# First Person, Present Tense?



## Kyle R (Mar 20, 2013)

I'm becomming more and more enamored with this style of writing--the immediacy and immersion that first person present provides can feel (when done well) like a drug to your reader. It's almost like a form of hypnosis, transporting your audience into your main character's skin, caught up in the NOW of your story in a way that other tenses and POVs (third past, first past) can't duplicate.

Some readers (and writers), though, seem dead-set against it, calling the approach a multitude of things, from the neutral "hypermodern" and "new age", to derrogatory slanders such as "forced", "awkward", "fake", "amateur", or "just plain dumb."

What do you think about it? Would you/do you write in first person, present tense? Why or why not?

:encouragement:


----------



## Pluralized (Mar 20, 2013)

It seems inherently hard to sustain and an arduous way to write, but I'd be interested to see what you could do with it.

A Million Little Pieces was written this way, and it's downright spellbinding, fast, and well done. I can't remember if the whole book was first person - present tense, but I am looking for an excuse to reread it anyway, so I'll go see. 

Good luck with it.


----------



## Morkonan (Mar 20, 2013)

I recall a thread on this subject, a few months ago. I will will reply to the OP with the same amount of gusto I had in that thread:

I would rather gouge out my eyes with knitting needles and drown in the bile of a gastronomically challenged whale than read anything in first-person, present-tense.

That being said, if you enjoy it, by all means have at it! It's your craft and if you do it well, maybe people will enjoy it. If it gets published, I might even buy it, just to be sympathetic to a fellow forum member. But, I wouldn't ever actually read it. 

PS - No, I wouldn't write it. That's because if I had to write in that way, I'd have to read it. Knitting needles, eyes, upset whale stomach... You get the picture.


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Mar 20, 2013)

I like it, for the reasons of immediacy and NOWness that you mentioned. Maybe it's more difficult to do well, though, since you have to be more careful about limiting information to what's available to a single character as the action happens. Easy enough in a short, I would think, but sometimes harder in a novel.

I've read one rational argument against it, which is that in reality, people do not narrate themselves as they're doing things--that is, in order to tell a story, the events must be over and in the past (at least partially). This makes some sense but still doesn't convince me that present tense is bad. After all, regular people telling everyday stories will often slip into present tense, especially for exciting parts. So it strikes me as a natural thing to do.

I don't understand people who just don't like it, but I think any POV/tense combo can potentially be cool. Just has to be done carefully and suit the story, but that's true of anything.


----------



## Lewdog (Mar 20, 2013)

I think I am going to write all my thread responses in third person past tense so that I don't have to worry about Morkonan sneaking into my apartment and ganking me in my sleep.


----------



## Apple Ice (Mar 20, 2013)

I once tried writing in first person, present tense and I was on the verge of tears. I felt like I was being punched by my own story. There was so much i found myself unable to do. I just find it too hard, but if you can do it effectively then well done.


----------



## Morkonan (Mar 20, 2013)

Lewdog said:


> I think I am going to write all my thread responses in third person past tense so that I don't have to worry about Morkonan sneaking into my apartment and ganking me in my sleep.



Just letting you know that I laughed pretty loudly at that comment.  Thanks for the smile!


----------



## Kyle R (Mar 20, 2013)

Thanks for the book mention, Pluralized. I'll check it out. :encouragement: I do agree that it might be hard to sustain, if the writer is unaccustomed to it. But if said writer has been writing in that tense for years, for example, I'm sure it would become second nature to him or her. Kind of a "all things relative" sort of deal.

Mork, we all know you love first person present. Stop pretending. 

I'm sorry you dislike it so much. In first person present's defense, I'd like to quote two passages from two first present authors that I enjoy reading. I believe a lot of the dislike for first present comes from the fact that some authors use it in a stilted, choppy, unnatural way. But in the hands of a capable writer, first present can come out as fluid as any other POV style:

On the fifth night of our search, I see a plesiosaur. It is a megawatt behemoth, bronze and blue-white, streaking across the sea floor like a torpid comet. Watching it, I get this primordial déjà vu, like I’m watching a dream return to my body. It wings towards me with a slow, avian grace. Its long neck is arced in an S-shaped curve; its lizard body is the size of Granana’s carport. Each of its ghost flippers pinwheels colored light. I try to swim out of its path, but the thing’s too big to avoid. That Leviathan fin, it shivers right through me. It’s a light in my belly, cold and familiar. And I flash back to a snippet from school, a line from a poem or a science book, I can’t remember which:

There are certain prehistoric things that swim beyond extinction.
_
- Haunting Olivia, _Karen Russell




It's time to feed again. I don’t know how long it’s been since our last hunting trip, probably just a few days, but I feel it. I feel the electricity in my limbs fizzling, fading. I see relentless visions of blood in my mind, that brilliant, mesmerizing red, flowing through bright pink tissues in intricate webs and Pollock fractals, pulsing and vibrating with life.

- _Warm Bodies_, Isaac Marion


See, it's not _that_ bad. .. right?


----------



## Leyline (Mar 20, 2013)

It's actually my favorite POV, and I've been writing in it for well over ten years. Some of my best work is 1st Present.


----------



## Lewdog (Mar 20, 2013)

Morkonan said:


> Just letting you know that I laughed pretty loudly at that comment.  Thanks for the smile!



I'm glad, if I'm going to be killed by a psychopath over my writing style, I had always hoped it was by one of those happy serial killers like the Joker, verses one of those serious ones a la Jeff Ridgeway.


----------



## popsprocket (Mar 20, 2013)

I can't stand the stuff.

I'm sure it can and has been done well in the past, but the huge influx of YA novels published by first time writers in first/present makes me want to give up reading forever. It's a jarring thing to read and having read more than one whole novel in the tense, I can tell you that personally it has no immediacy for me. There is no immersion as far as I'm concerned and  I wish it would go away.


----------



## Morkonan (Mar 20, 2013)

KyleColorado said:


> Thanks for the book mention, Pluralized. I'll check it out. :encouragement: I do agree that it might be hard to sustain, if the writer is unaccustomed to it. But if said writer has been writing in that tense for years, for example, I'm sure it would become second nature to him or her. Kind of a "all things relative" sort of deal.
> 
> Mork, we all know you love first person present. Stop pretending.
> 
> ...









I trusted you. I bared myself to you. I.. I joined the forum, thinking it would be safe and that nothing bad could ever happen, here. And you do this! To me! Oh, shame, sir! SHAME! 



Hey, there are probably plenty of great stories told in first-person, present-tense, just as there are probably plenty of fine dishes made with rotting shark meat covered in fermented kelp slime. But, I don't have to read them! YAY FOR MEEZ!

Seriously, though, it's just not my bag. It isn't my thing. I just can't wrap my head around it. It's just "not right." I suppose if I had been brought up differently, eaten all my vegetables and gotten more hugs, or something, I'd have been just fine with it. But, I just can't... I can't deal with it. I read "The Windup Girl" about halfway through. It's a Hugo winner, for goodness sakes! But, I couldn't take it any more, so it now occupies a respectful place somewhere in my library. I don't know where I put it on purpose, so I couldn't be tempted to try to read it again very easily. Maybe I need professional help? 

(The "absurd" is a wonderfully entertaining way to make a point. Of course, you understand I'm journeying off the deep-end of absurdity here. But, the point is still made - I don't like to read it and couldn't ever see myself writing a book, using it. I could, however, write some sort of prose piece in a poetic style while using it. But, that's the sort of category I put the style in and it's outside of what I consider to be palatable for storytelling. I fully endorse any writer to write whatever they want. I just couldn't do it, myself.)


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Mar 20, 2013)

Here's a question: do you all make conscious decisions about tense/POV? Like sit down and weigh pros and cons? Change your mind later? Me, I just start writing and there it is. Sometimes it's 3rd past, sometimes it's 1st or 2nd. Just whatever trips off my little fingers, sometimes without me even having any idea what I'm writing about. So for me I'd say perspective and tense decide the story as much as vice versa.


----------



## Kyle R (Mar 20, 2013)

Lol Mork. Fair enough! We all have our likes and dislikes and I applaud you for the veracity of yours. 

An argument I've come across, though, and one I firmly disagree with:



> I suspect that authors who are attracted to this format are often writing about their own lives as they wish they had turned out and therefore they can’t resist making their main characters into super-human heroes.  ...   In sum, I don’t think present tense authors are thinking enough about the impact that format has on the reader.  They’ve chosen a format that is inherently narcissistic.  This is my story, the author is saying.  Read about me. Admire me; aren’t I terrific!



http://expendableman.wordpress.com/2011/09/20/writing-in-first-person-present-tense-think-again/

Wrong! The story I'm currently working on was originally written in third person, past tense. But I changed it to first, present, in order to have a greater impact on the reader. My choice was entirely cerebral and tactical, and neither narcissistic nor due to a lack of thinking (I deliberated the choice, back and forth, for weeks.)

So I think the assumption that first present is an automatic amateur choice is very.. hmm.. naiive.


----------



## Nee (Mar 20, 2013)

"Watching it, I get this primordial déjà vu, like I’m watching a dream return to my..."

Actually, that should be: 

I watch it in some primordial déjà vu, like a dream.

But then that just shows you how hard it is to actually pull it off.


----------



## lowprofile300 (Mar 20, 2013)

KyleColorado said:


> I'm becomming more and more enamored with this style of writing--the immediacy and immersion that first person present provides can feel (when done well) like a drug to your reader. It's almost like a form of hypnosis, transporting your audience into your main character's skin, caught up in the NOW of your story in a way that other tenses and POVs (third past, first past) can't duplicate.
> 
> Some readers (and writers), though, seem dead-set against it, calling the approach a multitude of things, from the neutral "hypermodern" and "new age", to derrogatory slanders such as "forced", "awkward", "fake", "amateur", or "just plain dumb."
> 
> ...



@KyleColorado,
You hit the nail, dead on the head. I write that way sometimes, because I find it pulls the reader in, much faster and with less resistance It's not always effective though. That said, I remember as a kid reading Dickens "David Copperfield" and how I felt for the protagonist so much so that when he cried, I cried in real life.


----------



## movieman (Mar 20, 2013)

Lately it seems to be popular among writers and unpopular among readers. I find it hard to read myself, and would need a very good reason to buy a book written that way.


----------



## Morkonan (Mar 20, 2013)

lasm said:


> Here's a question: do you all make conscious decisions about tense/POV? Like sit down and weigh pros and cons? Change your mind later? Me, I just start writing and there it is. Sometimes it's 3rd past, sometimes it's 1st or 2nd. Just whatever trips off my little fingers, sometimes without me even having any idea what I'm writing about. So for me I'd say perspective and tense decide the story as much as vice versa.



I think about it before I start writing a story. It is a main part in my decision making process. I do not leave it up to "chance" so to speak, as some element that will make itself known as I craft the story. That being said, it is possible that it could be changed, but I wouldn't do so lightly.

I do weigh the pros/cons of PoV and Tense. They're important and will set the tone as well as give me different sets of tools as I craft the story. Let's say I think up an awesome fantasy story about daring deeds, big battles, angry kings, dragons selling ice-cream, whatever... So, I start sketching things out, figuring out what I want to explore and how I want to do it. I figure out where certain events take place in the story, what drives the plot and how its going to develop, certain key scenes that drive home certain issues in the story, etc. 

Now, I might decide that I want an epic. I feel that this story would be best served by involving lots of characters and lots of different locations with many things happening at the same time. I know that I can do this effectively with a certain set of tools, like third-person, past-tense. That's easy and gives me a wide assortment to play with. I decide, further, I want an omniscient narrator, because there are thoughts and things that would be unknown to other sorts of narrators, but I suppose I could make do with limited omnscience. Yes, that's what I will go with - Third-person, past-tense, limited omniscience. Cool, I'm safe as every other author has done this and it's not difficult to do everything I need to do.

But, wait... What if I want to make this a bit more personal? A bit more gritty? What if I want to focus on one character's experience. After all, I'm weaving this big tapestry of events and while running about, showing the reader all sorts of cool stuff is fun, I think maybe a more intimate, personal story might be even better. It may even do something that some stories in this genre don't do effectively - Give the reader a truly intimate experience of an epic tale. That has promise! That could be a lot more fun. But, also, it's going to be harder to do. So, I pull up my bootstraps and decide for a first-person, past-tense.... Hmm, what to go with in regards to a narrator? Toughie. A completely limited narrator would be appropriate, but is that restriction necessary? At this point, I'd focus on that specific problem - Choosing an appropriate narrator. The rest has already been solved and I have a good outline of where I want to go.

That's all about the concept phase. It has nothing at all to do with the draft. All those concept decisions, which include Tense/PoV/Narrator have been decided before any draft is written. I may not know where the story is going, but I know the car I'm going to drive while getting there.

PS - Not saying I've churned out oodles of masterpieces, all carefully constructed works of literary art. Just outlining how I approach it and what my method of choice would be.


----------



## Staff Deployment (Mar 20, 2013)

> I suspect that authors who are attracted to this format are often writing about their own lives as they wish they had turned out and therefore they can’t resist making their main characters into super-human heroes. ... In sum, I don’t think present tense authors are thinking enough about the impact that format has on the reader. They’ve chosen a format that is inherently narcissistic. This is my story, the author is saying. Read about me. Admire me; aren’t I terrific!



(Source)

KyleColorado brought this up, and disagreed with it, and I agree with his disagreement.

Am I narcisisstic for writing about an 18-year-old girl who is also (unwittingly) a psychic zombie? Is it wish-fulfillment to constantly, schizophrenically shift between perspectives / points-of-view? Is the story of Staff Deployment when everyone starts getting eaten by monsters, main characters included?


----------



## FleshEater (Mar 20, 2013)

I just want to stop in here and say I'm on board with Kyle's original post. First person present is my favorite to read. Almost every Palahniuk novel is in first person present. Though he jumps to first person past, and second person a lot too.


----------



## Morkonan (Mar 20, 2013)

Staff Deployment said:


> (Source)
> 
> KyleColorado brought this up, and disagreed with it, and I agree with his disagreement.
> 
> Am I narcisisstic for writing about an 18-year-old girl who is also (unwittingly) a psychic zombie? Is it wish-fulfillment to constantly, schizophrenically shift between perspectives / points-of-view? Is the story of Staff Deployment when everyone starts getting eaten by monsters, main characters included?



I agree with you. In fact, I don't see why any primary motivation for any sort of author should be, necessarily, narcissism. I disagree with that commentary, as well. But, I do think the blogger and, likely, the original author have some valid points regarding first-person, present-tense. Perhaps the blogger was getting a bit to vehemently opposed to the idea. I may hate the format, but I don't disparage those who chose to write it by slinging around ad hominems.

For myself, it's like trying to read instructions that are written on the inside of an opaque shampoo bottle... It's difficult, pointless and likely won't bring back my receding hairline.


----------



## Staff Deployment (Mar 20, 2013)

That above article seems like an amateurish interpretation of a more professional writing article anyway (one it mentions at the top of its post). I did a quick google search. It's part of a larger book, but I was able to find a brief excerpt:



			
				David Jauss said:
			
		

> I'd like to begin this discussion of the past and present of present-tense narration with a prediction about the future: when the literary historians of 3000 write about the fiction of our time, I believe they will consider our use of the present tense to be its most distinctive--and, perhaps, problematic--feature. Whereas present-tense narration was once rare, it is now so common as to be commonplace. In 1987, Robie Macauley and George Lanning dubbed it "the most frequent cliche of technique in the new fiction," and since then, it's appeared with even greater frequency. And although there are signs that its use is diminishing among established writers, it's becoming the default choice for many younger writers. Recently, I asked one of my talented undergraduate students why she wrote all of her stories in the present tense. "Isn't that the way fiction's supposed to be written now?" she said, then added, "The past tense makes a story seem kind of 'nineteenth-century,' don't you think?" Why, I wondered, did a tense that has served authors since the very inception of fiction suddenly lose favor? What made the past tense passe? And why was the present tense now omnipresent?



EDIT: Found some more, from this page: Materials for Writers, which is interesting on its own (if a little bit basic in tone).



			
				David Jauss said:
			
		

> I. Why present tense?
> 
> In part, a reaction against "modernists," who were "time-obsessed" (Proust, Kafka, Woolf, Stein, Mann, Wolfe, Faulkner, Dos Passos, etc.). "But also an extension of the modernists' attitude toward time and history..." (2)   Modernists used the present tense for characters' thoughts, put action in the past tense; today's writers often use the present for action as well. The present tense is also used to escape time- to eliminate the past and history.
> 
> ...


----------



## Kyle R (Mar 20, 2013)

Hi FleshEater. Go Palahniuk! I haven't read any of his more recent novels (there was one written in a strange, accented-pidgin voice that looked a little too difficult for me to get into), but for a period of time I was obsessed with all things written by Chuck. _Lullaby_ remains one of my favorites. Also, _Survivor_.

Interesting excerpt, Staff. :encouragement: I think the author is being a bit condescending, though, probably because his only cited experience with present-tense comes from an undergrad student of his whose reasoning for using the tense seems to be based on modern trends.

I like to think of present tense as having a more useful purpose: an experimental approach storytelling, using psychology. It's an attempt to further empower the suspension of disbelief by persuading the reader that the events are unfolding before his or her very eyes.

Isn't it a primary goal in storytelling to enhance the reader experience?

Even though he was speaking about the use of active verbs, and avoiding too much use of the past perfect tense, I think Dwight Swain's quote applies well here: 

"What your reader wants is present action— events that have consequences for the future; characters shaping their own destinies. If he doesn’t get this sense of forward movement, he turns to another, more skillfully written yarn."

Writing in the present tense is an attempt to ramp up that immersion in the moment as much as possible.


The gun wasn't pointed at me. It _is _pointing at me, right here, right now. And his finger is on the trigger.


----------



## JosephB (Mar 20, 2013)

I’ve had conversations about this with my wife -- she is an astute and  thoughtful reader with good insight -- and when we talk about books, she  doesn’t really think about tense or POV unless I bring it up. And before  I started writing, I didn’t think about it either. Years ago, when I  read _Bright Lights_, _Big City _which is in the even  less unitized and accepted second person, present tense -- it didn’t  occur to me that it was unusual. I just read it. This is mostly something writers obsess  over, but I don’t think that many readers really care -- if the writing  and story are good. So I say don’t sweat it -- whatever works best for  you.


----------



## FleshEater (Mar 20, 2013)

KyleColorado said:


> Hi FleshEater. Go Palahniuk! I haven't read any of his more recent novels (there was one written in a strange, accented-pidgin voice that looked a little too difficult for me to get into), but for a period of time I was obsessed with all things written by Chuck. _Lullaby_ remains one of my favorites. Also, _Survivor_.



I too went through a short stint of Palahniuk obsession. His style is, in my opinion, the most interesting I've ever seen, and it's partly due to his first person present tense. _Choke_, _Damned_, _Invisible Monsters_, and _Haunted _are all solid reads as well.

I don't see why anyone would debate this. Just do it, ha-ha! I write all of my stories now in first person present tense, and never receive comments concerning it. In fact, even my latest work is in that tense, and it brings a great sense of being in the moment.


----------



## Leyline (Mar 20, 2013)

JosephB said:


> I’ve had conversations about this with my wife -- she is an astute and  thoughtful reader with good insight -- and when we talk about books, she  doesn’t really think about tense or POV unless I bring it up. And before  I started writing, I didn’t think about it either. Years ago, when I  read _Bright Lights_, _Big City _which is in the even  less unitized and accepted second person, present tense -- it didn’t  occur to me that it was unusual. I just read it. This is mostly something writers obsess  over, but I don’t think that many readers really care -- if the writing  and story are good. So I say don’t sweat it -- whatever works best for  you.



Agreed. Like lasm, I don't decide on a POV or tense: I just start writing and it sorts itself out. Most first drafts for me are a hodgepodge of tenses. Sometimes the deciding factor is simple laziness -- I re-draft into whatever tense I used the most. I've found that attempting to plan and pre-ordain a story is a death sentence to that story. The project I'm working on now that I'm having the best luck with started out as nothing more than a title (_Eyes All Filled Up With Smoke_) that sounded charmingly Tiptree-esque to me, and a quote from a song. I then wrote six evocative (to me) sub-chapter titles that acted as episodic descriptors. Then I started rambling. Since I'd recently finished a draft of a story that dealt with my considerations of one aspect of a hypothetical God, I decided why not make this one about an aspect of a hypothetical devil? The older I get, and the more I write, the more I'm tending towards discovering the story in draft after draft. This also lends itself, in my experience, towards a more experimental approach -- this is my best stab yet at a POV I've become enamored with lately: 1st person trying desperately to pretend it's omniscient.


----------



## Staff Deployment (Mar 20, 2013)

Leyline said:


> This also lends itself, in my experience, towards a more experimental approach -- this is my best stab yet at a POV I've become enamored with lately: 1st person trying desperately to pretend it's omniscient.



Yes, I like that too. I'm about halfway done a huge story with that pretend-omniscience as its central premise; one of the best parts about writing in that style is when the narrator's interpretation of events clashes with what actually happens.

There's an entire conversation sequence I wrote in which the narrator believes that it's some kind of contest or battle to see who can get the upper-hand and who can intellectually dominate the other, but afterwards she finds out that the other party just thought it was a normal conversation, and didn't apply even half the significance to it that the narrator did. This sort of thing wouldn't work nearly as well, nor be nearly as fun to write, if it was in third-person.


----------



## JosephB (Mar 21, 2013)

Leyline said:


> Agreed. Like lasm, I don't decide on a POV or  tense: I just start writing and it sorts itself out.



I  don't really think about it either. Not always, but most times, I  automatically launch into third person, past tense. Although at some  point early on, it might cross my mind that the story might work better  in first person. I've only written one thing is first person, present  tense -- that short story you read in the Workshop about the guy seeing his ex at her  wedding. I struggled with it a bit -- I've written a few things in first  person -- but nothing in present tense. However, I immediately  appreciated one of the key advantages of present tense -- writing the  back-story without using those past perfect "had's." Another thing,  first person, present tense seemed more conducive to  observational humor and little philosophical asides -- and I found that coming out more easily than in  my usual stuff. Maybe because it seems more immediate or off the cuff.  Anyway, I see doing a lot more of it now that I have one under my belt.


----------



## Tettsuo (Mar 21, 2013)

lasm said:


> Here's a question: do you all make conscious decisions about tense/POV? Like sit down and weigh pros and cons? Change your mind later?



Yes.  I actually sat down in a Starbucks and decided how to write my current project.  I previously researched the pros and cons and decided that 1st person present tense would be best for me.

There were scenes I thought up that I couldn't use because the main character wasn't going to see it as it happened.  There was information I could have provided quickly with a different POV, but I had to stretch out to avoid the long tiring chats from the main character that I hate in other books written in 1st person present tense.

It's absolutely restrictive if you choose to follow it completely... so that's what I did. LOL!  That became part of the motivation of writing the story; how can I tell the story and stick fully to it.

The thing that was great for me is it enabled me to fully occupy the character and see through their eyes as the events occur.  I really enjoyed that.


----------



## archer88iv (Mar 21, 2013)

I enjoy playing with it. Not quite as much as I enjoy playing with first and past tense (because that opens up more opportunity, I feel, for reflection on the part of the perspective character), but it's still a lot of fun. When I'm in a casual mood (not to say "when I want to write casually"), it seems to work especially well, because it allows for a very nonchalant connection between character and reader. 

Laid back.

Now, admittedly, that might be exactly the opposite of immediacy and immersion, but that's not what I'm after when I write that way. Listen to people telling stories from their own lives sometime. How many of them choose exactly that combination of person and tense? "So I walk into the lobby and the guy says, 'Wrong place, dude. Chinese art museum is down the stairs and to the left.' I figure that's all he does all day is stand there and tell people they ducked in the wrong door. Poor bastard."


----------



## Robdemanc (Mar 21, 2013)

No.  I do not like it.  It made the Hunger Games more bizarre than the story itself.

Third person, past tense for me because 

1) - Stories are stories because they have already happened.  How can it be a story if it is happening now?
2) - When I read a story I am reading about someone else, not me, so I prefer to see he/she instead of I

But I can overlook it sometimes. Delores Claiborne by Stephen King was well done as first person.

I wonder if one day I will experiment, I have often wondered about future tense and how that would be to write.


----------



## Lewdog (Mar 21, 2013)

Robdemanc said:


> No.  I do not like it.  It made the Hunger Games more bizarre than the story itself.
> 
> Third person, past tense for me because
> 
> ...



Lewdog hasn't read either of those books so he wouldn't know.


----------



## Rustgold (Mar 21, 2013)

I'm always surprised by some of the objections against 1st person, and it seems to be that certain writers don't understand certain advantages to it.

Yes 1st first person limits the viewpoint on the world, but is this a bad thing?  You can hide details, introduce falsehoods, and do many things which isn't possible when you see everything.


----------



## Rustgold (Mar 21, 2013)

Robdemanc said:


> No.  I do not like it.  It made the Hunger Games more bizarre than the story itself.



The problems with Hunger Games wasn't in the prospective it was viewed from, in fact I'd suggest the faults in it would be even worse (and positives diminished) if it was 3rd person.  Hunger Games was a story badly butchered to cater for a market demographic.  This wasn't the tense's fault.

(edit: and I know, double post.  I give out sour lemons to forum Commies [Nazis get overused].)


----------



## Morkonan (Mar 21, 2013)

Rustgold said:


> I'm always surprised by some of the objections against 1st person, and it seems to be that certain writers don't understand certain advantages to it.
> 
> Yes 1st first person limits the viewpoint on the world, but is this a bad thing?  You can hide details, introduce falsehoods, and do many things which isn't possible when you see everything.



I'm not jumping on First Persion, Present Tense's back, here, but...

Can you explain why hiding details would be advantageous to a writer and result in a pleasurable experience for the reader?

Introducing falsehoods is interesting. But, how will that benefit a reader when they don't know that the character believes in something that is false? Are you saying that the "gotcha" moment is easier to create in this format?


----------



## Leyline (Mar 21, 2013)

Morkonan said:


> I'm not jumping on First Persion, Present Tense's back, here, but...
> 
> Can you explain why hiding details would be advantageous to a writer and result in a pleasurable experience for the reader?
> 
> Introducing falsehoods is interesting. But, how will that benefit a reader when they don't know that the character believes in something that is false? Are you saying that the "gotcha" moment is easier to create in this format?



Check out Gene Wolfe, IMO the master of the unreliable narrator. "The Fifth Head Of Cerberus" and "The Island Of Doctor Death and Other Stories" are probably his two most powerful examples. And it's no 'gotcha' moment, it's far more transcendental and jaw-dropping than that. 

Those are vastly pleasurable experiences for this reader. Rustgold didn't claim it was always the most advantageous POV to use, just that it did indeed have advantages. I personally like it for an even simpler reason: I find it far easier to discover a strong voice for my main character in first person, to the point that I sometimes feel like I'm transcribing rather than writing.


----------



## Morkonan (Mar 21, 2013)

Leyline said:


> Check out Gene Wolfe, IMO the master of the unreliable narrator.



Hmmm, I finished reading his "Book of the New Sun" and the rest of the "Sun" series just last year. I enjoyed that, so I'll definitely pick up your recommendations. And, I'll keep in mind the subject of this thread, while reading them. Thanks!



> ..I find it far easier to discover a strong voice for my main character in first person, to the point that I sometimes feel like I'm transcribing rather than writing.



But, does that differ between Present and Past Tense?

Sure, First Person is more personal and intimate and you're going to probably spend quite a bit of time discussing feelings, emotions and all those wonderful things that endear certain sorts of characters to readers. Some other methods require these to be inferred, which can be difficult to do, especially when they're complex and the narrator is a bit unwieldy for that.

But, Present Tense? (Shudder) Do you find that Present Tense helps you "discover a strong voice" and such more than Past Tense does?

(PS - I understand the "transcribing rather than writing" part. But, that can be dangerous sometimes, can't it? How many times has any writer ended up transcribing themselves into massive paragraph deletions, I wonder?  )


----------



## Leyline (Mar 21, 2013)

Morkonan said:


> Hmmm, I finished reading his "Book of the New Sun" and the rest of the "Sun" series just last year. I enjoyed that, so I'll definitely pick up your recommendations. And, I'll keep in mind the subject of this thread, while reading them. Thanks!



Severian himself is, in fact, one of the finest examples of unreliable narrator in literature, IMO. Another fantastic 1st Person POV unreliable narrator -- who lies, skips over important events, etc -- can be found in Wolfe's _The Wizard Knight_. 





> But, does that differ between Present and Past Tense?



Rustgold, in the comment I was referencing, didn't mention tense. 



> Sure, First Person is more personal and intimate and you're going to probably spend quite a bit of time discussing feelings, emotions and all those wonderful things that endear certain sorts of characters to readers. Some other methods require these to be inferred, which can be difficult to do, especially when they're complex and the narrator is a bit unwieldy for that.
> 
> But, Present Tense? (Shudder) Do you find that Present Tense helps you "discover a strong voice" and such more than Past Tense does?



I like both. But you seem to be under the impression that present tense can only be used as if it were describing things as they happen on a moment by moment basis, as if life and narrative were descriptions of action only. This simply isn't so. People have memories and moments where they ponder things. I just interrupted my typing of this post to think of the way my father told stories: how he would place the listener into the moment for a large portion of the story. I smiled. Then I resumed typing. I type this line.



> (PS - I understand the "transcribing rather than writing" part. But, that can be dangerous sometimes, can't it? How many times has any writer ended up transcribing themselves into massive paragraph deletions, I wonder?  )



I can only speak for myself, and the answer is no. My second, third and beyond drafts are always expansions.


----------



## Staff Deployment (Mar 21, 2013)

Morkonan said:


> Can you explain why hiding details would be advantageous to a writer and result in a pleasurable experience for the reader?



That _definitely_ is not a concept that needs to be explained.


----------



## luckyscars (Mar 22, 2013)

lasm said:


> I've read one rational argument against it, which is that in reality, people do not narrate themselves as they're doing things--that is, in order to tell a story, the events must be over and in the past (at least partially).



I know this isn't your opinion lasm, but I still laughed a little at the argument. If we want to go down the 'in reality' route as an argument against a certain style, that pretty much means doing away with anything written as a third person omniscient (unless one believes in the big man in the sky, of course)


----------

