Getting Away from 1st Person

[McKenna]

.

 

[Alex De Kok]

I've done it from first to third, from third to first, and from second to third!

I found that I needed to put more narrative in when I went from first to third, and take a little out going the other way, mainly because in first person the character just couldn't have known some of the things one can tell in third person.

Generally, I've been satisfied with the results. This may be because I like to use dialogue and dialogue can carry the plot forward whichever person one is writing in.

The second to third piece was originally written for an audience of one. I dislike reading second person stories other than those written specifically for me, so when I decided to inflict it on the long-suffering readers here I changed it. It just happens to be my best-scoring story!

Alex

 

[McKenna]

.

 

[Pure]

Yes, I've done it. It's trickier than one might think. More than substitution of "Jacob" for "I". The third person pov means you have to decide what the narrator knows, if anything, about (happenings in) the minds of the people involved. There's lots of options, sorta like using Adobe photshop, versus JoeBlow's generic photo editor.

Another exercise it to keep "I" but have it be the other main character.

In general, there's too little third person writing around here, compared to the norms; and that reflects poorly on us.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

The more limited POVs are more challengening for an author. I attempted some first person stuff long ago and found I didn't have the patience for it nor the talent to pull it off. I found conversion to be a real PITA. Not from a thinking stand point, but from re writing everything.

My only advice would be to plan it like a battle, start at the begining and go through once correcting obvious things, then let it sit a day ot two before making a second more through attempt. If not you can get so bogged down in the editing that you get sick of the work and the constant rereading and re editing.

-Colly

 

[cloudy]

The more limited POVs are more challengening for an author. I attempted some first person stuff long ago and found I didn't have the patience for it nor the talent to pull it off. I found conversion to be a real PITA. Not from a thinking stand point, but from re writing everything.

My only advice would be to plan it like a battle, start at the begining and go through once correcting obvious things, then let it sit a day ot two before making a second more through attempt. If not you can get so bogged down in the editing that you get sick of the work and the constant rereading and re editing.

-Colly

Just struck me how different we all are. Writing in first person is the easiest thing in the world for me. Third person takes much more thought and energy.

 

[oggbashan]

Copy the story and edit part of it for 3rd person limited.

Try 3rd person omniscient on the same part.

See which works best - for you. Then do the whole story.

Didactically, Og

 

[cantdog]

If you have a plot to move forward, it can be extraordinarily difficult if you accept the real limits of first person. That is, what could she know? What can she actually see? If you have a simple sexual encounter to narrate, I suppose first person would do fine. Some books (Poisonwood Bible, for instance) use first person and switch to another character's first person account, then another's.

Me, I like to bring the reader back a step from the immediate and tell him a couple of things once in a while. I like to have a plot, a proper story to go with the improper story, and not everything will happen in the sight of the main character.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I find first-person to be pretty easy and natural, but third-person is more powerful and ultimately more satisfying.

In first-person you draw on what your narrator knows and feels, while in third person you have to know all your characters and their motivations and feelings. Plus in third-person, the whole universe is your stage and you're only limited by your imagination. In first person you're stuck in one place and one time.

Still, I use first person when it's my own character's experience that's the main focus. With third-person I like to pull back and look at the big picture, the relationship between people.

---dr.M.

 

[Pure]

When you hear the first person is 'the easiest thing,' as stated by cloudy, it's often become the first person narrator is NOT very much distinguished from the author. (I haven't read cloudy, some I'm not talking about her stories, in particular.)

Although there are fine examples of this blurring, as in some Henry Miller 'novels.' it's often embarrassing (in results) at lit:

For instance: where the author is college educated, or well read, their lead character--even if she's a waitress-- talks and think in the words of a college educated person.

IF and WHERE the first person character is well thought out, their education, views, etc., *esp as distinguished from the author*, then it is less hard to insert a name for "I". Imo.

 

[SadieRose]

Very often I find that I cannot read first person stories. There are a few exceptions to this rule and all are very well written, but the first person done badly tends to spill over for me from fiction into journal and I lose interest from there on in.

As a consequence I very rarely write anything from the exclsuive persepective of one character. I feel that it gives me more scope, but also makes for a more illuminating storyline.

 

[McKenna]

.

 

[raphy]

Good point Alex, thanks for the tip! I hadn't thought of this, but of course you're right. Writing from third-person omniscient means I may be able to include more detail; Although I may only include the thoughts/feelings of one of the characters. I rather like not knowing precisely what the other character is thinking -I'd rather rely on his actions as a basis for interpretation as to his state of mind. (This may make more sense if/when I ever put the story up here at Lit.)

Write it in third person limited then, not third person omniscient. That's how most of my non-lit writing is done, and I love that PoV. It's the very very best way to get inside your protagonist's head without writing in first person.

 

[raphy]

When you hear the first person is 'the easiest thing,' as stated by cloudy, it's often become the first person narrator is NOT very much distinguished from the author. (I haven't read cloudy, some I'm not talking about her stories, in particular.)

Although there are fine examples of this blurring, as in some Henry Miller 'novels.' it's often embarrassing (in results) at lit:

For instance: where the author is college educated, or well read, their lead character--even if she's a waitress-- talks and think in the words of a college educated person.

IF and WHERE the first person character is well thought out, their education, views, etc., *esp as distinguished from the author*, then it is less hard to insert a name for "I". Imo.

I agree - And suggest Alastair MacLean's Fear Is The Key as an excellent example of a full length first person novel. MacLean does an amazing job of differentiating between information the protagonist/narrator knows and information the reader knows

 

[raphy]

p.s. McK - I'd be happy to look over it for you if you like