Hi

I was reading Casey's thread about 1st person - for various reasons I feel I have to use 3rd for the current book - the next one will be 1st - but I am trying to stick more within one character's viewpoint (at a time anyway!) and avoid my usual POV drifts...

Reading a book in 1st recently I was struck by the immediacy - and jealous - you are inside the lead character's head and know what they are thinking and feeling.

I fear I write scenes - I show what the characters are saying and doing - their body language - the actors on the stage - I can see their expressions and I know what they are thinking - but the reader doesn't?

I realised I'd written a scene in which my mc is fairly passive - ok to a certain extent things are happening to him and around him at that point which is ok - but the reader needs to 'be' with that character?

I suppose in first the character is telling their story and in third you are telling it for them? Can you bridge that gap?

Sarah

in third you are telling it for them

I'm not sure I entirely agree with that. A lot of it is purely a change of tense, from 'I' to 's/he'.

JRK told most of the seven HP books in the 3rd person and from Harry's pov. Terry Pratchett also writes in the 3rd person, although is pov does wander between characters and occassionally to the authorial. In both cases it works fine.
And you can still have the person's thoughts and feelings.

The only problem - as you've found - is the MC has to be in the centre of the action. If they are not, you have to resort to one of the characters taking the role of a storyteller, to tell the MC and the reader what's been going on 'off camera'.


- NaomiM

<Added>

Pratchett's MCs get pretty philosophical at times.

I think it depends entirely how you write it. Even in third person, if it's focalised through a particular character you can be thoroughly inside their head: even including their voice, opinions, vocab, etc. Jane Austen invented it. And of course it means it's wonderfully fluid when you want to slip out of their head, perhaps via a neutral, fly-on-the-wall type moment, into someone else's...

After some discussion, the wake had been arranged at Maureen's house. The room was full by then, and the rain beat on the windows, although the guests didn't seem to notice. Only Mark, with the whole afternoon to look about him, because no one bothers to talk to children at a funeral, noticed how the weak light made everyone look grey-faced. And Mr Bloggins, over there in the corner. He had one of those fat, jolly faces, the kind you hoped would be teaching you maths at school. Aunty Maureen, you'd expect, but even he looked like the air had been let out of him. Mark was still wondering why when Maureen raised her glass, and though Mark had no particular expectations of what she might say, never having been to a funeral before, everyone else tensed. It was if the surprise of Maureen's house being chosen was finally going to flower into something much more intriguing. Even Sally felt her shoulders going tight, though she, she reflected, was one of the few present who knew the whole story. Oh, Maureen, how could you? she thought. Now, of all moments? Can't you ever just leave something alone?

Sorry. Definitely a first pancake, but you get the idea...

Emma

In mine, I have three MCs and the story's told in third person. I know what you mean, Sarah, about how to get close in. What I do is use italicised thoughts - just the most immediate ones - eg:
She wiped at her forehead and her hand came away wet. What I'd give for a fan.
I also try to lose, in second draft, all those 'she felts/she thoughts/she remembereds' and to go straight for the meat of the sentence, if you see what I mean.
Don't know if that's any help, but I think the clue is in immediacy: what keeps you right there, inside that person's head/body/soul?
Susiex

<Added>

Crossed with Naomi and Emma.

I don't think you need to italicise them, Susie - Pratchett doesn't, and it's usuallly obvious to the reader that it's the MC's thoughts. Although, saying that, Pratchett does also use 'he wondered', 'he thought', etc, where necessary, to flag up who's thoughts they are.

<Added>

eg, from his novel Night watch:

Vimes thought better when his feet were moving. The mere activity calmed him down and shook his thoughts in order... ...they think I'm a spy for Winder? thought Vimes. Spying on the Treacle Mine Road Watch? It's like spying on dough.

<Added>

and he even slips into second person:

He wondered if it was at all possible to give this idiot lessons in basic politics. That was always the dream, wasn't it? 'I wish I'd known then what I know now'? But when you got older you found out that you now wasn't you then. You then was a twerp.

I think you'd find a copy-editor took out the italics for thoughts - it's obvious what they are. In the old days they put them in speech marks, but not now.

I use 'I thought,' 'I wondered' and so on when I want the reader to be more conscious of the character-as-narrator - of them telling their story - and less when the pace picks up. I wouldn't say it necessarily means you're not right inside the character's head to have 'I felt that' or 'I was thinking about' or whatever: it can be more immediate, in the sense that the character's talking more directly to the reader, telling them the story.

Emma

And now I shall get myself into real trouble, because the reason I use italics is because my novel is in present tense. Adding 'she thinks' is really clunky in present tense. I know what you're going to say, Emma...
Susiex

Well I'm not, because quite a lot of ASA is in present tense, so there are moments of the character narrator (in this case Una) as narrator: for example, here,

PLOT SPOILER

when a long-lost friend has reappeared:

'Of course,' he says, and vanishes. For a mad moment I wonder if it's my hallucination haunting me: that I've dreamt him. Then I turn and look at Uncle Gareth. It's as if he's dead: not moving, not breathing, and only two new purplish stains over his cheekbones tell me that he's alive. I take his hand and I can feel his pulse lurching through the paper-thin skin inside inside his wrist. And I know why. I don't understand, not yet, but I know why.

It seems to me that this passage would work less well if I cut 'For a mad moment' and just put 'Is it my hallucination haunting me?' as a direct thought of character-Una because narrator-Una is observing character-Una, and so as the reader's representative, she provides the channel for that observation.

And similiarly, I don't think 'his pulse is lurching' would work as well without 'I can feel'. If I wrote, 'I take his hand. His pulse is lurching' the two things aren't as bound together, again, by the interaction of Una-narrator and Una-character, so, arguably, the reader has a less open channel into the feeling of the pulse under her fingers.

But that's rationalising after the event. When I do and don't do it is almost always instinctive.

Thanks everyone - that is really helpful - and yes - it is exactly that fluid quality I don't want to lose.

I agree 'telling the story for them' is a bit wide of the mark - the flaw is in me rather than 3rd person - it's a new section I'm working on and I was just dissatisfied with myself.

And yes - I did write in some thoughts as italics as an experiment...

In a way I don't want to over egg it - I don't necessarily need the MC thinking - x is being a bastard - because hopefully that's obvious - and is reflected in the reactions of the other characters.

And yes - I use second person occasionally too.

Don't you just love those midnight doubts?

Sarah

Emma, I had to have a play with your piece to see how it worked in third person present - of course, I've done it mechanically - but I wonder if there's a difference between first person present and third person present, in terms of clunkiness?

'Of course,' he says, and vanishes. For a mad moment she wonders if it's her hallucination haunting her: that she's dreamt him. Then she turns and looks at Uncle Gareth. It's as if he's dead: not moving, not breathing, and only two new purplish stains over his cheekbones tell her that he's alive. She takes his hand and she can feel his pulse lurching through the paper-thin skin inside inside his wrist. And she knows why. She doesn't understand, not yet, but she knows why.

Your version works beautifully, but third person - hmm. Food for thought.
Susiex

Yes, it comes over as a bit over-written in third, doesn't it. I'm quite capable of over-writing, but in first I don't think it is. How very interesting. It's ages since I've written a book in third: maybe that's one reason why.

There's also the ambiguity of the slightly commenty, narrator type things like 'for a mad moment'. In first, you know it's Una thinking it. In third, it makes me think, 'Who says the moment's mad?' And - ooh, this is getting interesting - with 'She doesn't understand, not yet,' it makes me slightly irritated, because there's a sense that the third-person, external narrator knows why, and is pointing that out while deliberately witholding why from the reader. Whereas in first, Una's just saying simply that she doesn't know why.

Emma

Exactly what I was thinking (re. the 'understand' bit). It starts to feel intrusive. When she 'owns' her thoughts, it's fine. But when we're standing outside her, who, then owns them - and do they have the right to?
Susiex

In a way I don't want to over egg it - I don't necessarily need the MC thinking - x is being a bastard - because hopefully that's obvious - and is reflected in the reactions of the other characters.

Pratchett over-eggs it mercilessly. Whereas JKR was villified when she tried to interject more of Haryy's thoughts and feelings in the later books.
It's just a metter of finding a happy medium.


- NaomiM

I'll have to see how it goes - it's a new draft - probably needs more work

Sarah