# Third-person Exposition Voice



## OurJud (Jul 2, 2013)

I almost always start my stories in first-person. Maybe this shows a lack of experience on my part, but it just feels so much more natural and easy to write, as you just simply need to imagine you are telling someone a story, and then write down what you're saying.

But with my current sci-fi short I opted for third-person. This wasn't a conscious decision and for that reason I'm reluctant to change it (trust your instincts, etc). However, I do find I'm struggling with the voice during the passages of exposition. Who is speaking during these moments? Is it me (the writer) or the thoughts of my protag'?

Take this sentence for instance



> Certainly it was never easy having to watch these brutal slayings, even in reverse, but the unpleasantness was far outweighed by the knowledge that *you* were about to stop it from ever happening in the first place.



The problem for me here is the use of the word 'you'. It sounds right, but the fact that the story is written in the third-person makes me think it should be 'they'. But then that kind of jars with the context.

I think this stems from my issues with describing what another person is thinking. The fact that I can't possibly know what they're thinking constantly niggles away at me when I'm writing their thoughts and feelings.

Does anyone have any tips for getting my head into the right place for writing third-person exposition.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Kehawin (Jul 2, 2013)

go with what feels right in the first draft.  Then when editing (I tend to edit after each scene, but that's just me) and you notice something like that, just change it to something impersonal... in that case, I would say

"... _unpleasantness was far outweighed by the knowledge that The Division* __was about to stop it from happening in the first place._*"


** or whatever you ultimately decide to nickname the Bureau

I have a hard time writing in the first person, myself, unless the story is based on real life events.  Dunno why.


----------



## OurJud (Jul 2, 2013)

Yes, [Name of Bureau] does sound better than "they".

But I'm still not entirely clear what voice I'm supposed to be using when writing 3rd-erson exposition. Is it a god-like figure or the protag's inner voice?

I'm fine with action and dialogue - I just imagine I'm watching a film and describe what I see and hear, but with background stuff it gets confusing and I'm prone to lose focus.


----------



## Kehawin (Jul 2, 2013)

OurJud said:


> But I'm still not entirely clear what voice I'm supposed to be using when writing 3rd-erson exposition. Is it a god-like figure or the protag's inner voice?



Well, you can use either, just stick with it!  LOL I know that doesn't help.  But basically, a review of POV:

1st person singular [automatically limited, unless using hindsight]
1st person plural [limited while each characters POV, but overall can be either limited or omniscient]
2nd person [either limited or omniscient]
3rd person limited [similar to 1st person singular, except the pronouns are changed from I to s/he]
3rd person - I forget the name, but it's basically limited omniscience [the reader is privy to some information that the character doesn't know, but it is still limited.  the narrator doesn't know all, but more than an individual character]
3rd person omniscient [the reader is aware of each characters' knowledge, and any other information the author/narrator shares.  The narrator knows all.]


So, in third person, you can choose for the narrator to focus one character with all his/her limits on knowledge/understanding, or you can choose the narrator to be aware of and narrating the thoughts/knowledge of multiple characters.

Obviously, different stories need different POVs.  If a murder investigation story is told from the omniscient standpoint, the reader would know exactly whodunnit from the beginning and wouldn't have fun trying to figure it out before the detective does.  But, if the murder story is one about character, or motive, and less about the riddle, then omniscient is better than a Scooby-Doo type "and I would have gotten away with it if it weren't for you darn kids!"


----------



## OurJud (Jul 2, 2013)

Brain melt! Brain Melt!

I've just read through a few passages, mentally swapping from 3rd to 1st, and I think that's what I shall do before I write much more. It's far less complicated and....

Oh, I think I want to cry. Sci-fi is seldom written in first-person, is it?


----------



## Kehawin (Jul 2, 2013)

um, I don't know, because really the only sci-fi I have ever read was older stuff... like, 50s and 60s...  I could check out some of the ones I have on my shelf if it really matters to you, but it shouldn't.  Who cares?  Use what tells the story best.  Like I said, I have a harder time writing in 1st person because I feel it's too limiting... but it does definitely have its place (like, in romance where feelings and thoughts are much more important than descriptions of concepts, etc).  3rd person really can be as simple as using impersonal pronouns and names instead of I, but it has to be what feels most natural to you, since it's your story.  If the story is about one single detective, I really don't see a problem with using 1st.


----------



## Robdemanc (Jul 2, 2013)

It sounds to me you will be fine in first person or third person.  If during the narrative you are only saying things that the character knows use either.  If during the narrative you are sometimes saying things the character does not know use third person.


----------



## OurJud (Jul 2, 2013)

Thanks. I've done a bit of research and there are more 1st-person sci-fi books than I thought. If 1st-person is good enough for Nubula award winners, then it's good enough for me!


----------



## wancow (Jul 2, 2013)

Is it someone's thought?  I use this all the time when I'm doing third person, but focusing with a single person's perspective


----------



## Angelicpersona (Jul 2, 2013)

Kehawin said:


> Well, you can use either, just stick with it!  LOL I know that doesn't help.  But basically, a review of POV:
> 
> 1st person singular [automatically limited, unless using hindsight]
> 1st person plural [limited while each characters POV, but overall can be either limited or omniscient]
> ...



I tend to swap around between the three different types of third person, depending on the scene. So there are some things that the reader knows everything about and some things that the reader only knows a little about. I dunno, it's what works for me lol


----------



## OurJud (Jul 2, 2013)

wancow said:


> Is it someone's thought?  I use this all the time when I'm doing third person, but focusing with a single person's perspective



Sort of. It was their view/opinion on something that I was using as a means of info-dumping.

Anyway, I've edited it to 1st-person now, and it feels so much more natural for my style.

It's odd, but when I write fiction, I _am_ the main character, so first-person is the obvious choice, really.


----------



## Jon M (Jul 2, 2013)

OurJud said:


> It's odd, but when I write fiction, I _am_ the main character


Curious about this. Normally when writing First Person, the point is to write from the perspective of the viewpoint character, in _his _voice. That's why, ideally, every First Person story is different -- because every character is different, quirks, etc. If you are writing all First Person stories with this idea that you are the main character, then I wonder if all those stories feature viewpoint characters that sound the same -- like you. 

Regarding the sentence in the OP, it still reads like Omniscient Third. You've just chosen to address a group of people generally. From Wikipedia:



> In some cases personal pronouns can be used in place of indefinite pronouns,  referring to someone unspecified or to people generally. In English and  other languages the second-person pronoun can be used in this way:  instead of the formal _one should hold one's oar in both hands_ (using the indefinite pronoun _one_), it is more common to say _you should hold your oar in both hands_.


----------



## Staff Deployment (Jul 2, 2013)

Jon M said:


> You've just chosen to address a group of people generally.



If all else fails, you can fall back on "one", as in "One should always remember to leave open the wardrobe door."


----------



## OurJud (Jul 2, 2013)

Jon M said:


> Curious about this. Normally when writing First Person, the point is to write from the perspective of the viewpoint character, in _his _voice. That's why, ideally, every First Person story is different -- because every character is different, quirks, etc. If you are writing all First Person stories with this idea that you are the main character, then I wonder if all those stories feature viewpoint characters that sound the same -- like you.



Not at all, Jon... at least I hope not. When I say I _am_ the main character I don't mean I write about me, imposing my (lack of) morals and beliefs on him. Far truer to say I take on the role of my MC and live through him. For instance, my character might spend his time torturing fluffy animals, but I could still get into his head and write him authentically.

Does that make sense?


----------



## InkwellMachine (Jul 2, 2013)

As far as perspective goes, I've seen some pretty messed up stuff. That doesn't mean it wasn't awesome despite, but it didn't adhere very well to whatever perspective it technically fell under. Try reading some stuff be Harlan Ellison (namely "_Repent, Harlequin!" Said The Ticktock Man_). I can almost guarantee that you'll get lost at least a couple of times, but still enjoy every ridiculous moment of his prose.

The point I'd like to make is that consistency is key. Harlan Ellison is able to write the way he does because he does it consistently. We expect him to do ridiculous things after the first few passages, so it would actually be more confusing if he were suddenly to adhere to all the 'rules' of the perspective he was writing in. That being said, I'm not telling you to abandon all pretense of writing in a perspective. I'm just saying that if the narrator refers to the reader ("you") or uses indefinite pronouns, they must do so consistently, otherwise this one isolated instance might be a bit jarring to the reader.


----------



## Jon M (Jul 2, 2013)

OurJud said:


> Not at all, Jon... at least I hope not. When I say I _am_ the main character I don't mean I write about me, imposing my (lack of) morals and beliefs on him. Far truer to say I take on the role of my MC and live through him. For instance, my character might spend his time torturing fluffy animals, but I could still get into his head and write him authentically.
> 
> Does that make sense?


Yeah, absolutely. Sounds like you got the hang of First Person. Look forward to reading one of your stories, if you decide to post it in the workshop.


----------



## OurJud (Jul 2, 2013)

Jon M said:


> Look forward to reading one of your stories, if you decide to post it in the workshop.



Thanks, Jon, but I'm not sure I dare after the amount of help I've had. I'd have to credit it to about 27 different people :distrust:


----------



## InkwellMachine (Jul 2, 2013)

Man, getting caught between posts on the previous page makes your post invisible. Second or third time this has happened to me today.

Just letting you know, last post on the first page. I gave input.


----------



## luckyscars (Jul 3, 2013)

People often over-analyze tense, like there's some kind of magic formula that 'works' when in fact ALL the options are viable in their own ways and choosing one shouldbe less a matter of preference and more a matter of what works to relay the information.

For instance, I have seen it said on this forum to 'avoid' first person omniscient like some kind of ugly drug. This is nonsense. Third person can and should be used whenever you wish to relay several, often contrasting, points of view in a quick and efficient manner. For example, consider 'War and Peace' by Tolstoy:



> [FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]At eight o'clock Kutuzov rode to Pratz at the head of Miloradovich's fourth column, the one which was to take the place of the columns of Przebyszewski and Langeron, which had already gone down. He greeted the men of the head regiment and gave the order to move, thus showing that he intended to lead the column himself. Having ridden to the village of Pratz, he halted. Prince Andrei, one of the enormous number of persons constituting the commander in chief's suite, stood behind him. Prince Andrei felt excited, irritated, and at the same time restrainedly calm, as a man usually is when a long-desired moment comes.


[/FONT]

[FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]What this POV does is allow complete freedom for the writer to account for two [/FONT][FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]contrasting[/FONT][FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif] POV's without confusing the reader by constantly switching POV or creating an issue of 'unrealiability'. This works in War and Peace because the book is essentially a historical account. It also worked in, say, 'Band of Brothers' by Ambrose and is common in most literary non-fiction as well. Would I use it in, say, a love story? Probably not. It is usually not the most intimate way to tell a story. But it has its place. They all do.

What I would recommend is considering or even 'trying out' multiple POV's and seeing which one facilitates your story best. It probably wouldnt take long to figure out, perhaps just a few sentences. Consider what it is you want to capture - do you want a person, if unreliable, account of one person's viewpoint? First person is probably your thing. Do you want a voice that is slightly removed but fixated on a select few individuals? Third person. A detailed and accurate account of an event and all those involved in it? Third person omni. So many options there...[/FONT]


----------



## OurJud (Jul 3, 2013)

Well I haven't read W&P, but the example you gave isn't 1st-person omniscient anyway, is it? It's 3rd-person omniscient. If it's 1st-person omniscient then where are the instances of 'I' ?


----------



## luckyscars (Jul 3, 2013)

OurJud said:


> Well I haven't read W&P, but the example you gave isn't 1st-person omniscient anyway, is it? It's 3rd-person omniscient. If it's 1st-person omniscient then where are the instances of 'I' ?



Typo. I meant 'third person omiscent'. I don't think there's generally such thing as 'first person omniscent'.


----------



## Kehawin (Jul 3, 2013)

luckyscars said:


> Typo. I meant 'third person omiscent'. I don't think there's generally such thing as 'first person omniscent'.



Sure there is!  It would probably be a religious-type thing, or maybe a superhero...


----------



## luckyscars (Jul 3, 2013)

Yeah I was thinking it would need to have a supernatural element. Might be an interesting idea to work with. The only example I can think of offhand which is similar to a 'first person omniscient' would be something like 'The Lovely Bones' where the narrator is a dead girl watching from Heaven.


----------



## OurJud (Jul 3, 2013)

luckyscars said:


> I don't think there's generally such thing as 'first person omniscent'.



I've just read a sci-fi novel called _alt.human_ that uses first person omniscent.


----------



## Staff Deployment (Jul 3, 2013)

I used first-person omniscient, sort of. Justified in that the main character is both psychic and capable of astral projection. At one point she literally says "I am not omniscient" and then immediately starts reading someone's mind halfway around the world.


----------



## OurJud (Jul 21, 2013)

Sorry to unearth this thread again, but I'm still struggling with this 3rd person voice when writing certain passages.

I started the story, quite instinctively, in 3rd, but then hit a passage where I became confused by the voice. To get around this I switched what I'd written up to the point to 1st person, and this did allow me to get through this awkward passage.

But now, for a couple of reasons, I've switched it all back to 3rd. The first reason is that I started reading a sci-fi novel a couple of night ago and quite by chance the tone is very similar to mine. It's written in 3rd and just sounds 'right'. The other reason is that despite helping me get through the awkward passage, my story just didn't read as well when in 1st person.

_But_, I've come to the same passage of exposition as before and still can't get my head around the 3rd-person voice.

I think the best thing I can do is paste an example and explain where I'm struggling. The paragraph before the exposition is clearly 3rd:



> This was why he hated this part of the job. The pretence that he sympathised and cared. He could appreciate how hearing the details of one’s death might be a little shocking, but where was the gratitude for what the department had done? Hell the hundreds of people whose lives had been spared thanks to the system should be counting themselves damn lucky the deprtment were able to get to them within the twelve-hour window. Others hadn’t been so fortunate.
> And it was for these people and their families that Goodwin’s real sympathies lay.



I then go into an info-dump about how the system works, and it is here that I struggle. I've bolded the problem pronouns.



> The thirteen-hourers. That’s what they were known as in the department. They were even harder to handle than the days-old ones. At least with them *you* knew there was no chance, just another poor bastard like the ones of old – the ones before the system. The thirteen-hourers, though, they _really_ got to *you*...
> A call would come in; someone had returned home to find the house ransacked and their partner lying dead on the kitchen floor, or maybe someone discovers a body in some back alley while out walking their dog. So, *our* department is dispatched to the scene along with the paramedics and a doctor who, on arrival, would establish a cause and likely time of death. If indeed the death had resulted from murder and there was any possibility that it had occurred within the last twelve-hours, an OPS, or Optical Preview Sequence to give it its full name, would be launched...



The passage continues in this vein, and I automatically want to use 1st person pronouns, I think because I'm describing his inner thoughts. But (in my head at least) they sit awkwardly with the 3rd person perspective in the rest of the story.

Can someone looking at this anew, tell me if the passage sounds right, or should I be using 3rd person pronouns where I've bolded the text?

Thanks.


----------



## Robdemanc (Jul 21, 2013)

Yes use third person in the second passage.  Change "our" to "the".


----------



## OurJud (Jul 21, 2013)

Robdemanc said:


> Yes use third person in the second passage.  Change "our" to "the".



Thanks. And what about the instances of "you"? Should they be changed to "he" and "him" like so:



> The thirteen-hourers. That’s what they were known as in the department.  They were even harder to handle than the days-old ones. At least with  them *you* knew there was no chance, just another poor bastard like  the ones of old – the ones before the system. The thirteen-hourers,  though, they _really_ got to *you*...





> The thirteen-hourers. That’s what they were known as in the department.  They were even harder to handle than the days-old ones. At least with  them *he* knew there was no chance, just another poor bastard like  the ones of old – the ones before the system. The thirteen-hourers,  though, they _really_ got to *him*...


----------



## Greimour (Jul 21, 2013)

Before that:



> Hell the hundreds of people whose lives had been spared thanks to the  system should be counting themselves damn lucky the deprtment were able  to get to them within the twelve-hour window.


That sentence is unbroken. I tried twice, but I think you should try reading that out loud then stick a comma in here or there etc... it's too long without any form of pause break. The very first word to me breaks off from everything that follows.

As for third person using introspection. This is a little trickier, I have never found the need to do it whilst writing in 3rd person. Usually I will find other ways of dropping an info-bomb. Small tidbits that leak the information as a whole, integrated within the story. However.



> The thirteen-hourers. That’s what they were known as in the department.  They were even harder to handle than the days-old ones. At least with  them *you* knew there was no chance, just another poor bastard like  the ones of old – the ones before the system. The thirteen-hourers,  though, they _really_ got to *you*...
> A call would come in; someone had returned home to find the  house ransacked and their partner lying dead on the kitchen floor, or  maybe someone discovers a body in some back alley while out walking  their dog.


I would keep that like that, personally. 
Afterward is harder:


> So, *our* department is dispatched to the scene along with the  paramedics and a doctor who, on arrival, would establish a cause and  likely time of death. If indeed the death had resulted from murder and  there was any possibility that it had occurred within the last  twelve-hours, an OPS, or Optical Preview Sequence to give it its full  name, would be launched...



Maybe instead switch back to third person; "Goodwins department..." and continue in third person as normal. Depending how you blend it, you could get away with it, keeping the voice and not truly slipping out of third person at all, even with that section that says "you".

That's how I would handle it anyway.



~Kev

:: Edit - Your final finished piece might give you insight for an entirely new way to provide the info-bomb, so continue as if you got it right and check it out with a re-read when it's complete ::


----------



## OurJud (Jul 21, 2013)

Thanks, Greimour. I did just find something on another website which states that in 3rd person, the character should never become the narrator. If I leave that passage using the 'you' pronouns as it is, then surely I'd be breaking this rule?

God, 1st person is sooooo much easier!


----------



## Greimour (Jul 21, 2013)

OurJud said:


> Thanks, Greimour. I did just find something on another website which states that in 3rd person, the character should never become the narrator. If I leave that passage using the 'you' pronouns as it is, then surely I'd be breaking this rule?
> 
> God, 1st person is sooooo much easier!



Yes, it is breaking the rule, but that's why I added the edit at the end. You might find another way to deliver it later. As you know, you can get away with using I and You during dialogue... but you can also get away with it when peeping into the mind like:

_You're a damn fool, Brian_. He chided himself. 

If you word it more along the lines of Goodwins thought process, you can get away with it. Still, it isn't ideal the way you do have it, but you can get away with it in draft copies. No one is reading it yet.

:: Edit again - there is something about the way you used the word you that just makes it read right to me. I didn't find the word out of place even reading it as a 3rd person narration. I will look into and try and figure out why I am reading it that way. ::


----------



## OurJud (Jul 21, 2013)

Greimour said:


> :: Edit again - there is something about the way you used the word you that just makes it read right to me. I didn't find the word out of place even reading it as a 3rd person narration. I will look into and try and figure out why I am reading it that way. ::



I suspect the reason is precisely the same one that made me automatically write it like that in the first place. I've never drifted from 3rd to 1st in the normal course of things, which make me wonder if I should be going with my instinct, especially with what you have now said.

I'll leave it for now (as you say, no one is reading) and see what others think, if they should feel they want to comment.


----------



## Staff Deployment (Jul 21, 2013)

"You" does not necessarily imply 1st or 2nd narration. It's often a general pronoun to refer to people unspecifically, and we all know when it's being used in that way.

I prefer the french "vous" because it's less ambiguous (except it's also a formal address but shut up). Too bad my french is nowhere near good enough to write in. Like about preschool level I'd say. Deep sigh.


----------



## Greimour (Jul 21, 2013)

Staff Deployment said:


> "You" does not necessarily imply 1st or 2nd narration. It's often a general pronoun to refer to people unspecifically, and we all know when it's being used in that way.
> 
> I prefer the french "vous" because it's less ambiguous (except it's also a formal address but shut up). Too bad my french is nowhere near good enough to write in. Like about preschool level I'd say. Deep sigh.




I pm'ed Jud about that very thing. Stating the use of you referred to a people in the context used, which is why it reads right to me. As a result, I am inclined to believe its fine using that word in the way it was used during 3rd person narration. As far as grammar on a whole is concerned, You is a no-no, but language evolves and you (again, a people not you personally which is my point) have to make changes and adjustments accordingly.

I remain true in the belief that you is fine as it is, but just in case, I am going to keep playing with how it can be reworded to avoid the doubts and confusion.


----------



## OurJud (Jul 21, 2013)

I've swapped from 3rd to 1st and back again, and when there's over 2,500 words it's a right royal pain in the backside.

I need to choose which perspective I'm going for before I write anymore because I don't want to waste any more time switching back and forth.

Third! Go with your instinct!

Sorry, I'm now talking to myself.

But, Jud, first-person is so much easier.

Shut _up!!_


----------



## Greimour (Jul 21, 2013)

OurJud said:


> I've swapped from 3rd to 1st and back again, and when there's over 2,500 words it's a right royal pain in the backside.
> 
> I need to choose which perspective I'm going for before I write anymore because I don't want to waste any more time switching back and forth.
> 
> ...



That made me smile... Like I originally said; keep the *you* section as previously highlighted the way it is. *IF* you do have to do an edit later, its a very small section to fix. 
Also, I think it's fine that way, so you can just beat me up for it if you must  <3


----------



## Jeko (Jul 21, 2013)

> first-person is so much easier.



I find it easier to write in, but harder to get effective prose out of. You need a good, distinctive voice for first. Third gives me more freedom.

Pick one and go with it.

And SD, I also prefer the french 'vous'. In fact, I prefer the French language in general; it feels less hostile than the English languange, which I fear has a personal vendetta against me.


----------



## OurJud (Jul 21, 2013)

Cadence said:


> I find it easier to write in, but harder to get effective prose out of. You need a good, distinctive voice for first. Third gives me more freedom.



I find that quite reassuring, as it happens, because I'm not sure I have one yet. A voice, that is.

Anyway, I've opted for third.


----------



## Markovich (Jul 24, 2013)

OurJud said:


> Sorry to unearth this thread again, but I'm still struggling with this 3rd person voice when writing certain passages.
> 
> I started the story, quite instinctively, in 3rd, but then hit a passage where I became confused by the voice. To get around this I switched what I'd written up to the point to 1st person, and this did allow me to get through this awkward passage.
> 
> ...



Your "you" is fine. Definitely don't use "our". Although I generally try to avoid using "you" in this sense because it seems to sound too informal. But the alternative "one" can sound too formal, but my writing tends to be more formal so it works for me.

If you want to use to first person just switch to dialogue, or the character's thoughts.


----------

