The majority of urban fantasy is written in the first person. I fight the monster, I open the door to the creepy crypt at the bottom of the hill, I try not to summon a snake god to Thanksgiving dinner. This creates a feeling of absolute immediacy, while also creating a feeling of safety, since most first person narrators are reasonably guaranteed to survive their stories. (I consider, say, Rose Marshall an exception, since she's already dead. Maybe this explains why she gets shot so much.) It also limits the perspective of the books. When you're reading a Toby book, the only information you'll get is what Toby has to give, and that information will always be filtered through her particularly Toby-esque way of seeing the world.
Third person gives you more leeway on the will she/won't she question where surviving is concerned, and also creates the option to provide the reader with additional information. Sure, the protagonist is bound by their own perceptions, but the author gets to play with omniscience. This is both good and bad, and the varying degrees of third person omniscience is a topic for another day. Suffice to say that sometimes this distancing serves the story very, very well.
I have just finished reading two third person urban fantasies, neither of which will be named here, because I'm looking critically at structure, not trying to compare-and-contrast their plots or the quality of their writing. In the first, the author took advantage of the third person structure and hopped from place to place, now following the villain, now following a secondary character, now returning to the primary protagonist. The omniscience was kept to a minimum, since otherwise, the plot would have turned boring for the reader; this is obviously pretty tricky, but the writer handled it well. I don't think this book could have been written in first person, and the tense never bothered me. It was a third person book because it needed to be.
The second third person urban fantasy stuck to an extremely limited perspective, following the protagonist at the exclusion of all else. At no point, did we get information that she didn't have, which made waiting for her to catch up occasionally a lot more frustrating than I expected it to be. I'm used to being forgiving when my UF/PR protagonists are a little slow, because I'm used to being so deep in their heads that I can see why they're not making the intuitive jumps that I can make. I know how they think. In the absence of that knowledge, I kept waiting for the heroine to be smarter than I was, and I kept being disappointed. It honestly left me wondering why the author didn't stick with the first person perspective that's standard in the genre. It would have been the same story; it would even have been a stronger story, because the immersion in the heroine would have made it much more urgent.
Choosing a story's point of view can be difficult, but I find that usually, I can tell which they need to be by looking at whether the story would even be possible in a tighter perspective. And I try to keep things as tight as possible, for the immediacy. Your mileage may, and probably will, vary.
So how do you feel about perspective? Does first person keep it tight and immersive, or is it off-putting and overly familiar? Does third person make things mysterious and flexible, or is it distancing and remote? Or does it even matter if the story's good?
Thoughts?
(*If the movie starts with people in the water, it's either an evil sharks movie, an evil alligator movie, or a sea monster movie. If you see a shark within the first five minutes, it's not an evil sharks movie. Etc.)
← Ctrl ← Alt
Ctrl → Alt →
Deleted comment
June 21 2011, 15:05:13 UTC 6 years ago
6 years ago
Deleted comment
June 21 2011, 14:58:36 UTC 6 years ago Edited: June 21 2011, 14:59:24 UTC
I prefer first person for "throw self in and devour as fast as possible to the exclusion of all else" books: Dresden files, Toby, Among Thieves by Douglas Hulick (my most recent 'devour' purchase and a big thumbs up to anyone looking for a fun read)...anything that I read to immerse myself and hide away from the world. I like the familiarity in that, and it makes it good cheering up material. I like my snark, and you don't get good snarkage out of a third person perspective.
I like third person for big epicness...any time I want the equivalent of Lord of the Rings or The Stand - something that will take me more than a couple of days to get through and will last a bit longer.
So...depends on the novel and what I'm 'using' it for. :-) No easy answers to this one!
June 21 2011, 15:05:32 UTC 6 years ago
June 21 2011, 15:01:40 UTC 6 years ago
I was about to point out an exception, except you should know it, because you wrote it. Then again, Rose wouldn't be the only urban fantasy* hero who doesn't stay gone when they die, which comes to mind as look Ghost Story will be released soon.
As for me, perspective comes with the scope and inclinations of the author. In other words, can the writer put hirself enough into the character's head to not feel like every other snarky urban fantasy hero, and make the story matter to this person? And, also, is there information that needs to be conveyed that hero can't see, or would suspend my disbelief if sie is always there to eavesdrop? I think it's probably why a lot of the traditional epic fantasy is in third-person, so you can see the scope of the conflict without having Hero McHero meddling in everything. If you have a conflict that isn't The End of the World making it deeply personal (and first person) can make it have meaning -- it's not the End of the World, but it might be the End of Someone's World.
(Then again, I've seen some truly awful third-person villainous pieces where I wonder if this person really thinks human beings** act like that. If you cannot write a villain who is either believable as what sie is, or just so damn fun that I don't care if sie's torturing small animals, then perhaps it's better to edit those scenes out and leave the villain a bit more ambiguous.)
* Rose is a weird case, since she's clearly in the modern the-myths-are-true fantasy, but she's the opposite of urban. Oh, genre names.
** Or things close to them,
June 21 2011, 15:06:40 UTC 6 years ago
Rose is urban in her way. Roads are a sign of urban sprawl, and she's an urban legend.
6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
June 21 2011, 15:01:55 UTC 6 years ago
However, I can think of a few first-person books that I wish had been written in third-person (or had a whole other person as the narrator) because that particular perspective was such an off-putting head to be in. One in particular that comes to mind is told from the point of view of a demon and while he is thus understandably (within the mythology of the book) unfeeling, it was the most bizarre read because every time he should have had an emotional response and didn't I was completely pulled out of the story.
I will say, for me, good writing goes a long way for me and can often be the deciding point of whether I like a book or not. (Really poor writing sets my teeth on edge.)
June 21 2011, 15:07:47 UTC 6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
June 21 2011, 15:03:24 UTC 6 years ago
When I read anything, at some point I cease to perceive that I'm reading words and it becomes a movie in my head whether it's written in third or first person. Maybe that's why it doesn't matter to me.
June 21 2011, 15:08:12 UTC 6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
June 21 2011, 15:05:13 UTC 6 years ago
Then, of course, there's second person, which should be reserved exclusively for "Choose Your Own Adventure" books.
June 21 2011, 15:08:27 UTC 6 years ago
6 years ago
June 21 2011, 15:07:21 UTC 6 years ago
At the same time you don't want your POV character to 1. know things that will just destroy the suspense of the book or 2. play "I know something you don't know!" with the reader (I HATE THIS. HATE HATE HATE.) I think George RR Martin's the master of this in the Song of Ice and Fire--with one notable exception in the first book, none of his POV characters know things the reader can't know and none of them know the plot.
I've noticed that urban fantasy tends towards the first person. I think this often works well for the genre, particularly when we have a POV who knows how his/her world works, or more specifically, how it works differently from the world the reader inhabits.
June 21 2011, 15:08:58 UTC 6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
Deleted comment
June 21 2011, 15:13:02 UTC 6 years ago
I like all POVs, but only when they're right for the story. I think knowing which one to use is a hugely important part of the outlining process.
Deleted comment
6 years ago
June 21 2011, 15:13:28 UTC 6 years ago
June 21 2011, 15:13:46 UTC 6 years ago
6 years ago
June 21 2011, 15:27:22 UTC 6 years ago
...My opinion on the matter has changed, obviously. I still think first person can be unweildy in the wrong hands, but having read a lot more of it I know just how hard it can be to create unique, complete characters when the reader gets to live inside their head, and damn do I respect it more. First person looks like it's hard to write, making things come natural takes effort. So. I tend to go more for the quality of the book than the perspective these days, though it's taken a lot of training. And at times there's still that automatic flinch of surprise when something's in first and not third person, because tiny!me is still in there somewhere going 'but that's not how books ought to be.' Thankfully tiny!me isn't the one with the wallet.
June 21 2011, 15:43:42 UTC 6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
June 21 2011, 15:29:29 UTC 6 years ago
In third-person narrative I do prefer that the majority of the time it's still from a perspective of what that person knows. Not totally, but if it gets too 'omniscient' I lose interest, and jumping around between viewpoint characters needs to be very well signalled otherwise I lose whole chunks ("Wait, why's he doing that? Oh shit, this is /her/, when did that start?").
But the 'person' bothers me a lot less than the tense. There are few books where I actually like the use of present tense (Neal Stephenson's "Snow Crash" is one of them), it's hard to do without sounding like a screenplay (NS managed, but he seems to keep getting into my head and finding a style I dislike and then using it and making me like it!). Occasional use can work, though, as in Roger Zelazny's 'hell-rides' which switch into present tense for immediacy and then switch back afterwards.
As for future tense, I don't want it. Things like "Little did he know that he would lose it all in the nxet week", and chapter headings like "In which the hero finds out that the Daft Wader was his father", which were common in Victorian writing.
And then there's Charlie Stross's "Halting State" written in present tense SECOND person! I never thought that could work (for anything apart from computer games: "You are in a room. There is a troll here. What do you want to do?"), but he actually did it well. I think the sequel is due out fairly soon...
June 21 2011, 15:44:11 UTC 6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
June 21 2011, 15:37:32 UTC 6 years ago
I am a big fan of third-person POV hopping - putting together a story from lots of little disparate bits, especially if those bits don't immediately mesh, is one of my favorite ways to read, if the world is solid enough to do it. But that's a personal taste, and hard to pull off, and it doesn't always suit a story; it too can be incredibly jarring when done badly, especially if characters fail to act and react like people.
It's definitely fun to think about. :)
June 21 2011, 15:44:30 UTC 6 years ago
Deleted comment
June 21 2011, 15:45:03 UTC 6 years ago
Deleted comment
6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
Deleted comment
6 years ago
Deleted comment
6 years ago
June 21 2011, 15:42:59 UTC 6 years ago
Of course, my first editor advised me to re-write the novel in first person (and it was implied it might be a dealbreaker if I didn't). A bit of angst on my part ensued, because I had some crucial scenes where the protagonist is off-stage, but I got it sorted out. There have been times in the subsequent novels where I've wished I could use third person -- there's a lot of stuff happening offstage in Switchblade Goddess, for instance. But at least it gives me material for short stories etc.
As a reader, I've seen plenty of books written in third person that have seemed just as immediate as first person. It does take a bit more to keep it as immersive, I think, but good writers can do it. And for authors who have various series in first person, I think there's a greater challenge to keep the different narrative voices distinct.
June 21 2011, 15:46:00 UTC 6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
June 21 2011, 15:45:04 UTC 6 years ago
Lots of times, I've wondered whether this particular story would be better off in the third person, so I can jump to other character POVs. But in the end, I've kept it as is, because changing would inevitably require spoilers I want to use for later books in this series; that, and I really love the voice of my narrator. I'd hate to lose that by writing her from third rather than first. So, yeah. It's definitely an interesting question!
June 21 2011, 15:46:30 UTC 6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
June 21 2011, 15:55:21 UTC 6 years ago
What does it come to?
Well, it's the author's choice, of course. Unfortunately, sometimes authors use the tool with which they're the most comfortable, not the tool that's the best for the job. But who am I to judge?
I think the second-worst sin, when it comes to perspective, is to carelessly transition between perspectives. To be giving a story in first person, and turn it into 3rd-person without giving a shift. This confuses the reader and is I think the sign of a careless author.
I think the worst sin about perspective is that schools do not, as a general rule, teach people how to use it at all. Whichever technique, it's a tool, and where would I go to learn these tools? But, at least from my own experience, whereas we were exposed to oodles of literature*, we didn't spend much, if any, time learning how to write fiction with any perspective. Lots and lots of time on essays, but not so much on formats, both fiction and non, which we'd actually use. And I'm of the opinion that is the biggest sin about perspective.
* what literature and why is a rant for another day; hits some important points in my opinion
June 21 2011, 16:00:27 UTC 6 years ago
6 years ago
June 21 2011, 15:57:24 UTC 6 years ago
off topic
my first thought was I would totally watch a horror movie about evil humans from a sharks perspective.
I'm not sure how they would ever do it, but it could be up syfy's alley
June 21 2011, 16:00:35 UTC 6 years ago
So would I.
6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
June 21 2011, 16:16:11 UTC 6 years ago
June 21 2011, 17:36:43 UTC 6 years ago
6 years ago
June 21 2011, 16:25:02 UTC 6 years ago Edited: June 21 2011, 16:26:33 UTC
As a writer, I still prefer limited 3rd with a POV character. I choose the POV character based mainly on what I want the audience to know, and what I don't. And I tend to stick with that same POV all thr way through in shorter fiction (7000-10,000 words), and have a small number of multiple POV characters in long stories and novellas. But as a reader, with the exception of present tense and 2nd person, usually I'm pretty forgiving. And resent tense still kinda wigs me (except in Practical Magic where somehow it works).
But then, I'm weird.
June 21 2011, 17:36:58 UTC 6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
June 21 2011, 16:28:26 UTC 6 years ago
I've been reading some paranormal romance that seems to be very much in the tradition of Jane Eyre when it comes to choosing between the guys - restrictive-saint vs passionate-sinner, rejecting both until you can stand on your own anyway - so this is what sprang to mind on point of view.
June 21 2011, 16:37:09 UTC 6 years ago
6 years ago
June 21 2011, 16:36:59 UTC 6 years ago
June 21 2011, 17:37:21 UTC 6 years ago
Yes.
6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
June 21 2011, 16:52:30 UTC 6 years ago
That being said, I can see why a lot of UF are written in first because they tend to be mystery-detective novels like the old Raymond Chandler books. Or even a bit like Perry Mason. (I would maybe like to see a few more less snarky types though.)
Personally I tend to go for 3rd person limited because I like jumping around to the different characters doing their things and seeing how they react to stuff.
And possibly because I think in third person. Well, at least, I sometimes feel that I have a narrator person narrating my life. Kinda like what happened in Stranger than Fiction - but without the "little did he know part".
June 21 2011, 17:37:56 UTC 6 years ago
6 years ago
June 21 2011, 16:59:29 UTC 6 years ago
I like a good first-person narrator, and I enjoy writing first-person material. I do think that the modern-paranormal genre is a trifle top-heavy with snarky, wisecracking first-person heroines -- and I clearly haven't been reading enough to have found the third-person books mentioned above. But the first-person POV is enough of a genre convention that I can deal with it so long as the underlying plot logic holds up. At the same time -- and looking back, here, at both Bull and de Lint -- I think third-person narration is, at least sometimes, better positioned to convey the sheer sense of wonder/Otherness that I find compelling in the best urban fantasy. (And I add that the Toby books, for my money, do much better than most other first-person narratives at putting across just that wonder/Otherness.)
It is perhaps ironic that the urban/paranormal series I'm most annoyed with on narrative grounds is, in fact, a first-person series. My problem in the specific case is not strictly with the choice of viewpoint -- it's that the magic system the author postulates (which I found fascinating and original) creates some specific and very tricky challenges with respect to maintaining a first-person POV, and in the course of the first two books it seemed to me that the author failed to either properly exploit or abide by the strict terms of the system she'd established. Which was frustrating as h*ll, because I very much wanted to see the setup pulled off successfully, and it just didn't work for me. Like Our Hostess, I won't name that author or series here; other folks' mileage may vary, and it isn't necessary to name the work to make the particular point.
As an aside, the shift toward first-person narrators is by no means limited to fantasy. Genre mystery, most especially in the "cozy" subcategory, is tilting sharply toward first person narrators in my recent experience. Which is interesting in some respects given the particular plotting issues that arise in structuring mystery novels. Broadly speaking, I think I'm somewhat less tolerant of first person narrators in mystery (or at least of annoying first person narrators, which is a slightly different can of worms).
June 21 2011, 17:39:44 UTC 6 years ago
Some very interesting points!
6 years ago
6 years ago
6 years ago
June 21 2011, 17:42:37 UTC 6 years ago
June 21 2011, 19:21:20 UTC 6 years ago
Deleted comment
June 21 2011, 19:21:35 UTC 6 years ago
← Ctrl ← Alt
Ctrl → Alt →