First Person v Third Person Limited

Lifelongdagger said:

A writer friend of mine said, for her, the decision for her to go for third limited instead of first was lacking the courage to risk more of herself in first person. Writing in third lmited allowed her to hide behind the narrative

Click to expand...

It isn't clear to me that either POV offers either much advantage or much disadvantage with respect to either courage or risking yourself. You can easily hide behind a first-person narrator. You can put much of yourself into a third person narrator.

Of the myriad factors to consider when choosing a POV, I think courage and self risk are very low on the priority list.

Dale

If you do limited third correctly, it's almost indistinguishable from first person except for the difference in pronouns. The voice comes through just as well in either one.

I prefer first person POV and also present tense.

But I write in third limited and past. Conformity. I plead guilty


With first person, the reader only knows what that person knows, which is limiting, but writing in first can be more engaging and it's easier for a 'voice' to come through which is a big selling point for books.

However, third makes for easier reading in general and allows you to develop minor characters more and present an objective view of the MC [Something alot of old writers like Shakespeare and Webster focused on].

In deciding between them, I'd recommend writing a couple scenes in both First and Third and then read them aloud and tell by ear which sounds right to you. Usually your first instinct upon starting a novel is right, but there are occasions...=)

For your friend's specific story, her plight might be a true one. But I don't see it as anything that could ever be applied generally to every MS or story.

Both are different POVs to master; your friend might feel more comfortable to be uninhibited in 1st person. That's fine. But, I feel 1st is much more difficult to write. A convincing first person voice requires a careful writer to craft it. You have to be scrupulous in how this character presents their world.

I can read bad 3rd, if the story interests me. I can't read bad 1st.

I like writing in 1st. There is a kind of intimacy to it. And, narratively, it is easier to bring the voice out full-force. The only way to see the world is through the MC's eyes and with their vocabulary. But, it's hard if there are aspects of the story the MC doesn't witness firsthand. I have a rough WIP that has two 1st person MCs. It is hard because the voices have to be distinct. I know other writers have done more but I don't think I (personally) could handle more than two in a single novel.

I like writing 3rd. As I write more I find it can be as personal as 1st. But narrative voice is harder to bring out. (Not because it is harder to write but because there is an expectation of certain conventions on the part of the/most reader(s).) It's easier to switch between characters. The use of names to refer to POV characters in 3rd (instead of I) lessens the burden of making every voice completely individual.

They both have strengths. They both have weaknesses. I used to think I enjoyed writing 1st person more than 3rd limited. Now I find that either (as well as past/present tense) is enjoyable and familiar.

I tend to hear a first line. (Once I have done all my outlining and preplanning and all that stuff that I do before I start writing.) And it will tell me whether the story should be 1st or 3rd. On occasion I have changed it partway through. Usually that first instinct is best. But I'm not an expert. I just do what feels right for each story.

I write stories in both, but prefer 3rd person because I can show a lot more going on and show view points from each character. I like my books to read as though it's a movie going on in the readers head, with no one perspective getting in the wau of what they get from the story.

For me...I took it as a game. In my first work, I used first person and the second I used 3rd person POV, and so on. But for my next WIP, I'm also confuse, which one I should use...

But most of my friends said by using 3rd person POV my work looks like a movie, than the first. I may not help much, but still I hope it'll help you. Good luck!

Lifelongdagger said:

Writing in third lmited allowed her to hide behind the narrative, though she feels in hindsight her writing, and the MC's voice, suffered in the doing of this. She is now considering re-writing her MS in first person.

Any thoughts?

Click to expand...

Sounds like cobblers to me. In 1st, the character voice is most likely to subsume that of the writer. In any variation of 3rd, more, not less, of the author comes through.

All my books have more than one POV, so they're all in 3rd. I don't much care for multiple POVs in first. Either they both end up sounding the same (which is weird in first), or the voices are so different it's jarring.

I agree that much more of the author comes through in 3rd. In 1st the character's voice should completely eclipse the author's, but in 3rd it filters through the author.

I think the biggest advantage in 3rd person is the ability to hide things from the reader while still seeing the action. If a serial killer (example) were in first person, it would ruin any surprise you wanted. The Limited also tightens up the ability to give the reader more than you want to give.

I read once that writing first person is much harder because you have to be smarter (and know more) than your character. A writer who writes 3rd person can get away with not being quite as intellegent (sorry, I know we all think we are superhuman, but in fact it is not correct). That is why more "coming of age" type novels are first person, but less "building a nuclear bomb" type stories. When someone tries a first person Jesus or Einstein, they are usually going to blow it. First person usually works best with a slightly untrustworthy narrator-- a Holden Caulfield in a mental hospital, or a young child like Scout Finch.