![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Writing: First Person POV (con.)
Mar. 27th, 2009 08:52 amI started this first person POV conversation a while back and got pretty far into it when I realized that there were a few other things I wanted to say, but that the post was getting a little long. So here's the continuation.
One of the best and most effective uses of the first person POV is when the writer has an untrustworthy main character. This is basically a main character that is hiding something from the reader, or it outright lying to the reader in some way, shape, or form, and the best way to lie to the reader is when the story is in first person. Because when the reader is reading something in first person, they automatically trust that first person POV because, in essence, that POV is theirs. They become the character, and so they automatically believe that they are getting all of the information they need from that character . . . which isn't always true. In fact, it's almost never true. In third person, the author can give the reader information that the character doesn't actually have if necessary because they can move to a different POV character, or they can be writing in omniscient (with a "hidden" narrator looking over the shoulder of the characters) and that narrator can point out things the character didn't see, etc. So in essence, in the third person POV you're actually getting MORE information from the characters and author than you are in first person . . . but the perception of the reader is exactly the opposite. They feel like they have more information because they feel like they ARE the character, and why would they lie to themselves? So they automatically trust everything they're given, when in fact, the main character in first person could be feeding the reader only what they want the reader to know and/or see, leaving out some good little bits that paint the main character in a different light. This is called an untrustworthy main character, and it can be used to great storytelling effect . . . in the right hands.
And that's the key. This is an extremely effective way to "fool" the reader and have a really good twist in the book at some point. (And BTW, it CAN be done in third person as well.) But it only works in the right hands. And if it doesn't work, it usually goes horribly, horribly wrong very fast. In effect, as a writer you should only lie to the reader if the CHARACTER would lie to the reader at that point. You can't lie to the reader just because you as the author would like a little plot twist at a certain point. The character's personality has to be the main driving force behind the lie. Otherwise it will fall flat and the reader won't trust the AUTHOR anymore, rather than the character, and then everything goes wrong because the reader won't buy you're next book because you've violated the author/reader relationship and the trust is now gone. (Just like lying to someone in a real world relationship over something important usually destroys the relationship.) And in order to pull off an effective lie from even the character's perspective, you still as the author have to leave in enough clues pointing to the lie as you can, so that when the reader gets that revelation that the character is untrustworthy at some point, they can go back and see the truth well before the revelation. In other words, they can go back and say, "How did I miss that? It was so obvious I was being lied to!" And that, my friends, is why writing an untrustworthy character is so damn difficult. You have to lie convincingly while at the same time pointing out the truth. A very hard thing to do well. And as I said, in the wrong hands it just goes horribly bad. But in the right hands. . . .
So that's a great reason to use first person: when you have an untrustworthy character.
Another thing I didn't go into in the last post regarding first person is some of the varieties of first person. There's the obvious types of writing styles that may require first person, for example, writing the novel as a series of journal entries, or letter, or as a memoir. These types of books are hard to pull off effectively because letters, journals, and memoirs have to have a certain tone to them. It isn't the reader having the first person POV character's thoughts, there's a little more to it than that. People think and write differently, and putting your thoughts into words gives those words a slightly different inflection. In some sense, putting the characters thoughts into letter, journal, or memoir form is RESTRICTING those words, since we typically order our thoughts and phrase them different when writing them down. Also, in letters and such, there's an inherent audience for the letter (whoever it's addressed to) and we all reveal different things to different people. I might tell my friend![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
pbray something that I wouldn't tell you guys on this blog for example. (And yes, blogs are a form of first person POV in action, aren't they? Where's that first person POV novel written as a series of blogs with subsequent comment threads? I haven't seen anything like that on the shel--wait, forget I said that, it's MY IDEA, HANDS OFF! *grin*) In another sense, though, it's very FREEING as well, because in a diary, for example, people don't feel a need to restrain themselves, because the assumption is that no one will be reading the diary--at least nobody of importance. It can be more personal, more revealing, and probably won't lend itself well to the untrustworthy character plot either, unless the character is actually lying to themselves directly in the diary.
So those are some effective ways to write a first person novel: in the form of letters, journals, diary entries, as a memoir, etc. I believe Stephen King did that with his novel Carrie to some extent, didn't he? It's been a while since I read that one.
And the last thing I wanted to talk about regarding first person POV novels (for now) is combining first person with third in the same novel, or even writing a novel from multiple first person POVs.
First person with third can be done well and effectively, but should only be used for a specific reason, something to do with the plot. Usually it comes into play because the first person POV can't see and hear or be part of every little twist and turn of the plot in all novels without it becoming obvious that the author is manipulating things unrealistically so that they CAN see and hear or be part of every little twist and turn of the plot. When the "author intervenes" to make something happen, and the reader can feel that in the writing, then the book is made of fail. To get around this, an author may take a few scenes throughout the book and write them in third person from another character's POV so that the reader can realistically share those relevant plot points without it feeling like author intervention or manipulation. So, in the end, the book is MOSTLY written in first person, but there are a few sections that are in third. If your novel is written mostly in third person and you only have a few sections written in first . . . then I'd say you need to reconsider that first person POV character. Why does that need to be in first? That's the crucial question. If it's used minimally in the book, then you'd better have a damn good reason for it to be in first, not simply that you want it to be, or that it seemed like a cool idea at the time. There has to be some kind of plot element that requires that it be in first, or perhaps a significant character element. You can't use the first/third POV change as a gimmick to make your book appear "different." So typically, the first/third POV thing is used when the book is MOSTLY in first, with a few sections in third, with the occasional EXTREMELY RARE exception. And I emphasize the "extremely rare" part of that, and reiterate that you can't use this as a gimmick.
Another version of this is using multiple first person POV characters in the same book. This is hard. Let me say that again, this is extremely hard. Again, you must have a good reason for this, and not be using it as a gimmick. And the reason that it is hard is because EVERY SINGLE FIRST PERSON POV CHARACTER MUST HAVE HIS/HER OWN VOICE, and that is extremely hard to pull off. In other words, the reader should be able to identify the first person currently "speaking" as soon as they start reading a particular new section, and they should be identifying who is speaking by the person's voice, NOT because the author conveniently told them who was speaking in the chapter header, or in the first sentence, or in the dialogue, etc. It all comes down to the voices of the characters and making them distinct and instantly recognizable and that takes a shitload of skill. I mean that. If the voices AREN'T distinct and instantly recognizable, then the reader is going to spend the first few pages of every new scene or chapter trying to figure out which person's head they are in . . . and that means you've failed as a writer. The reader shouldn't have to work at reading the novel. I don't think this multiple first person thing a skill I currently possess (although I'm always getting better at the craft, I hope). I would not currently tackle a multiple first person POV book right now unless someone paid me a significant amount of money and gave me a few years to work it all out and get it right. I'm getting closer to being able to do this I think, but I'm not there yet. And I've been writing a LONG, LONG time. If you're going to attempt this, then be aware that such books are extremely hard to sell, simply because it is so extremely hard to MAKE IT WORK WELL. And what is usually at work here is that the book should really be written in multiple third person limited POV, which is as close as you can get to first person POV without it actually being in first person. And a multiple third person limited POV novel is much easier to sell. You still have individual voices for the characters, but you don't have to be as strict in making those voices completely and utterly distinct. And it's less confusing for the reader in the long run.
So, that's what I have to say about first person POV (for now). Comments? Questions? Anything about first person that I haven't address yet, things that I inadvertently left out? (Remember this is based off of a panel at a con, so there are likely some things we didn't get around to addressing in those 50 minutes of talk time.)
One of the best and most effective uses of the first person POV is when the writer has an untrustworthy main character. This is basically a main character that is hiding something from the reader, or it outright lying to the reader in some way, shape, or form, and the best way to lie to the reader is when the story is in first person. Because when the reader is reading something in first person, they automatically trust that first person POV because, in essence, that POV is theirs. They become the character, and so they automatically believe that they are getting all of the information they need from that character . . . which isn't always true. In fact, it's almost never true. In third person, the author can give the reader information that the character doesn't actually have if necessary because they can move to a different POV character, or they can be writing in omniscient (with a "hidden" narrator looking over the shoulder of the characters) and that narrator can point out things the character didn't see, etc. So in essence, in the third person POV you're actually getting MORE information from the characters and author than you are in first person . . . but the perception of the reader is exactly the opposite. They feel like they have more information because they feel like they ARE the character, and why would they lie to themselves? So they automatically trust everything they're given, when in fact, the main character in first person could be feeding the reader only what they want the reader to know and/or see, leaving out some good little bits that paint the main character in a different light. This is called an untrustworthy main character, and it can be used to great storytelling effect . . . in the right hands.
And that's the key. This is an extremely effective way to "fool" the reader and have a really good twist in the book at some point. (And BTW, it CAN be done in third person as well.) But it only works in the right hands. And if it doesn't work, it usually goes horribly, horribly wrong very fast. In effect, as a writer you should only lie to the reader if the CHARACTER would lie to the reader at that point. You can't lie to the reader just because you as the author would like a little plot twist at a certain point. The character's personality has to be the main driving force behind the lie. Otherwise it will fall flat and the reader won't trust the AUTHOR anymore, rather than the character, and then everything goes wrong because the reader won't buy you're next book because you've violated the author/reader relationship and the trust is now gone. (Just like lying to someone in a real world relationship over something important usually destroys the relationship.) And in order to pull off an effective lie from even the character's perspective, you still as the author have to leave in enough clues pointing to the lie as you can, so that when the reader gets that revelation that the character is untrustworthy at some point, they can go back and see the truth well before the revelation. In other words, they can go back and say, "How did I miss that? It was so obvious I was being lied to!" And that, my friends, is why writing an untrustworthy character is so damn difficult. You have to lie convincingly while at the same time pointing out the truth. A very hard thing to do well. And as I said, in the wrong hands it just goes horribly bad. But in the right hands. . . .
So that's a great reason to use first person: when you have an untrustworthy character.
Another thing I didn't go into in the last post regarding first person is some of the varieties of first person. There's the obvious types of writing styles that may require first person, for example, writing the novel as a series of journal entries, or letter, or as a memoir. These types of books are hard to pull off effectively because letters, journals, and memoirs have to have a certain tone to them. It isn't the reader having the first person POV character's thoughts, there's a little more to it than that. People think and write differently, and putting your thoughts into words gives those words a slightly different inflection. In some sense, putting the characters thoughts into letter, journal, or memoir form is RESTRICTING those words, since we typically order our thoughts and phrase them different when writing them down. Also, in letters and such, there's an inherent audience for the letter (whoever it's addressed to) and we all reveal different things to different people. I might tell my friend
pbray something that I wouldn't tell you guys on this blog for example. (And yes, blogs are a form of first person POV in action, aren't they? Where's that first person POV novel written as a series of blogs with subsequent comment threads? I haven't seen anything like that on the shel--wait, forget I said that, it's MY IDEA, HANDS OFF! *grin*) In another sense, though, it's very FREEING as well, because in a diary, for example, people don't feel a need to restrain themselves, because the assumption is that no one will be reading the diary--at least nobody of importance. It can be more personal, more revealing, and probably won't lend itself well to the untrustworthy character plot either, unless the character is actually lying to themselves directly in the diary.So those are some effective ways to write a first person novel: in the form of letters, journals, diary entries, as a memoir, etc. I believe Stephen King did that with his novel Carrie to some extent, didn't he? It's been a while since I read that one.
And the last thing I wanted to talk about regarding first person POV novels (for now) is combining first person with third in the same novel, or even writing a novel from multiple first person POVs.
First person with third can be done well and effectively, but should only be used for a specific reason, something to do with the plot. Usually it comes into play because the first person POV can't see and hear or be part of every little twist and turn of the plot in all novels without it becoming obvious that the author is manipulating things unrealistically so that they CAN see and hear or be part of every little twist and turn of the plot. When the "author intervenes" to make something happen, and the reader can feel that in the writing, then the book is made of fail. To get around this, an author may take a few scenes throughout the book and write them in third person from another character's POV so that the reader can realistically share those relevant plot points without it feeling like author intervention or manipulation. So, in the end, the book is MOSTLY written in first person, but there are a few sections that are in third. If your novel is written mostly in third person and you only have a few sections written in first . . . then I'd say you need to reconsider that first person POV character. Why does that need to be in first? That's the crucial question. If it's used minimally in the book, then you'd better have a damn good reason for it to be in first, not simply that you want it to be, or that it seemed like a cool idea at the time. There has to be some kind of plot element that requires that it be in first, or perhaps a significant character element. You can't use the first/third POV change as a gimmick to make your book appear "different." So typically, the first/third POV thing is used when the book is MOSTLY in first, with a few sections in third, with the occasional EXTREMELY RARE exception. And I emphasize the "extremely rare" part of that, and reiterate that you can't use this as a gimmick.
Another version of this is using multiple first person POV characters in the same book. This is hard. Let me say that again, this is extremely hard. Again, you must have a good reason for this, and not be using it as a gimmick. And the reason that it is hard is because EVERY SINGLE FIRST PERSON POV CHARACTER MUST HAVE HIS/HER OWN VOICE, and that is extremely hard to pull off. In other words, the reader should be able to identify the first person currently "speaking" as soon as they start reading a particular new section, and they should be identifying who is speaking by the person's voice, NOT because the author conveniently told them who was speaking in the chapter header, or in the first sentence, or in the dialogue, etc. It all comes down to the voices of the characters and making them distinct and instantly recognizable and that takes a shitload of skill. I mean that. If the voices AREN'T distinct and instantly recognizable, then the reader is going to spend the first few pages of every new scene or chapter trying to figure out which person's head they are in . . . and that means you've failed as a writer. The reader shouldn't have to work at reading the novel. I don't think this multiple first person thing a skill I currently possess (although I'm always getting better at the craft, I hope). I would not currently tackle a multiple first person POV book right now unless someone paid me a significant amount of money and gave me a few years to work it all out and get it right. I'm getting closer to being able to do this I think, but I'm not there yet. And I've been writing a LONG, LONG time. If you're going to attempt this, then be aware that such books are extremely hard to sell, simply because it is so extremely hard to MAKE IT WORK WELL. And what is usually at work here is that the book should really be written in multiple third person limited POV, which is as close as you can get to first person POV without it actually being in first person. And a multiple third person limited POV novel is much easier to sell. You still have individual voices for the characters, but you don't have to be as strict in making those voices completely and utterly distinct. And it's less confusing for the reader in the long run.
So, that's what I have to say about first person POV (for now). Comments? Questions? Anything about first person that I haven't address yet, things that I inadvertently left out? (Remember this is based off of a panel at a con, so there are likely some things we didn't get around to addressing in those 50 minutes of talk time.)
