I'm wondering how to address my main character. He's a detective inspector so my gut is to call him by his surname as it sounds a little more formal. Would everyone agree with that?

I think it depends on lots of things - the context of the scene; who is addressing him - their character, relationship with the MC, power issues etc...

I'd have thought it reasonably likely that it changes throughout the book - sometimes a more formal address works better, sometimes it might suit to use his first name/full name, even nickname.

I agree with Jess that it depends on the context, Dr Quincy.

If you mean what should you call him when narrating in 3rd person, then I think it might depend on his character and what kind of relationship you want the reader to have with him. For instance, if he's called Detective Inspector Tom Jones, for instance, then you might narrate him as Tom if you want readers to think of him on a personal level, and if we're going to find out about his personal life, for instance. But if you want to present him as someone businesslike who keeps his distance from people at work and we know him mainly in a work context, then calling him Jones might seem more appropriate.

Think also of how the people around him would think of him. If it was a family novel then his family would think of him as Tom. In a work context that may be the case for a few close colleagues, but most of them will think of him as the DI called Jones, won't they?

Just some thoughts in case they help...

Deb

I would stick with surname, unless it's within dialogue between close friends/lovers.

eg. Le Carrie refers to George Smiley as Smiley all the way through, although his colleagues and superiors might call him "George" within dialogue.


- NaomiM

It's pretty unusual in modern fiction to call characters just by their surname, isn't it? It's more the stuff of the 19th C. classics - though even then only with the men: 'Elizabeth', but 'Darcy' - and even into the '30s - 'Harriet', but Wimsey'...

But I must admit that in my last book I found I called my male MC by just his surname, and my female MC by just her first name, throughout. I rasied it with my editor, because I thought it ws something she would object to, and she didn't. She said 'Well, it is rather old-fashioned, but it's an old fashioned book'. She thought it worked OK. I think you call them whatever feels right to you.

Rosy

It's pretty unusual in modern fiction to call characters just by their surname, isn't it? It's more the stuff of the 19th C. classics - though even then only with the men: 'Elizabeth', but 'Darcy' - and even into the '30s - 'Harriet', but Wimsey'...

But I must admit that in my last book I found I called my male MC by just his surname, and my female MC by just her first name, throughout. I rasied it with my editor, because I thought it ws something she would object to, and she didn't. She said 'Well, it is rather old-fashioned, but it's an old fashioned book'. She thought it worked OK. I think you call them whatever feels right to you.

Rosy

<Added>

Grrrr, I hate it when that double-posting thing happens!

And in fact, as yours is crime fiction (?) then the tradition even in mdoern ones seems still to be surname only, quite often, doesn't it? Ruth Rendell says 'Wexford', P.D. James says 'Dalgleish' (though I can't spell it), Donna Leon says 'Brunetti', etc.... Maybe crime is an exception, anyway?

Rosy

Yes, I think the police must be one of the few contexts where surnames still get used quite a lot, which is maybe why it comes naturally. And as Deb says, who calls him what says a lot about the relationship. As for what he's called in the narrative, I'd go with whatever you find yourself instinctively doing - which sounds like surname.

Emma

Oh both US and UK medical drama tv programmes they seem to mostly call other staff by their surnames. However, I don't know about real life in that context...

Deb