Odd writing choices

[MillieDynamite]

I've considered a story where the first-person narrator is nameless, and their sex or gender identification, or sexual preference, won't be revealed.

 

[SimonDoom]

The narrator in Daphne du Maurier's mystery novel Rebecca also is unnamed.

Norman Rush's novel Mating features an unnamed female first person narrator as well. It struck me as odd in that book because it's such a long novel and the narrator is highly intelligent and interesting and self-reflective. I thought it was a curious choice.

Jay McInerny's novel Bright Lights Big City is the only full length novel I've read in 2d person present tense. I think in that case he was deliberately writing in a "showy" way to get attention as one of the "it" authors of the 80s.

Dickens' novel Bleak House alternates between third person omniscient and first person as told by a female character in the story. You get used to it, but it's a curious choice, and I don't think Dickens did that in any of his other novels, some of which are all in first person and others all in third person.

Cormac McCarthy writes dialogue without quotation marks -- at least, in the stories of his I've read. He doesn't use dashes, either, as is sometimes done outside the US. He's a US author so it's a curious choice.

 

[ColtonWrites]

I heard there's a guy around here who likes to write in second person.

In general, I only find a writing choice "odd" if the writer doesn't pull it off. I like a unique approach, I like to see writers trying new things. If it's jarring in the reading and trips you up, makes you wonder why the writer made that choice, then I think something is missing in the execution.

The most recent example I can think of is FantasticLand by Mike Bockoven. It's a horror novel set in an amusement park isolated by a storm, the workers stuck there going full Lord of the Flies. It's an interesting premise, it has some really cool horror elements.

But it's written as testimonials after the fact, as part of a journalistic project to uncover what really went on. Not on its own necessarily a bad approach, it can be pulled off. But the way it's executed, the effect, to me, was to lose all immersion and suspense in the story. Each section reads like a story some dude might be telling me over a beer, and the tension is weakened by the conversational tone and the fact that you know the speaker has made it through whatever ordeal they're describing.

World War Z did the same thing but I thought he really did pull it off. (Haven't seen the movie)
Its set 10 years *after* the zombie apocalypse, but the reader doesnt know the full resolution, so theres still a lot of suspense.

That kind of "testimonials" story can be hard for a novice author - you need to be able to write from a variety of voices (not just POV).

 

[SimonDoom]

I've considered a story where the first-person narrator is nameless, and their sex or gender identification, or sexual preference, won't be revealed.

Try it. It should be interesting.

 

[SimonDoom]

World War Z did the same thing but I thought he really did pull it off. (Haven't seen the movie)
Its set 10 years *after* the zombie apocalypse, but the reader doesnt know the full resolution, so theres still a lot of suspense.

That kind of "testimonials" story can be hard for a novice author - you need to be able to write from a variety of voices (not just POV).

I read the book and saw the movie. I preferred the book and its historical, series-of-interviews style. The movie focuses entirely on a character played by Brad Pitt, who travels around the world and figures out a way to deal with the zombies.

 

[ColtonWrites]

I've considered a story where the first-person narrator is nameless, and their sex or gender identification, or sexual preference, won't be revealed.

I did one where I named the character and gave them a non-binary identity, but never specified secondary sex characteristics.

Might be cool to see one done the other way, where the physical characteristics are described but not the narrator's identity.

 

[ColtonWrites]

I read the book and saw the movie. I preferred the book and its historical, series-of-interviews style. The movie focuses entirely on a character played by Brad Pitt, who travels around the world and figures out a way to deal with the zombies.

If they lost the historical-interview style I will probably continue not to watch it.

The audio book is AMAZING.

 

[Djmac1031]

I read the book and saw the movie. I preferred the book and its historical, series-of-interviews style. The movie focuses entirely on a character played by Brad Pitt, who travels around the world and figures out a way to deal with the zombies.

I thought both versions had merit but really were almost two different stories.

 

[crookedletter]

World War Z did the same thing but I thought he really did pull it off. (Haven't seen the movie)
Its set 10 years *after* the zombie apocalypse, but the reader doesnt know the full resolution, so theres still a lot of suspense.

That kind of "testimonials" story can be hard for a novice author - you need to be able to write from a variety of voices (not just POV).

Agreed. I wouldn't write off the approach. But I do think it sets you up right away with a certain level of detachment and lack of immediacy with the story. So it's just an added challenge in the already difficult task of capturing and keeping a reader's attention. Not something just anyone can pull off.

I recall really liking World War Z, though it's been awhile. Maybe about time to revisit that one.

 

[MillieDynamite]

Mulling it right now.

Try it. It should be interesting.

 

[Djmac1031]

I've considered a story where the first-person narrator is nameless, and their sex or gender identification, or sexual preference, won't be revealed.

Closest I came to that was a short story called. Dancing Fingers.

Originally, the narrator identified as a woman and was describing an experience on a date with a partner clearly identified as male.

When voice actor Resident Madame wanted to record it as an audio, she suggested changing it so that the gender of the woman's partner was neutral and that the female narrator was now speaking directly to that person ("You / your") instead of about them, making it more personal.

I agreed and it worked very well.

 

[YmaOHyd]

I've considered a story where the first-person narrator is nameless, and their sex or gender identification, or sexual preference, won't be revealed.

I wrote a story like this where I tried also not to use the pronoun 'I', removing the narrator completely.

 

[designatedvictim]

I've considered a story where the first-person narrator is nameless, and their sex or gender identification, or sexual preference, won't be revealed.

Doing it without naming the main character is fairly straightforward, this novice does it most times.

But the rest of it...

That sounds like a challenge.

Especially on a site like this.

Good luck, if you try it.

 

[StillStunned]

I've done both 1P and 2P with a nameless and non-gender-specified main character. In both cases the emphasis was on the "wrongness" of the situation: the first is a creepy stalker story, the other a creepy molestation story.

I heard there's a guy around here who likes to write in second person.

Nobody *likes* writing 2P. But people's reaction when they're forced to admit that sometimes it works, that makes up for a lot.

 

[AG31]

So I'm about halfway through an audio version of the H.G. Wells classic "War Of The Worlds" when it occurred to me that the 1st person narrator has never once been referred to by name, not by himself or by other characters.

Wells takes it a step farther when at one point, the narrator begins to recount the adventures of "my brother" who, again, is never referred to by name.

The story still works quite well, and so far there was only one spot where things got confusing when the brother gets into a tussle with three other unnamed men. Lots of "he" and "him" floating around and it was tough to follow who was doing what to whom.

Ive written a few short stories where I chose not to name my narrator, but I find it an odd, interesting choice to write an entire novel without ever once naming the main character.

There are other characters that do not receive names either. The narrator spends some time with a character only referred to as "the curate," and the brother meets two women in his travels that he takes up with. While one is named, the other is referred to only as the "sister in law."

Got me thinking about other odd choices in writing, whether it be classic or modern literature, or our own stories.

This has turned into a fairly interesting thread about choosing to let characters go unnamed. But I was looking forward to hearing about a variety of odd choices. Might you re-post with a slightly different Subject line?

 

[Djmac1031]

This has turned into a fairly interesting thread about choosing to let characters go unnamed. But I was looking forward to hearing about a variety of odd choices. Might you re-post with a slightly different Subject line?

Im open for suggestions on a better title.

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

I've considered a story where the first-person narrator is nameless, and their sex or gender identification, or sexual preference, won't be revealed.

I did that in a very tragic 750.

Funny thing is, I didn't plan it that way, but I guess cutting it down to 750 made it happen. One of the commenters noticed it.

 

[MillieDynamite]

That kind of becomes 3rd person doesn't it?

I wrote a story like this where I tried also not to use the pronoun 'I', removing the narrator completely.

How Creepy.

I've done both 1P and 2P with a nameless and non-gender-specified main character. In both cases the emphasis was on the "wrongness" of the situation: the first is a creepy stalker story, the other a creepy molestation story.


Nobody *likes* writing 2P. But people's reaction when they're forced to admit that sometimes it works, that makes up for a lot.

Cool stuff can happen even when you don't know it at the time.

I did that in a very tragic 750.

Funny thing is, I didn't plan it that way, but I guess cutting it down to 750 made it happen. One of the commenters noticed it.

 

[YmaOHyd]

That kind of becomes 3rd person doesn't it?

The un-pronouned narrator is physically present and acting in the scene, so... kind of? But kind of not.

 

[AG31]

Im open for suggestions on a better title.

Your subject line was great. The thread just got diverted. How about "Trying again: Odd Writing Choices."

 

[KittyOfSteele]

Done it, though my characters already default to girls. Try it!

I've considered a story where the first-person narrator is nameless, and their sex or gender identification, or sexual preference, won't be revealed.

 

[EmilyMiller]

So I'm about halfway through an audio version of the H.G. Wells classic "War Of The Worlds" when it occurred to me that the 1st person narrator has never once been referred to by name, not by himself or by other characters.

You did proof read Twelve Months, right ?

The closest the narrator comes to being named is in writing, “and I told her my name.”

 

[Djmac1031]

You did proof read Twelve Months, right ?

The closest the narrator comes to being named is in writing, “and I told her my name.”

Again. I suppose it stood out to me more because of it being a full novel as opposed to a short story.

And its not just the choice not to name the narrator, but the clearly intentional choice to not name several other main or supporting characters.

 

[iwatchus]

I tried mixing 1P and 3P in a story. The FMC is a dominatrix as a side gig. In session, it's all 3P, but out of session, it's all 1P (her POV). I was trying to emphasize the difference between the two sides of her. It did well rating wise, but got little engagement and none of the comments even mentioned the shifting.

 

[YmaOHyd]

This has turned into a fairly interesting thread about choosing to let characters go unnamed. But I was looking forward to hearing about a variety of odd choices. Might you re-post with a slightly different Subject line?

I couldn't really think of any that weren't either content-driven or [waves hands vaguely] commercially-driven, I guess. Like I think it is an extremely odd choice for Mercedes Lackey to consistently write gay and lesbian-coded main characters who are straight. I think it is also an odd choice for her to consistently re-invent polo in various forms. But the logic tracks if you look at the choices as less about creativity and more as expressions of frustration that JK Rowling's wizard boarding school series has made a billion dollars and hers hasn't, even though it also has magic ponies.

Here's one that's POV-related: Christopher Moore has a trilogy about vampires in San Francisco. First book good, second book fine, third book genuinely unreadable horseshit. Half the book is told in the form of diary entries from the most irritating character on earth, in a written style that is virtually unbelievable, because it asks the audience to believe that the character writes with a physical pencil on physical paper in exactly their speaking voice, including all the irritating verbal tics that the Most Annoying Girl On Earth would have.

In handwriting, it's very rare for people to write more than they have to. People who speak this way don't write: "so, like, I went to the store, and I was like, oh my gosh there's bread, and then like I got some bread, ch'yeah!". The physical effort and time required to write 'like' on a piece of paper filters out filler words. Moore doesn't, so the annoying character's annoying perspective is made much more annoying.

The other issue with the book is that I'm 100% sure he wrote it so the publisher would stop asking for another sequel; it fundamentally betrays everything good about the first two novels, and both his editor and publisher should be ashamed to have accepted it.