CelestialBody
Starlet of India
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2000
- Posts
- 7,904
Writing:Stylistic question.
- Thread starter CelestialBody
- Start date
Dixon Carter Lee
Headliner
- Joined
- Nov 22, 1999
- Posts
- 48,682
It depends completely on the subject matter and theme, and how well the writer matches them to his style. In "Catcher in the Rye" the first person inarticulateness becomes telling prose, and is much more lovely than the writer "telling" us how the protagonist feels. With Tom Clancy half the fun is the techobabble, and that works best in the third person.
If you're going to use a natural first person voice it should fit the mood of the piece and vice versa. For example, Ray Bradbury uses a highly stylized articulate poetry for his characters, even when they're narrating, but that's usually because he's telling a highly stylized articualte poetic story (and he writes short stories, where it works better.) He is permitted to use prose exposition because it fits his theme.
To me it doesn't matter. All that matters is that once a style is decided upon that it is apprpriate to the theme and that it's executed well. Good writing is good writing.
If you're going to use a natural first person voice it should fit the mood of the piece and vice versa. For example, Ray Bradbury uses a highly stylized articulate poetry for his characters, even when they're narrating, but that's usually because he's telling a highly stylized articualte poetic story (and he writes short stories, where it works better.) He is permitted to use prose exposition because it fits his theme.
To me it doesn't matter. All that matters is that once a style is decided upon that it is apprpriate to the theme and that it's executed well. Good writing is good writing.
Never
Come What May
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2000
- Posts
- 23,234
CB:
"Natural Speech:
I opened the door and was struck by the cripness of the autumn air. The brightly colored leaves crunched beneath my feet.
Not-Natural Speech:
I opened the door, the air outside was crisp. The leaves were bright and crunched beneath my feet. "
You've never heard me speak it seems.
Or is that, "It seems you've never heard me speak"?
"Natural Speech:
I opened the door and was struck by the cripness of the autumn air. The brightly colored leaves crunched beneath my feet.
Not-Natural Speech:
I opened the door, the air outside was crisp. The leaves were bright and crunched beneath my feet. "
You've never heard me speak it seems.
Or is that, "It seems you've never heard me speak"?
Dixon Carter Lee
Headliner
- Joined
- Nov 22, 1999
- Posts
- 48,682
I've never heard you speak. Are you a Soprano? Or Bass?
cymbidia
unrepentant pervert
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2001
- Posts
- 8,786
You didn't ask me but...
Not-Natural speech
If one had never had the opportunity to hear Never's speaking voice, one wouldn't be able to choose between bass or soprano, would one?
Natural speech
I don't fucking know whether she's a bass or a soprano.
What's for dinner?
Not-Natural speech
If one had never had the opportunity to hear Never's speaking voice, one wouldn't be able to choose between bass or soprano, would one?
Natural speech
I don't fucking know whether she's a bass or a soprano.
What's for dinner?
horny_giraffe
Occasionally Spotted
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2001
- Posts
- 1,416
I don't know about preference, but tenses and point-of-views can make a difference in the feel of piece.
The third person is good for distancing. If you've got an evil character or someone suffering through a crap-load of embarassment, you might want to stay in the third person. I could never watch "Three's Company" without distancing myself because the characters are so damm foolish. But it's a kick and a half if I can laugh at them, not with them.
I forget what all the tenses are--something like indefinite, indefinite past, past, future, etc. As anyone would guess, I find the present tense more stressful, because you don't even know if the narrator will be alive at the end of the sentence. You've got no idea.
At least with the past tense, you know somebody is around to tell the story.
Come to think of it, I've never seen a story in the future tense. That could be interesting. I'll have to try that. Someone describing their sordid intentions in excrutiating detail. hehehe
The third person is good for distancing. If you've got an evil character or someone suffering through a crap-load of embarassment, you might want to stay in the third person. I could never watch "Three's Company" without distancing myself because the characters are so damm foolish. But it's a kick and a half if I can laugh at them, not with them.
I forget what all the tenses are--something like indefinite, indefinite past, past, future, etc. As anyone would guess, I find the present tense more stressful, because you don't even know if the narrator will be alive at the end of the sentence. You've got no idea.
At least with the past tense, you know somebody is around to tell the story.
Come to think of it, I've never seen a story in the future tense. That could be interesting. I'll have to try that. Someone describing their sordid intentions in excrutiating detail. hehehe
CelestialBody
Starlet of India
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2000
- Posts
- 7,904
Re: You didn't ask me but...
KillerMuffin
Seraphically Disinclined
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2000
- Posts
- 25,603
Each story is different and each story has a different "voice."
I can, unequivocally, say that I do not like present tense. I have never had an experience where someone described something to me as it was happening. It's always been in past tense, even if it just happened a mere heartbeat ago. Even in the well written present tense stories that I have read, I've had that niggling feeling in the back of my skull that something wasn't right because there was no way it could be happening right at that very moment, the narrator would be entirely too busy to describe it in detail or reflect upon what people were saying. People don't think that way.
As far as the way things are written, that depend entirely on the character we're with at the time. The narrator of the text is who the text should follow. Obviously, if we were following Felix's thoughts and actions, it would be vastly different than anything sexy-girl would think or do. There would be more syllables. Every character has a way of thinking that's natural to that character but unnatural to another character.
I think that whatever a character thinks needs to flow smoothly so it doesn't jar the reader, but I don't think it needs to follow a set pattern that's considered natural from one point of view because everyone is different.
I can, unequivocally, say that I do not like present tense. I have never had an experience where someone described something to me as it was happening. It's always been in past tense, even if it just happened a mere heartbeat ago. Even in the well written present tense stories that I have read, I've had that niggling feeling in the back of my skull that something wasn't right because there was no way it could be happening right at that very moment, the narrator would be entirely too busy to describe it in detail or reflect upon what people were saying. People don't think that way.
As far as the way things are written, that depend entirely on the character we're with at the time. The narrator of the text is who the text should follow. Obviously, if we were following Felix's thoughts and actions, it would be vastly different than anything sexy-girl would think or do. There would be more syllables. Every character has a way of thinking that's natural to that character but unnatural to another character.
I think that whatever a character thinks needs to flow smoothly so it doesn't jar the reader, but I don't think it needs to follow a set pattern that's considered natural from one point of view because everyone is different.
Similar threads
