- the story is what counts." I'm afraid I'd have to disagree. The point of view does matter, and it matters a lot....


While I can't speak for others, if I say, "It doesn't matter," I mean that I don't judge a book by it. I judge a book by how well the whole package works. It is up to the author to choose the right voice and perspective for a given story, and therefore that is part of the craft of writing, along with every other choice an author needs to make when crafting a novel (or short story). Since there are novels I love written in first person and novels I love written in third person, the empirical evidence in my case seems to indicate that neither style is inherently better than the other in all situations; but in any _specific_ case, the choice of viewpoint may be an important factor in a book's success or failure.

Your mileage may vary.


----------



## Amyshojai (May 3, 2010)

I tend to read more 3rd person and prefer to write my thriller fiction that-away. Nonfiction, that's different. Many mysteries seem to be written in first person. So I suspect it depends somewhat on genre conventions, what the reader (or author) prefers, and suchlike.

Regarding the Yoda-speak, lots of fun to perform (says the actor) but it would drive me nuts to read or write.


----------



## christopherruz (May 5, 2012)

I'm a big fan of the third person, as I like absorbing the story in a more cinematic way. Having to interpret a characters intentions, feelings and turmoil through their dialogue (or lack of dialogue), actions and interactions is always more satisfying than being able to sit inside a character's head and hear them say, "I'm conflicted, damn it!"


----------



## Matthew Lee Adams (Feb 19, 2012)

OwenTobias said:


> I see a lot of replies to this along the lines of "it doesn't matter -- the story is what counts." I'm afraid I'd have to disagree. The point of view does matter, and it matters a lot. What I like about first person POV is bias, and seeing the fictional world through the eyes of a fictional person. It's fascinating when it's done right. Think about classic novels like _The Great Gatsby_; can you imagine how different that book would be (and how dreadfully boring) if we didn't see things the way that Nick Carraway does?
> 
> I also like books that occasionally change the point of view, even if it's just for interlude scenes. I'm thinking of ones like Patrick Rothfuss's Kingkiller series (_The Name of the Wind_ and _Wise Man's Fear_). These books adopt the 1st person POV except for very short chapters that help to maintain the fiction that the protagonist is telling his life story while sitting in an inn (it's a framed tale). A novel like this would be a considerably different (and weaker) read if it was told from a 3rd person point of view.
> 
> ...


The question was whether readers prefer to read stories told in first-person. Or in third-person.

I answered I don't have a preference, because it's the story that matters.

I like to read *good* stories. Period. I don't seek out a particular point-of-view.

What you misunderstand from my answer is that I'm not arguing whether one point-of-view better fits a particular story. Or whether an author excels in one point-of-view or the other.

I also pointed to a blog post I did recently talking about various advantages and challenges for each of these two points-of-view, and how certain narratives lend themselves more readily to one or the other: http://matthewleeadams.com/2012/05/first-person-or-third-person-point-of-view/

I will say that neither point-of-view *guarantees* a good story. I've read wretched first-person stories. And similarly wretched third-person stories.

So again - I'd rather read a good story than a particular point-of-view. My bookshelves are filled with a mix of both. And it's up to good authors who write good stories to choose the point-of-view they believe will best bring their stories to life.


----------



## SadieSForsythe (Feb 13, 2012)

I generally prefer 3rd person. This isn't to say I won't read a story in the 1st person, and even enjoy it. But I know from experience that the 1st person is a lot more likely to get on my nerves a lot more quickly.


----------



## Kathelm (Sep 27, 2010)

> I also like books that occasionally change the point of view, even if it's just for interlude scenes. I'm thinking of ones like Patrick Rothfuss's Kingkiller series (The Name of the Wind and Wise Man's Fear). These books adopt the 1st person POV except for very short chapters that help to maintain the fiction that the protagonist is telling his life story while sitting in an inn (it's a framed tale). A novel like this would be a considerably different (and weaker) read if it was told from a 3rd person point of view.


I think the reason that first person works for The Kingkiller series is specifically because Kvothe is telling his life story. I usually prefer third person, and when first person annoys me, it's often because of the question, "Who's this person telling the story to?" First person can easily feel like a gimmick if the author doesn't have a clear reason for why they chose it.


----------



## ChrisWard (Mar 10, 2012)

Doesn't matter to me as long as the story is good.


----------



## D/W (Dec 29, 2010)

Narrative mode isn't a factor I consider when deciding which book to read. I have a slight preference for third person but I've enjoyed many stories written in first person too.


----------



## charlesatan (May 8, 2012)

For me it depends on the story and what the author is trying to accomplish. So I'm fine with either first-person or third-person. Second-person is harder to pull off and more difficult to convince me, but I've seen it work too.

I do think certain tropes or genres tend to favor certain points-of-view, but that's not always true. There's a bigger flair for Mystery in first-person for example but third-person works too.


----------



## BenjaminBurrell (Mar 29, 2012)

One thing I to really enjoy about 1st person is that it seems to encourage a more intimate connection with the thoughts and feelings of the protagonist. When its written, 'I felt this way,' rather than, "He felt this way,' it's like the narrator has been removed and I'm directly in the head of the character. 

The limitation is that it's much, much harder to switch POVs and maintain any of the advantages of 1st person. 

That's my reaction to it, anyway.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

BenjaminBurrell said:


> One thing I to really enjoy about 1st person is that it seems to encourage a more intimate connection with the thoughts and feelings of the protagonist. When its written, 'I felt this way,' rather than, "He felt this way,' it's like the narrator has been removed and I'm directly in the head of the character.


I think you're onto something. This can also make the reader more uncomfortable too. In third person, we're eavesdropping on the character's thoughts. They don't know we are there, so they are unguarded and unembarrassed.

With first person, they know we are there, and they are baring their souls to us. They are letting us see how foolish or stupid or weak or arrogant or scared they are.

But I think that's a part of why some stories -- and some pov characters -- work better in first or third. A character who can't own up to his or her feelings has to be seen in third person if you want to get at those feelings. (Or the author has to be a virtuoso to reveal the information against the narrator's will, which some are good at. On the comedy end, P. G. Wodehouse was a master of revealing things the narrator didn't know.)

Camille


----------



## JenniferRenee (Apr 18, 2012)

Recently, I've found that more than half of the young adult books are now being written in first person. If it's done well, first person doesn't bother me, and I don't even _notice_ that it's a different type of narrative from third person. First person tends to be more intimate, and it's easier to understand what motivates a character. However, if the character is too whiny or emotive, then I do find that I need a break from that character's brain.

What I love about third person is the ability to know what drives many characters instead of just one or a small number of characters. I appreciate the challenge of showing (and not telling) the events and actions of the characters in third person stories.


----------



## A.D.Trosper (May 15, 2012)

I prefer third person and I like multiple points of view. I like first person okay, as long is it's done right. What usually turns me off completely is present tense whether it in first or third. I just can't get into present tense. I've only found one book I like that was present tense and even then I found it somewhat difficult to get into the story.


----------



## EliRey (Sep 8, 2010)

Interesting. I write contemporary romance and I am part of a writers group of maybe 20 of whom I believe maybe two or 3 of us write in 3d person. I'm glad to hear how many prefer third because while I enjoy reading in either as long as the story is good. I stink at writing in first.   I shouldn't say that. I think for me it depends on the genre. I have a paranormal romance I've been toying with and for some reason it screams to be written in first person. 

Bottom line I have no reading preference but my writing preference is 3d person.


----------



## KateEllison (Jul 9, 2011)

Hmm. Hard to say. For many years I vastly preferred close 3rd (and many of my old favorites are in that POV), but the majority of what I read now is written in 1st person, and I've realized I probably like it better.

I do think that 1st person is slightly riskier, though, because if the protagonist is whiny or annoying AT ALL, the book becomes unbearable (for me).

But actually, half the time I don't really even think about it. I just enjoy the story. And if it's well-written, I don't care either way.


----------



## Carol (was Dara) (Feb 19, 2011)

I have a strong preference for first person because it starts me off immediately on the side of the narrator. After that, he/she has to do something pretty annoying to make me turn against them. Unfortunately if I do wind up disliking the narrator, the whole book is a loss but I'd feel the same way about third person. An annoying main character is never fun, even when I'm just watching him instead of hearing from him. 

That said, I don't think I've ever avoided a book because it was written in third person. All I ask is that it always be clear who I'm supposed to be following and that the number of main characters doesn't get so huge I can't form a connection with any of them. I have that problem with a particular sprawling fantasy series that has an enormous cast of characters. Somehow I'm supposed to relate to all of them but instead I struggle just to remember who they are and what their part is in the larger story.


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

For me it really depends on the story and the author. With first person you can get a real visceral immediacy that can draw you right into a story. The big limitation is you are locked into the POV of that character with all their flaws and short and far sighted vision problems. I think most readers are comfortable with third person.

I have read some great books in the first and more not so great. It is limited. I think first works best in a small scope story and third is better in larger scope fiction. I've read some very good stories in third, with shifting first person POV that gets inside the characters head--which can be very effective. It is tricky to do well.

I'm in the minority with Hunger Games--the first person was tedious and boring for me. But I'm not a YA reader.

With a great story you barely even think about the tense, unless you are dissecting.


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

Dara England said:


> That said, I don't think I've ever avoided a book because it was written in third person. All I ask is that it always be clear who I'm supposed to be following and that the number of main characters doesn't get so huge I can't form a connection with any of them. I have that problem with a particular sprawling fantasy series that has an enormous cast of characters. Somehow I'm supposed to relate to all of them but instead I struggle just to remember who they are and what their part is in the larger story.


So you disliked Lord of the Rings? Or Martin?


----------



## scottnicholson (Jan 31, 2010)

I love first-person characters who are constantly lying to themselves, or think they are one way but usually act another...


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

scottnicholson said:


> I love first-person characters who are constantly lying to themselves, or think they are one way but usually act another...


Yeah. I've seen that used very well by some authors where the characters words and actions are an act and the opposite of what is really ticking in their head. Let the character reveal how twisted he is.


----------



## Yusagi (Jan 21, 2010)

I think it depends on the kind of story the author is going for. If it's very character driven or the intention is to make the scenes intense by way of a narrow or unreliable narrator, first person is the way to go. If the author wants a sense of grandness and world-building, or if it's very plot heavy, I think that third person would be the best way to convey that. That said, I'd love to see a second-person story capture one or both of those sides. I wonder if it can be done...?


----------

