Second Person (rebooted from the story discussion forum)

[KillerMuffin]

As I would have said:

I don't think POV is as cut and dried as all that. I don't think it's: the narrator is I then it's first person, you then it's second, he/she/it then it's third, period, point blank, that's all she wrote. That's a logical fallacy of sorts, a false trichotomy, if you will.

POV is a continuum, in my way of thinking. Some stories are more first person than others. One Flew Over a Cuckoo's nest is narrated by an I. The entire thing. However, the I character is essentially a wall in personality and many times never interjects himself into the scene, so, for significant portions of the novel, the POV is a very distant third person, though not omniscient. The narrator is I, but the POV for 3/4 of the novel is third. The protagonist is he. How is that possible with a black and white, either/or definition of POV? Quite simply, it's not.

In the first person protagonist/second person antagonist stories on this site, they are narrated by the I character who tells the you character how to think, feel, and behave. In a black/white definition of POV, it's all first person. In a POV continuum, it's a fluid POV style that switches from one to another as necessary.

The reason I say POV is fluid and not static (either/or for the entire work) is that POV directly influences narrative distance. In a strict sense, first person has the least narrative distance, second person has a mid-narrative distance, and third person has the most narrative distance. In a more real sense, second person has the tendency to be the most distancing between reader and narrative over the other two because of how the reader interacts with the text. Not to create an intentional fallacy among Litsters, but I doubt that writers here intend to push readers further away with the second person pronoun. I believe they intend to create more intimacy with first/second pronouns than they believe happens with first/third pronouns. That's not what actually happens. The appearance of the "you" being told what to think, feel, and do ends up being a turn off. The reader doesn't get sucked into the narrative dream and can't imagine the action happening as it goes. They're sidetracked by you and the false intimacy the writer assumes.

That's not to say this happens with all reader, but evidence (in the form of votes and hits) seems to indicate that the second person pronoun is not liked in the narrative by the audience, where first and third person are preferred.

Why is that? You is alienating. The writer mistakenly assumes it brings reader/writer together, brings the reader more deeply into the story. The reader responds by adding his or her thoughts, feelings, and what he or she would do during events, which don't match the story. Half the time (stastically), it doesn't match the character. I certainly don't have a penis, for example, and women don't arouse me.

How do we discus POV characters briefly to someone who has just started? By labeling the entire story with a POV. It's simple to say second person killed the story for most of your readers because it's true. It's not the narrative POV, strictly speaking, because the narrator is usually a first person character. However, it is a non-narrative POV. It is the POV of a major character that the story simply can't do without. The story isn't first person or second person, it's both. The sentences, individual are in one character's point of view. "You touch me." Which POV is it? An either/or paradigm will unequivocally say first. A fluid POV paradigm might say second, particularly if the preceding sentence was "You come in" and the succeding sentence was "You like it." Why? You is the actor and I is the receiver. You is taking the foreground in this sentence and I is taking the background. It's not as cut and dried as "You eat lunch" or "I drank tea" because both pronouns are in there.

This is where I think the either/or paradigm is disingenous without every intending to be. It forces every sentence, scene, paragraph, chapter, etc. into a single POV, whether that logical unit is actually in that assigned POV or not. Normatively, all works are in the narrator's POV. But that only works in a relative fashion and doesn't factor in the dimensions of distance, both narrative and reader's response.

I don't believe there's anyway we will ever agree, sr71plt (if you even read this), simply because we have different approaches to perspective and they're not likely to change. I will give you a bibliography that I developed my opinion with and then later "cemented" it with, but I don't consider these an authority I can appeal to in order to prove my opinion is more valid than yours. Literature is not science and is/isn't cannot simply exist, only an opinion that seems more accurate or valid than the current one (which will always be up for disagreement depending on the views and opinions of the people exposed to it). We can't run an experiment to "prove" who is right and who is wrong because you can't prove one theoretical perspective is more right than the other. We can only have an opinion and those are not ultimately definitive.

However, discourse is important. It's important for people to understand your view of the issue and where it came from because you are not wrong. It's also important for people to understand mine, too, because I'm not wrong either. (By "people," I mean those who are interested in the goings on.) That way, people can develop their own opinions, which they can then rely on to be thought out, logical, and based on their own consideration, not a dictionary or some MFA somewhere. We may seem diametrically opposed, but I don't think so. After all 1 + 1 = 2, but it also equals 10. The difference isn't that 2 cannot ever equal 10, the difference is that one math uses the decimal paradigm and the other math uses a binary one.

I am not doing this to "woo" you into my way of thinking, nor do I expect you to attempt to "woo" me into your way of thinking. I am not thinking of this issue in terms of right and wrong. I don't think either of us are wrong. I am doing this because I disagree that a "neutral source" has the ultimate answer to a literary discussion and that's it, it's over, someone's right, someone's wrong. My "sources" do not come right out and reiterate my opinion. You won't find my "definition" of second person in any of these. You will find the seeds and sprouts of my opinion in there, however. Which is what I arrogantly hope happens here. Someone else will find the seeds of their opinion in both of our views. After all, that's what discussion is for.

Bibliography (I will leave off style, poetry, and individual articles on narrative):

Forster, E. M. Aspects of the Novel. Orlando, FL: Mariner Books, 1956. Print.

Gardner, John. On Becoming a Novelist. New York: Norton, 1983. Print.

James, Henry. The Art of Criticism: Henry James on the Theory and the Practice of Fiction. Ed. William R. Veeder and Susan M. Griffin. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1986. Print.

McArthur, Tom ed. The Oxford Companion to the English Language. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2002. Print.

Murfin, Ross C., and Supryia M. Ray, eds. The Bedford Glossary of Critical and Literary Terms. 3rd ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2009. Print.

O'Connor, Flannery. Mystery and Manners: Occasional Prose. Ed. Robert Fitzgerald and Sally Fitzgerald. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1993. Print.

Pack, Robert, and Jay Parini, eds. Writers on Writing: A Bread Loaf Anthology. Hanover, NH: Middlebury College, 1991. Print.

Smiley, Jane. Thirteen Ways of Looking at a Novel. New York: Knopf, 2005. Print.

Stone, Sarah and Ron Nyren. Deepening Fiction: A Practical Guide for Intermediate and Advanced Writers. New York: Pearson Longman, 2005. Print.

 

[sr71plt]

I only see "I think" in what you posted. What did those folks in the bibliography you gave actually say about second person as differentiated from first person? (And no, I'm not going to do your research for you. I'm busy stringing popcorn for the Christmas tree.)

Person is about perspective--in whose eyes the perceiving is. If you aren't in the mind of the "you" describing what the "you" is perceiving in your work and are in the mind of the "I," no matter what you are saying about "you," the perspective/perception/person is in the first person: I. It''s first person.

That's why second person is so hard to maintain and tires the reader out quickly (and apparently why a lot of folks don't even know what it is--there isn't much written about it that I've ever seen--although I provided links to simple explanations on the other thread).

In the example you gave that you thought was in the second person but it was all from the perspective of "I," I showed you what it would look like in the second person.

But you can certainly believe you're writing in the second person if you want to believe it.

(I hadn't realized the thread had been closed in the other forum, though. It's interesting how Penelope Street puts in the last word and then closes the thread as if she knows it all--when often she doesn't. As far as I can determine she hasn't even written any erotica here in a long, long, long time--and not all that much then.)

 

[amicus]

An interesting soliloquy; in first person point of view, I presume?

And yes, the literaticians of style insisted upon a strict definition of point of view, and for good reason, I think.

There is a recent film, "Vantage Point", with Dennis Quaid, if memory serves, that tickled my imagination concerning how many different, 'vantage points of view', one could successfully write into existence.

I would offer an artistic analogy, as between formal Classical Music and improvisational Jazz, and I suppose also, the pre Impressionist era in painting with the Classical interpretations beforehand.

I would suggest, that in all three, Music, Painting and Writing, that the imperative is to....communicate with the observer/reader/listener.

With multiple POV's, one must avoid confusing the reader as to who is speaking at the moment and why.

This is more difficult than one might surmise...I remember a story in which I wanted the thoughts and feelings of two individuals to be expressed simultaneously...a guy and a gal, step by step, into a pre meeting, meeting, and aftermath...what each was thinking and feeling, moment to moment, without resorting to third person omniscient.

It was difficult, at least for me, to write and still maintain a reader's confidence that they knew what was happening, and why and who, moment to moment...I think I never finished it...

I suggest the quintessential is to communicate with the consumer.?

Amicus

 

[sr71plt]

It's always amazing that Amicus can write so much and yet say so little about the topic at hand.

 

[amicus]

Each post of yours confirms my conclusion that outside your myopic world, you know nothing and are closed to any intrusions upon your sedated state of existence.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I know of one novel written in a true second person; Tom Robbins's "Half Asleep In Frog Pajamas."

You can read the first pages on amazon and decide for yourself how well it works...

Personally, it's the best second-person novel I've ever read!

 

[sr71plt]

Each post of yours confirms my conclusion that outside your myopic world, you know nothing and are closed to any intrusions upon your sedated state of existence.

OK, I'll bite. What did your post have to do with the second person view?

The perspectives in the movie you cite are all first person. That was the hook of the movie--events viewed in first person from various vantage points/perspectives.

 

[sr71plt]

I know of one novel written in a true second person; Tom Robbins's "Half Asleep In Frog Pajamas."

You can read the first pages on amazon and decide for yourself how well it works...

Personally, it's the best second-person novel I've ever read!

I think one of the links I gave on the other thread includes several second-person perspective works, including this one--in case anyone wants to pursue it further.

 

[Pure]

i read a little of this robbins piece and it's a weird experience. the "you" is a character, gwen, in the story, told in present tense. so "you put your hand on his shoulder [other character]" means _Gwen puts her hand on his shoulder,_

the narrator appears invisible and is not very evident. the experience is weird because the narrator is apparently talking to Gwen about what she IS doing. he's like a shadow consciousness reflecting gwen's, moment by moment. if it were past tense the rationale would be clearer, i.e. he's telling Gwen what she did, perhaps some time ago, as if, perhaps, she's forgotten.

 

[sr71plt]

i read a little of this robbins piece and it's a weird experience. the "you" is a character, gwen, in the story, told in present tense. so "you put your hand on his shoulder [other character]" means _Gwen puts her hand on his shoulder,_

the narrator appears invisible and is not very evident.

Yes, that is moving the same meaning from the second to the the third person. Where writers get hung up, though, is more in differentiating second from first person. They think that something like "You move your hand to my shoulder" is second person just because the "you" is present and the "you" is doing the action. That's not so. It's still first person, because it is the "I" who is perceiving everything. So, first person perspective.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I think one of the links I gave on the other thread includes several second-person perspective works, including this one--in case anyone wants to pursue it further.

will do!

i read a little of this robbins piece and it's a weird experience. the "you" is a character, gwen, in the story, told in present tense. so "you put your hand on his shoulder [other character]" means _Gwen puts her hand on his shoulder,_

the narrator appears invisible and is not very evident.

Someone told me he read halfway through the book before he realised that the "you" character was female.

I had forgotten that it was in present tense, as well-- funny!

The damn thing ends on a cliffhanger.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Yes, that is moving the same meaning from the second to the the third person. Where writers get hung up, though, is more in differentiating second from first person. They think that something like "You move your hand to my shoulder" is second person just because the "you" is present and the "you" is doing the action. That's not so. It's still first person, because it is the "I" who is perceiving everything. So, first person perspective.

You could do some very funny things with a false second person plus unreliable narrator...

 

[Pure]

as i've added, above:

the narrator appears invisible and is not very evident. the experience is weird because the narrator is apparently talking to Gwen about what she IS doing. he's like a shadow consciousness reflecting gwen's, moment by moment. if it were past tense the rationale would be clearer, i.e. he's telling Gwen what she did, perhaps some time ago, as if, perhaps, she's forgotten.

the only real life analogue i can think of, for this technique: it's like talking to and assisting a blind person: "you are walking down the stairs... now you are on the last step. don't be distracted by Judy's singing, over there."

 

[sr71plt]

As hard as (genuine) second person is to pull off--especially in longer works--it's easier to do in the present tense than the past tense.

Equally interesting to me is a long first person work in the present tense. I had assumed that it would be as tiring to read as second person, but I've read an advance copy of an Amazon.com contest finalist book that will come out this month titled Catcher Caught, which I didn't really realize was in the present tense (I knew it was in the first person) until it was almost over. And then it hit me why it was and why it worked. The narrator is dying of leukemia. There is no future tense for him. (Best book I've read this year, by the way.)

 

[sr71plt]

"you are walking down the stairs... now you are on the last step. don't be distracted by Judy's singing, over there."

Not second person. That "Don't be distracted" ruins it for second person perspective. That has had to come from some other perspective than the "you." This is a first person perspective passive.

To be second person, it has to maintain the perspective of the "you":

"You are walking down the stairs. Now you are on the last step. You hear Judy singing a song in a pleasing contralto, but you know you are late to class and you keep on walking."

This has maintained the perspective of the "you" and also has given the feelings/sensations that only the "you" can say that character is feeling.

 

[Stella_Omega]

as i've added, above:

the narrator appears invisible and is not very evident. the experience is weird because the narrator is apparently talking to Gwen about what she IS doing. he's like a shadow consciousness reflecting gwen's, moment by moment. if it were past tense the rationale would be clearer, i.e. he's telling Gwen what she did, perhaps some time ago, as if, perhaps, she's forgotten.

the only real life analogue i can think of, for this technique: it's like talking to and assisting a blind person: "you are walking down the stairs... now you are on the last step. don't be distracted by Judy's singing, over there."

That's how I felt too- I didn't realise it untill you said so!

As hard as (genuine) second person is to pull off--especially in longer works--it's easier to do in the present tense than the past tense.

Equally interesting to me is a long first person work in the present tense. I had assumed that it would be as tiring to read as second person, but I've read an advance copy of an Amazon.com contest finalist book that will come out this month titled Catcher Caught, which I didn't really realize was in the present tense (I knew it was in the first person) until it was almost over. And then it hit me why it was and why it worked. The narrator is dying of leukemia. There is no future tense for him. (Best book I've read this year, by the way.)

Wow. When a writer can make technique as invisible as that--- that's skill. Thanks for the rec!

 

[Pure]

note sr71

Originally Posted by Pure
[pure's hypothetical example] "you are walking down the stairs... now you are on the last step. don't be distracted by Judy's singing, over there."

sr71 Not second person. That "Don't be distracted" ruins it for second person perspective. That has had to come from some other perspective than the "you." This is a first person perspective passive.

To be second person, it has to maintain the perspective of the "you":
-----

yes, that's an excellent point. however as to 'ruins it', the reason i made that intrusion is that robbins is VERY close to doing it himself. and i don't think robbins is ruining robbins in that way.

robbins' opening lines of the book:The day that the stockmarket falls out of bed and breaks its back is the worst day of your life. Or so you think. It isn't the worst day of your life, but you think it is.

i think your line of argument would make virtually all narrated texts, first person, and perhaps that's true in some sense. so in fact the difference lies in whether the first person is part of the action [first person] or is observing it, with more or less subtle commentary and interpretation [third person].

 

[sr71plt]

robbins:Th e day that the stockmarket falls out of bed and breaks its back is the worst day of your life. Or so you think. It isn't the worst day of your life, but you think it is.

i think your line of argument would make virtually all narrated texts, first person, and perhaps that's true in some sense. so in fact the difference lies in whether the first person is part of the action [first person] or is observing it, with more or less subtle commentary and interpretation [third person].

Yeah, in the highlighted phrase, he's dropped out of second person and thrown in third person omniscient.

But there's no reason why such mixing doesn't work across a long work. The bits and pieces that have been offered as second person on these two threads and aren't are just not second person in what bits and pieces are being offered as examples of second person.

The meaning of second person doesn't have to be pushed beyond its bounds just because a particular writer wants to claim they can successfully write in the second person.

 

[Boota]

I've got to really work to get into reading second person POV. With few exceptions it takes me out of the story and makes the reading far less enjoyable. The Robbins pages I read, though, were very cool. About the best way I've seen it handled, actually. I tend to discard books that are written in second person unless the writer finds a way to grab me and make me feel like wading through that POV is going to be worth it.

 

[Liar]

A lot of "second person" fiction is in fact not. Just because someone is adresses as "you"

It's sometimes a first person or implied third person narrator talking to a third person. I read a novel a while back by a local author, which was written as letter from the author to his son. I'm not his son, I'm not supposed to , but I was kind of taking a sneak peek at a one sided correspondence.

And what happens if a narrator breaks the fourth wall and adresses the reader, as the reader? Then the POV is still first person, the narrator is the origo.

 

[driphoney]

I only see "I think" in what you posted. What did those folks in the bibliography you gave actually say about second person as differentiated from first person? (And no, I'm not going to do your research for you. I'm busy stringing popcorn for the Christmas tree.)

Person is about perspective--in whose eyes the perceiving is. If you aren't in the mind of the "you" describing what the "you" is perceiving in your work and are in the mind of the "I," no matter what you are saying about "you," the perspective/perception/person is in the first person: I. It''s first person.

That's why second person is so hard to maintain and tires the reader out quickly (and apparently why a lot of folks don't even know what it is--there isn't much written about it that I've ever seen--although I provided links to simple explanations on the other thread).

In the example you gave that you thought was in the second person but it was all from the perspective of "I," I showed you what it would look like in the second person.

But you can certainly believe you're writing in the second person if you want to believe it.

(I hadn't realized the thread had been closed in the other forum, though. It's interesting how Penelope Street puts in the last word and then closes the thread as if she knows it all--when often she doesn't. As far as I can determine she hasn't even written any erotica here in a long, long, long time--and not all that much then.)

Closing an active writerly thread . . . amazing.

As for your explanation of the thinking needing to be in the head of "you" for it to be second person is interesting. I wrote what I thought was a first person little ditty since I was talking about the thoughts and actions of "I". However, "I" was reacting and observing the actions of "you", so I was told this was second person. What do I know? So, I go along with the "you" opinion. I do believe it got hammered by some because was written to "you", though. (Haters! )

Thanks, you guys, for making me think.

 

[Burnt_Feathers]

Most, if not all, of the Master Chris Collection of BDSM stories are written in the second person pov.

I am certain they must be somewhere in the Alt Sex Stories Text Repository but I have never had much success with their search engine.

However, I found them elsewhere with Google:

http://www.bdsmlibrary.com/stories/story.php?storyid=641