Writers: Third Person ___?

Cafe Society
21

First of all, forget third person omnescient The designation is created by English teachers who didn’t write, and is nonsense.

As a matter of fact, it is extremely rare to actually see a third-person omniscient narration, mostly because it’s extremely difficult to do. I’ve written hundreds of stories (40+ published) and never used it.

The key concept for a working writer is “point of view.” The point of view character is the one whose thoughts are known to the audience. This is why there is no omniscient, since an omnicient character, by definition, would know what everyone around him is thinking. It might be useful for a telepath, but for no one else.

A better designation:

Third person, single point of view. The narration is in the 3rd person, but seen through the eyes of one character. This is by far the most common type of third-person narrative. Basically, though you write in the third person, you give the thoughts of one character. That character can guess what another is thinking, but the author cannot get into the head of the other.

third person, multiple point of view. The person whose thoughts you are describing changes from one scene to the next. Warning – changing POW within one scene is very difficult and is usually considered a sign of sloppy writing. So you write one scene from Jim’s point of view, then the next from Sally’s, then Jim’s, etc. You can have more than two characters doing this, but it’s difficult.

Third person, storyteller Rare, but it can be useful. This is where the author can jump in as he tells the story and can get the omniscient narrator effect.

Third person, camera eye Also rare. There is no point of view; we see the characters actions as though on screen, with no attempt to get into their thinking.

22

RealityChuck, sounds like good advise, but: In my original example, it could well be written in third person, single point of view, example: ’ I hate you, Billy.’ Bobby yelled. But deep down, Bobby didn’t really hate Billy. He was jealous of his high score on the test." (Let’s not worry about the “show don’t tell” rule for now.)

vs.

’ I hate you, Billy.’ I yelled. But deep down, I didn’t really hate Billy. I was jealous of his high score on the test." Doesn’t first person seem more interesting than third person, single point of view? Doesn’t first person allow the reader to become or go along with the main character as opposed to third person news reporter-like style which seems just a tad more distant to me?

Maybe you can show me some small examples of different POV (or styles) by playing around with my example above? - Jinx

23

You know, I don’t think there’s an answer to that question. Or rather, I think that it’s more complicated than can be answered with your examples. Distance, or “interestingness,” isn’t neccesarily a function of whether something’s in first or third person. First person can be closer, but it isn’t neccesarily, and a close third can be just as close and engaging as first.

But what you’re calling the “show don’t tell rule” (which isn’t what I was talking about, but they’re easy to confuse) is inseperable, IMHO, from things like distance. I think you’re right, saying “but really Billy felt so and so” is distancing in third precisely because it’s lecturing. So conveying that information in a different way–not lecturing, but implying, for instance–automatically changes the distancing effect. If you’re after a particular distance, the way you give information is as important as what person you use, if not more so. Which is why I’m suggesting that questions of what your POV might or might not be able to witness, or how “interesting” first or third person is, might not be the best way to choose. Because niether of them is more interesting, or better than the other, by itself. You have to take all the rest of it into account.

Given your examples, assuming nothing else to the work but these two sentences, the first is more engaging, I’d say, because “but really I felt this way” seems more like a confession, or a personal realization, than a lecture. But–it’s a large one–if this were a larger work, and Billy, saying “but really I felt whatever” is, say, cleary lying, or perhaps being pedantic in pointing that out partly because he’s trying to hold his reader/listener at a distance and not reveal his true feelings, then that could be just as distancing and lecturing as the example in third. Context is everything, and there’s no “First is close, third is distant” rule that you can point to and have a simple answer to what you want. That said, I think it’s probably easier to be more distant in third, and easier to be closer in first. But if you want to know which you should use, I think the only really good way of finding out is starting out in one, and then writing the same bit over in the other and see which one strikes you as more the effect you’re after.

I’ll tell you what my favorite writing book is, since it does deal with the question of distance, among other things–John Gardner’s The Art of Fiction. I don’t agree with every single detail of what he says, but I think it’s a book you may find interesting and helpful.

24

Jinx – it’s hard to show the difference between the various POV types in a short example, since you need to use several scenes.

Why third person, one POV over first person? Lots of reasons, some of which boil down to “it feels better.” Since you can switch POV in the third person, this allows to create suspense (first person is great for mystery – where the unknown is revealed, but tricky for suspense – where the main character is unaware of a danger that the reader knows about).

First person also requires that you put everything in the voice of the main character. Thus if you were trying to portray a character of limited intelligence, for example, first person becomes restrictive. You get bogged down in keeping the story to his level. I’m not saying this can’t be done, only that you then have to concentrate on the expression, sometimes to the detriment of the story.

25

Jinx, take a look at some Jane Austen. The two novels of hers that I’ve read (Emma and Pride and Prejudice) are both written from the POV of an omniscient third person narrator. However, it is clear in each case who the protagonist is (Elizabeth and Emma respectively) and while we are told the thoughts and feelings of other characters, we sympathise with the protagonist. Hence, we avoid the newspaper report-style of writing and can become emotionally involved with the main character’s life, and sympathetic to her thoughts, but we can also receive information unable to be given in a first person subjective narrative. It also gives Austen the opportunity to engage in a bit of ironic humour, because she can easily share information about a character that we know, but the character does not.

That is not to say that this sort of information cannot be conveyed in first person, just that this is one way of doing without distancing the reader (though, to be fair, Austen is somewhat distancing, especially at first, because of the formality of her language).

26

Why not try writing a couple of important scenes in first person and then again in third person. Don’t just change the "I"s to "he"s; rethink the scene to change the emotional level of involvement, the distance between the author and the reader, and the information you convey. Then see which one works best for the purpose of telling this individual story you want to tell.