First Person

Um...I may be wrong here because sometimes I get authors/books mixed up but I'm fairly certain Cathy's Moon book is in first person, so hopefully she'll be able to chime in.

First person is seen a lot in Chick Lit (which, as noted in another thread is pretty much dead, but the voice is still seen, just marketed differently now), but not so much in romance generally, with some exceptions in romantic suspense or romantic mysteries.

Romance today generally has at least some scenes from the hero's POV, which is problematic if you're writing in first person. Women's fiction, OTOH, does have a significant amount of first person. I think Pat Gaffney works in first person at least some of the time.

JD

Cerridwen is new. They're the mainstream imprint of Ellora's Cave and if memory serves they launched in the past 18 months (but I could be wrong on that).

I'm not certain what your question regarding "popularity" is about.

You might want to read a few books from each line to determine where your voice fits best.

aspiringwriter said:

It's interesting to see that...

I went on Harlequin and they have a new series called Harlequin Everlasting--they will accept 1st and third person. The others though are 3rd person only.

?

Click to expand...

That's not necessarily true. Super just bought a new author, and her book was first person, and she just reported yesterday that her editor has decided it's staying first person. I think there's also been a couple of Desires in first person.

So, third is the general "rule," but like all so-called "rules" it was made to be broken by someone with great story and deft execution of it.

Susan G.

Cathy's first three books (Hunter's Moon; Moon's Web; Touch of Evil) were all written in first person. Her fourth, Captive Moon, is written in third.

My upcoming novel is written in first person.

(Cathy and I both write paranormal romance.)

aspiringwriter said:

Thank you DragonJax... I appreciate it.

I personally like writing first person than third. IMHO it's a tad easier in the way of showing and telling... With third, to me it's a bit harder. I like 1st b/c you can describe the MC's feelings, what he/she sees...

Again, thank you.

Click to expand...

You can do the same thing in Deep 3rd. <G> I'm not a huge fan of reading 1st, so I don't do much writing in it, either.

That's not to say that I never read 1st.

Susan G.

Rather than thinking about what you like to write, think about what you like to read. How many of the fiction books you've read in the last year were in first person and how many were in third?

I'm betting there were more in third than in first. There's a reason for that: more readers will read third person than first, and more books are published in third person than in first.

Which isn't to say first person is bad. Just that it's automatically ruling out some number of readers for you. So, if you're going to use it, you should be sure that it's accomplishing some storytelling purpose (not convenience for the author) that will improve the story FOR THE READER.

JD

First person is damn difficult to pull off well. I think that's why there are fewer first-person books (er, GOOD first-person books) out there.

And I absolutely agree with Susan: close third-person POV accomplishes quite a lot, sometimes even better than first person.

Yeah, it's easier showing and telling, but it's IMMENSELY more difficult to plot a book where the character can't see around the corner. You have to use a variety of techniques to get the right information to the MC (main character) to "guide" them to find out things. Lots of people do a great job with internal stuff, but then fall down when it comes time to advance the actual plot. And in a subgenre romance, it's even trickier because you're doing a DOUBLE arc plot (paranormal mystery as one, romance as the other, for example.)

I really enjoy writing first person, but also really enjoyed doing the third person books we're putting out right now. A lot depends on the story. I think paranormals are easier to do in first person because there are more methods (such as magic, or psychic ability or mental conversations) with third parties that can advance the plot while the MC is doing something else.

JMHO, of course.

As for your other question, aspiring---Harlequin has FAR more readers. Cerridwen is a fairly new imprint of Ellora's Cave, and there are more readers of traditional paperbacks than ebooks presently. You won't find any of Cerridwen's books in Waldenbooks, or WalMart. That's a pretty big market for romance readers. You also won't see an advance from Cerridwen (meaning money in your pocket before the sales are tallied.) Harlequin DOES pay an advance.

But things, they are a'changin. Cerridwen might do well enough in sales to wind up on the bookstore shelves, like many of EC's other books have. Only time will tell.

I've really been enjoying "The Other Boleyn Girl" by Philippa Gregory which is *technically* a romance. It is in first person.
This is not something you can read because it is not published, but I think it's really interesting. I am good friends with Stephenie Meyer who writes the Twilight series which are written first person from her heroine's point of view. But she has been rewriting the first book from her hero's point of view and it is definitely fascinating, but because I am so used to the heroine's point of view I sometimes get confused in my mind when the "I" is suddenly a different person and I have to remember I am reading Midnight Sun and not Twilight. Very odd. Hmmm.

Maprilynne

Not that long ago I read a book by Tori Carrington that was in both third person AND first person. The hero was in first person and the heroine was in third. It was a bit confusing at first glance, but I really enjoyed that novel... so did my husband when I convinced him to read it. Now, isn't that an interesting twist to this discussion?

Sonarbabe said:

Not that long ago I read a book by Tori Carrington that was in both third person AND first person. The hero was in first person and the heroine was in third. It was a bit confusing at first glance, but I really enjoyed that novel... so did my husband when I convinced him to read it. Now, isn't that an interesting twist to this discussion?

Click to expand...

I've seen that done. I think it's cool. I also read a book that was done in first person, but had both the hero and heroine's POVs. Both had such a different voice that you knew right away whose head you were in.

It was funny, because when I first starting reading that book, I was disappointed that I wasn't going to get the hero's POV. (It begins in the heroine's POV.) Then I came to the first section for him, and I was so pleased. <G> It was really well done.

POV, like anything else, is a tool for a writer to use. We shouldn't think in terms of a right way or a wrong way. (Well, except for head-hopping, of course. <G> That's wrong. <G>)

Susan G.

In general, I am turned off by first person POV because it is so often done poorly especially in romance. If I'm reading a thriller or mystery I don't mind the first person so much. Maybe because when reading romance, I like to know what both parties are thinking and feeling and it's hard to do when it's from the heroines POV. When they do both the hero and heroine's POV first person it reads better if done well. Otherwise the romance feels so one-sided, it's hard to get into it and harder to believe.

I don't like first-person sex scenes, so I avoid first person romance. (Because if it doesn't have sex scenes, I don't wanna read it anyway.)

What is it about first person sex scenes you don't like? I have written a first person sensual romance but I rarely use the word "I" and keep it active and use lots of dialogue which cuts down on telling something rather than showing.

DecemberQuinn said:

(Because if it doesn't have sex scenes, I don't wanna read it anyway.)

Click to expand...

I it!!!

<ahem> And, of course, I agree. <ahem, ahem>

Maprilynne