Do people really like 2nd person narration?

[DanDraper]

I see some stories written in second person narration.
Does anybody actually like that? and if so, why?

I can understand 1st and 3rd person narration, it makes more sense.
But reading it in 2nd person with all that "You" in every other sentence is too distracting.
But everyday there are stories written that way.




.....

 

[oggbashan]

I don't. I think it would be unpopular.

 

[KeithD]

There's very little written in actual second person. Most of it you see is in pseudo second and is really an awkward version of first person that, no, there aren't many readers who enjoy wading through such convoluted and strained prose.

 

[lovecraft68]

Hard pass for me, all that "you are..." makes me feel like someone is trying to hypnotize me.

 

[SimonDoom]

No.

I find it contrived and artificial. It makes no sense. Also, KeithD is correct that what people often think is second person is really a version of first person.

Here's first person:

I see you approaching me, and I want you. You take your clothes off, and I'm excited.

Here's second person:

You see Tim approaching, and you want him. He takes his clothes off, and you are excited.

I have read very few true second-person POV stories at Lit. AlinaX wrote one, but I can't remember the name. As I remember, it was a surprisingly successful example. Jay McInerny's Bright Lights Big City is one of the few popular novels I can think of in this POV.

True second person POV is so unfamiliar to most readers that it's likely to leave them turned off.

 

[windar]

No.

I find it contrived and artificial. It makes no sense. Also, KeithD is correct that what people often think is second person is really a version of first person.

Here's first person:

I see you approaching me, and I want you. You take your clothes off, and I'm excited.

Here's second person:

You see Tim approaching, and you want him. He takes his clothes off, and you are excited.

I have read very few true second-person POV stories at Lit. AlinaX wrote one, but I can't remember the name. As I remember, it was a surprisingly successful example. Jay McInerny's Bright Lights Big City is one of the few popular novels I can think of in this POV.

True second person POV is so unfamiliar to most readers that it's likely to leave them turned off.

One wonders whether McInerny chose second person largely because it was unusual and would bring him attention. If so, it worked...

 

[oggbashan]

Thre only place I see for second person is the old fashioned adventure books:

"You enter a room. there are three doors facing you. Which do you choose?

If you choose door 1 go to page 69; if you choose door 2 go to page 78; if you choose door 3 go to page 34."

 

[SimonDoom]

One wonders whether McInerny chose second person largely because it was unusual and would bring him attention. If so, it worked...

I have absolutely no doubt that's why. And, yes, it did.

 

[KeithD]

Thre only place I see for second person is the old fashioned adventure books:

"You enter a room. there are three doors facing you. Which do you choose?

Case in point. This is actually first person. The "you" isn't asking the question. In second person, it's all, totally, done inside the head of the "you." No external perspective at all.

"You enter a room. You see three doors before you. You contemplate which to choose."

 

[AlinaX]

True second person voice, if done well, can be very intimate, but only works in certain types of stories.
http://literotica.com/s/swallow-8
http://literotica.com/s/the-garden-and-you

 

[SimonDoom]

Case in point. This is actually first person. The "you" isn't asking the question. In second person, it's all, totally, done inside the head of the "you." No external perspective at all.

"You enter a room. You see three doors before you. You contemplate which to choose."

The key, which people miss, is identifying which pronoun is connected with the inner thoughts. If the pronoun "you" is used but the narrator cannot reveal "you's" thoughts, then it's not second person.

This is why second person is so jarring and weird, because it makes no intuitive sense that the narrator has access to "you's" thoughts.

 

[KeithD]

This is why second person is so jarring and weird, because it makes no intuitive sense that the narrator has access to "you's" thoughts.

And, as some point out, presumes that the reader will identify with the "you" in the story, which often is not the case.

 

[karaline]

Personally, I don't like it either, i feel like i'm being told what I think, but as others have already said, i feel like McInerney pulled in off in Bright Lights

 

[Voboy]

Yeah, I don't willingly read second person. Which means, in keeping with the timeless Lit dictum of "write what you'd want to read," I won't write it either.

Might make an interesting experiment. A dare, almost. But nothing serious.

 

[Kumquatqueen]

The only time it makes sense is with two partners, one telling the other what they are going to do to make the former satisfied. In that context, it can sound very sexual.

Any other time, it usually comes across as young teenage fanfic (mostly because it is).

 

[KeithD]

The only time it makes sense is with two partners, one telling the other what they are going to do to make the former satisfied. In that context, it can sound very sexual.

Any other time, it usually comes across as young teenage fanfic (mostly because it is).

Well, that would be almost impossible to do without really being in first or third person.

 

[DanDraper]

It's good to know I'm not the only one who hates that form of narration. I see it almost every day here, I can't imagine it has much success.




....

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Hmmm... I've written in second person but only in user manuals.

 

[SimonDoom]

Ever considered submitting a moanual for 'Toys & Masturbation', or 'How To'?

There are lots of story possibilities with this concept.

"Alexa, how do I make this toy work?"

 

[ChloeTzang]

Second person is really hard to do well, and it's so hard to stay consistent and keep the right POV, but when you can pull it iff, I think it's worth it. I did it with this story, and I really was talking to "you" - every male reader who's ever been toa Bangkok bar or club, and left with one of the bargirls.... this was very deliberately aimed at putting "you" into the story. There's a time and a place for second person, and if you don't get it right, it comes across as really contrived.

I won't say I got it right here, but that was what I was trying for, and I think I came close.

https://www.literotica.com/s/will-you-still-love-me-tomorrow-2

Just as you used me last night. Just as every other farang I have ever left this Club with on every other night has used me.

Just like you, the light of love is in his eyes. Just like you, he loves me tonight, for always, for ever. Just like you, I know he'll only love me while his moment of pleasure lasts. I'll give him my body, I'll give him the pleasure he desires, I'll give him everything he desires, all the time knowing that just like you, he'll only love me until the morning sun drives the romance of the night away.

I know he won't love me forever.

He won't love me tomorrow.

Only for tonight.

Like you.

 

[KeithD]

I really was talking to "you" - every male reader who's ever been toa Bangkok bar or club, and left with one of the bargirls.....[/I]

Hmmm, I'm about to start writing such a story (well, sh/e is a bargirl now), so maybe I should read your story first. Or, having been in a lot of Bangkok bars myself, and having left them with company, maybe not.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I think the reason this style shows up so often on Literotica - despite it being generally unpopular, as demonstrated here - is that it's a common mode of writing in cybersex/SRP. It works there, because SRP is typically one-on-one and collaborative in a way that writing for an audience isn't. Then people who've cut their teeth with sexy cybering try their hand on Literotica, and don't realise that what works well in cyber goes down like a lead balloon here.

The key, which people miss, is identifying which pronoun is connected with the inner thoughts. If the pronoun "you" is used but the narrator cannot reveal "you's" thoughts, then it's not second person.

I'm not sold on this assertion. It's certainly typical for n'th person narrative to explore the thoughts of the n'th person, but I've never heard that presented as a defining characteristic. A story need not present anybody's thoughts at all, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have a person.

How would you characterise a story like this, for instance?

My name is Loretta, though I sometimes go by Lottie. I'm just turned eighteen, and I have the greenest eyes of anybody in this town.

It's a small town, mind. There's not much to be said for it, but every night when the sun goes down, the whole place looks like it's turned to gold, and that's when I used to go a-roaming.

You must have heard about the things that happen here. Last Christmas, Bill Blake's little boy went missing. They found him in the creek, murdered. Then somebody killed the schoolteacher's dog. He brought her into school and gave a eulogy that got all the tears flowing.

People were getting pretty jumpy by then, and then they found Handyman Joe's head in the fountain. Then old Mrs. Colgate was stabbed, but she still had enough breath in her to gasp out, "My killer is Loretta!"

The cops burst through my door and arrested me. I admit it. I didn't kill the dog, but I killed the Blake boy, and Handyman Joe (with his own circular saw), and Mrs. Colgate, and a whole lot of others that people thought were accidents. Remember the kids who fell through the ice when the warning signs went missing? And the fire in Belavista? That was me.

That version never describes Loretta's thoughts. The original that inspired it does, but given the context and the conversational narration style, it's quite possible the narrator is unreliable. So we still don't really know her inner thoughts beyond what she presents to the world.

Would you argue that this isn't a first-person narrative, though?

 

[SimonDoom]

I think the reason this style shows up so often on Literotica - despite it being generally unpopular, as demonstrated here - is that it's a common mode of writing in cybersex/SRP. It works there, because SRP is typically one-on-one and collaborative in a way that writing for an audience isn't. Then people who've cut their teeth with sexy cybering try their hand on Literotica, and don't realise that what works well in cyber goes down like a lead balloon here.



I'm not sold on this assertion. It's certainly typical for n'th person narrative to explore the thoughts of the n'th person, but I've never heard that presented as a defining characteristic. A story need not present anybody's thoughts at all, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have a person.

How would you characterise a story like this, for instance?



That version never describes Loretta's thoughts. The original that inspired it does, but given the context and the conversational narration style, it's quite possible the narrator is unreliable. So we still don't really know her inner thoughts beyond what she presents to the world.

Would you argue that this isn't a first-person narrative, though?

The passage you cited is clearly first person, despite the one-time use of the word "you."

You make a good point, because point of view doesn't necessarily require getting into a character's inner thoughts. That could be true of second-person as well. I can imagine a second-person POV narrative where "you" is the main character but "you"'s inner thoughts are never revealed; the narrative just describes "you"'s external conduct. As long as there is no "I", it would still be second-person POV.

It's probably more accurate to say if there's an I and a You in the story, and the story reveals the inner thoughts of I, then you know it's first person POV.

 

[KeithD]

I'll stick with second person isn't there unless everything is perceived from that second person. Thoughts don't have to be expressed for this to happen. And, no, it isn't often accomplished, more rarely the longer the work is. And in most cases when it's used, it's so awkward and convoluted that it was unnecessary to do.

 

[Dingo_Triplesix]

A new thing would be a 3rd person plural POV.

Let´s say a king uses the pluralis majestatis when describing an orgy with all of his people.

"We put our cock into your cunts, my beloved tributarys..."