Third Person / First Person / Third Person

[AlexBailey]

Probably me being unclear. Both are past tense. The flashback is first person. The current day is third person.

Oops. I’m a dumb ass. I read that wrong.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Oops. I’m a dumb ass. I read that wrong.

I do that ALL the time

 

[SimonDoom]

My intent was to ratchet up the intensity of Mark’s feelings from a year earlier. To not have him falling for Noelle in the current day to be just a tropey, inevitable thing. I could have kept it 3P throughout. But I wanted their first meeting to be really intense and memorable for him.

Not saying I carried off, but that was my intent .

Thanks for reading!

Em

That makes sense. I think it worked.

 

[EmilyMiller]

It’s kinda interesting. On average, I get one vote for every 83 views. For this story, I get one every 15 views.

Em

 

[Bramblethorn]

I just had a story with this structure published (A Holiday Wish). The middle first person section is a flashback and I wanted to both differentiate it (think black and white vs color in Oppenheimer) and to make this section more personal.

It was an intentional choice but I know such things can be jarring, if not handled well (and I and no master writer). I wasn’t after feedback on my execution (though of course that’s also welcome ), more on the general concept.

Have you ever done anything like this?

Sure have: Magnum Innominandum is mostly first person flashback, embedded in two levels of third person.

 

[Britva415]

When writing I felt a shift in what was going on and wanted to reflect it.

I'd have either shifted the entire story into 1p, or else put a much stronger frame around the shift to make it make sense and/or have impact. (They're both important.)

As a reader (and I guess critic), I couldn't find any reason why the rest of the story couldn't or shouldn't have been 1p. It was such limited 3p that it might as well have been 1p anyway, and this made it feel to me like the part which was in 1p was just not distinct enough from the rest of the story for it to have been called-for.

I guess this is a way of saying that the shift you felt wasn't felt by me. I didn't take any meaning, mood, or metaphor from the shift, and I don't think it served to create that more intimate sense of the past connection you mentioned. It didn't detract from it, but it didn't enhance it.

Yes, sectioned explicitly with dividers.

You know what I mean by "frame?" The typographical dividers didn't lampshade the shifted section enough to make it make sense, for me. If there had been more of a setup in the story's words (beyond just, basically, "I passed out"), it could have made more sense.

Maybe something like a foreshadowing of the pit of nostalgia he was about to descend into, before descending into it. Or a description of MP's awareness of his mental state spiraling inward, under the influence of fatigue, alcohol, and bereavement, or something. But that's just me brainstorming, to illustrate what I mean by frame.

Something to set it up, instead of just dividing it off. This one technique alone could have been a lot more effective at helping the reader (this reader) "feel the shift," themselves (myself). What I said about "making sense" and "having impact" would both be enhanced, I think.

 

[Cagivagurl]

I just had a story with this structure published (A Holiday Wish). The middle first person section is a flashback and I wanted to both differentiate it (think black and white vs color in Oppenheimer) and to make this section more personal.

It was an intentional choice but I know such things can be jarring, if not handled well (and I and no master writer). I wasn’t after feedback on my execution (though of course that’s also welcome ), more on the general concept.

Have you ever done anything like this?

Em

You rebel....
LOL

 

[EmilyMiller]

I'd have either shifted the entire story into 1p, or else put a much stronger frame around the shift to make it make sense and/or have impact. (They're both important.)

As a reader (and I guess critic), I couldn't find any reason why the rest of the story couldn't or shouldn't have been 1p. It was such limited 3p that it might as well have been 1p anyway, and this made it feel to me like the part which was in 1p was just not distinct enough from the rest of the story for it to have been called-for.

I guess this is a way of saying that the shift you felt wasn't felt by me. I didn't take any meaning, mood, or metaphor from the shift, and I don't think it served to create that more intimate sense of the past connection you mentioned. It didn't detract from it, but it didn't enhance it.


You know what I mean by "frame?" The typographical dividers didn't lampshade the shifted section enough to make it make sense, for me. If there had been more of a setup in the story's words (beyond just, basically, "I passed out"), it could have made more sense.

Maybe something like a foreshadowing of the pit of nostalgia he was about to descend into, before descending into it. Or a description of MP's awareness of his mental state spiraling inward, under the influence of fatigue, alcohol, and bereavement, or something. But that's just me brainstorming, to illustrate what I mean by frame.

Something to set it up, instead of just dividing it off. This one technique alone could have been a lot more effective at helping the reader (this reader) "feel the shift," themselves (myself). What I said about "making sense" and "having impact" would both be enhanced, I think.

Not sure where you got the bereavement from. But I appreciate the other feedback .

Em

 

[EmilyMiller]

Sure have: Magnum Innominandum is mostly first person flashback, embedded in two levels of third person.

Wow! Sounds complicated!

Em

 

[Britva415]

Not sure where you got the bereavement from. But I appreciate the other feedback .

Em

The breakup, not the flashback

 

[Bramblethorn]

Wow! Sounds complicated!

A little, but I think it makes sense when read.

 

[IvorieFrost]

You tried 3rd person. Then you tried 1st. At some point it occurred to you...why not try 2nd? You wrote a 2nd person story, and at first you found it difficult and awkward. But eventually you mastered it, and then your writing flourished as never before. Your stories won awards, and your novels became best sellers, and Hollywood came knocking, and you wrote wildly successful screenplays.

You became wealthy and famous but you were lonely. One night at a party you met a stunning creature named Ivorie and it was love at 2nd person sight.

You lived happily ever after.

 

[DustofFallenStars]

I'm trying something similar at the moment, although unpublished.

It's mostly told in 1st person, as the experiences of the MMC as he investigates the relationship between his younger self and his sweetheart girlfriend.

However, flashbacks of things that are related to him by other parties occur third person; he didn't experience them directly, so the perspective shifts to a distancing neutral narrative.

I think of it as love investigation story, featuring unreliable narrators, murky motivations, and hidden secrets; a crime story, where the victim was his own past relationship.

 

[BobbyBrandt]

I just had a story with this structure published (A Holiday Wish). The middle first person section is a flashback and I wanted to both differentiate it (think black and white vs color in Oppenheimer) and to make this section more personal.

It was an intentional choice but I know such things can be jarring, if not handled well (and I and no master writer). I wasn’t after feedback on my execution (though of course that’s also welcome ), more on the general concept.

Have you ever done anything like this?

Em

I am surprised by how many commenters haven't done this and even more surprised by any that objected to its use. It is so common in literature that when done correctly, it frequently isn't even recognized.

I've used it several times, the latest being with the mainstream middle-grade adventure story I published this year. The prologue is narrated in 3rd person, the story is told by the grandmother in 1st person, and the epilogue reverts back to 3rd person narrative.

There should be clear and defined boundaries between the narrative POV changes but not so obvious that they smack the reader in the face.

 

[lc69hunter]

Em, this story puts you in the rarified territory of authors like @TarnishedPenny, at least in my book

 

[EmilyMiller]

Em, this story puts you in the rarified territory of authors like @TarnishedPenny, at least in my book

High praise indeed!

Em

 

[GrushaVashnadze]

Have you ever done anything like this?

Em

In Metamorphoses ch. 1 the opening and concluding sections are in first person present, and the central section is in third person past - even though everything is told from the same character's point of view. It works, I think, because of the specific time-line /alternate reality demands of the story.

 

[Britva415]

So, I just finished reading a commercial novel which does this.

The point of view switches between first-person one character narrating, and third-person some disembodied narrator describing scenes which focus on another character. Sometimes the first character is also in these other scenes, so, he's there but he doesn't get to "I" these scenes.

It was annoying as hell, most especially for two reasons: First, there was literally no reason at all why the entire novel couldn't have been in third person. There was no taking advantage of the closeness of 1pPOV we always hear about. Second, there was no frame at all providing any sort of in-story narrative explanation for why the POV was switching.

There was nothing the first-person narrator did or knew or felt or thought which the third-person narrator didn't know, and vice versa - there was nothing in the third-person scenes focusing on the other character which the first person didn't wind up knowing. There was no tension or information asymmetry related to the differing points of view. They really were the same point of view - a single omniscient narrator who decided to pretend it was "I" in half the scenes and it was some other, separate, depersonalized third-person POV haver in the other half of the scenes, switching back and forth just for the hell of it.

I mean, I think I know the reason this bestselling author decided to do this. I think it was simply to contrive some sort of contrast in the prose as these two characters were followed through the story. No better reason than that. The author didn't make a better reason, didn't make it work to serve any purpose other than "having two points of view." Which is - I'm going to say "amateurish" even though this author has dozens of novels published, most of which make bestseller lists. This is exactly what the majority of novels in third-person POV's do already. There was less than zero reason to hang a lampshade on "two points of view" by changing between first and third in this particular story.

 

[StillStunned]

I mean, I think I know the reason this bestselling author decided to do this.

Who's the author?

 

[Britva415]

Who's the author?

Michael Connelly, Resurrection Walk

 

[EmilyMiller]

So, I just finished reading a commercial novel which does this.

The point of view switches between first-person one character narrating, and third-person some disembodied narrator describing scenes which focus on another character. Sometimes the first character is also in these other scenes, so, he's there but he doesn't get to "I" these scenes.

It was annoying as hell, most especially for two reasons: First, there was literally no reason at all why the entire novel couldn't have been in third person. There was no taking advantage of the closeness of 1pPOV we always hear about. Second, there was no frame at all providing any sort of in-story narrative explanation for why the POV was switching.

There was nothing the first-person narrator did or knew or felt or thought which the third-person narrator didn't know, and vice versa - there was nothing in the third-person scenes focusing on the other character which the first person didn't wind up knowing. There was no tension or information asymmetry related to the differing points of view. They really were the same point of view - a single omniscient narrator who decided to pretend it was "I" in half the scenes and it was some other, separate, depersonalized third-person POV haver in the other half of the scenes, switching back and forth just for the hell of it.

I mean, I think I know the reason this bestselling author decided to do this. I think it was simply to contrive some sort of contrast in the prose as these two characters were followed through the story. No better reason than that. The author didn't make a better reason, didn't make it work to serve any purpose other than "having two points of view." Which is - I'm going to say "amateurish" even though this author has dozens of novels published, most of which make bestseller lists. This is exactly what the majority of novels in third-person POV's do already. There was less than zero reason to hang a lampshade on "two points of view" by changing between first and third in this particular story.

Doesn’t this just say that bad execution sucks, not that the concept is inherently unsound.

Em

 

[Britva415]

Doesn’t this just say that bad execution sucks, not that the concept is inherently unsound

Yes?

But I feel like I'm also saying good execution must be harder than some of these people here seem to think, when even a seasoned pro is reduced to phoning it in like this.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Yes?

But I feel like I'm also saying good execution must be harder than people think, when even a seasoned pro is reduced to phoning it in like this.

So any examples of good execution?

Em

 

[Britva415]

So any examples of good execution?

Em

I've definitely encountered novels which did this where the choice seemed more justified based on what it did for the story.

They probably included some measure of the "intensity and intimacy with the 1p protagonist narrator" which keeps being propped up as the main benefit of 1p pov.

This is rare, but a couple of them may have also included something of the frame I've been referring to - something in the manuscript, in the storytelling, which reveals what the circumstances of the act of narrating are and the circumstances of us being in a position to hear or read it.

Specific titles aren't coming to mind right now but I'll ponder it and if they come to me I'll drop them in.

 

[Britva415]

something in the manuscript, in the storytelling, which reveals what the circumstances of the act of narrating are and the circumstances of us being in a position to hear or read it.

I seem to be the only person who's fussy about this, but I've read too many stories - both professional and amateur - where the absence of this frame is just jarring. Usually the reason it's jarring is because the story just isn't good enough for me to suspend disbelief. So, sure, we can be on the same page about this, all this says is that the concept* isn't unsound even if the execution is poor. I'm just saying that, too frequently, to me the execution is not good enough to make up for the lack of this frame.

* talking about the concept of 1p narration all by itself. More specifically, I personally do feel like the concept of completely ignoring the utility and benefit of framing it is in fact unsound, but like I said, I seem to be the only one around here who notices, or cares, or ever finds myself asking, "Why am I being told this story by this narrator? Who am I to them?"