Why in the world?

SRHowen

Does anyone here read Patricia Cornwell?

Why in the world did she switch from first person to a weird third person present tense?

I never made it all the way through Blow Fly and thought my god this is awful, then I saw the newest book--Trace. I took a look and didn't buy it. It also is in this weird third person present tense.

Anyone read anything on this or read the latest--?

Shawn
 

Writing Again

I've been told by a few people that second person present tense is the literary "in thing."

She has a home page here, perhaps you can email her and ask.

Here is another site that may be able to help you. It is pretty dedicated to her.

I'm don't think the average reader is into present tense in either first, second, or third. I'm just to it as I read and write screenplays, but it seems very odd in a novel.
 

rtilryarms

What is 3rd person present tense? Can you give an example for the uneducated?
 

HConn

He runs to the edge of the balcony and peers out toward the bay. The tattered sailboat bounces on the swells, slowly making its way to shore.

"Put on the hot cocoa," he shouts. "Nestor is coming home."

He wipes the rain out of his eyes, then turns and walks back inside.


Shawn, I would guess that she's been hired to write a couple screenplays, and likes the form.
 

Jamesaritchie

present tense

I don't like it, but there are many in literary circles who love present tense, particulary third person present tense. It isn't terribly uncommon in such circles.

The is one second person present tense novel I enjoyed, and that was "Bright Lights, Big City."
 

Writing Again

Re: present tense

I would think second person, any tense, would be very invasive if it made assumptions about the reader with which they were uncomfortable.

I think most people are more comfortable reading past tense because most people speak in past tense most of the time.

Very seldom do you speak about that which is happening now. People speak mostly about what has happened and a bit about what will happen, and some about what would happen if.
 

Jamesaritchie

present tense

I don;t think present tense is invasive in any way, it's just too immediate.

And, actually, people do speak in presnt tense a good bit, if you listen for it.

"And he goes, what are you doin' here, and I go, none of your business."

Or, "I'm walking along, minding my own business, and this guy steps right out and gets in my face."

I've heard people ramble for hours, and stay in present tense for most of it.

But for writing, most people are more comfortable with past tense, at least for long reads. Short stories in present tense tend to work much better than novels.

Despite this, hardly a year goes by without someone hitting the bestseller list somewhere with a present tense
novel.
 

Maryn

Present Tense

In light of our discussing tense under the Mystery banner, it's worth noting that although readers may prefer past tense, it tells them that the story-teller POV survived. Present tense leaves open the possibility that the killer will find the story-teller before s/he can convince the police he's the one...
 

Writing Again

Re: present tense

I don;t think present tense is invasive in any way, it's just too immediate.

Not invasive?

Lets put it in its most extreme form to demo the point.

You are a guy, and the second person present tense protag is female. In the next paragraph the big bearded lumber jack leans over with his mouth partly opened to kiss you.

Nope, I don't think of myself as particularly machoistic, but I won't read any further than that, thank you.
 

HConn

Re: present tense

WA, are you talking about present tense or second person?

And did that lumberjack have a breath mint, or no?
 

pdr

2nd person POV

2nd person POV can be very effective but you have to write really well to make it work. I've just finished reading a short story where the main character is an adult and she is recounting an episode that happened in her childhood. The use of the second person POV makes that telling of what happened even more shocking to the reader. And the writer's skills are such that she uses 'you' in an empathetic way rather than the 'you' a Sergeant Major yells in some poor soldier's face'. It's different and a bit of a challenge. Might not be your cup of tea but it does open some possibilities to a writer who has the skills to exploit them.
 

Writing Again

Re: present tense

WA, are you talking about present tense or second person?

And did that lumberjack have a breath mint, or no?

I'm not sticking around to find out.

Come to think of it, I don't remember reading a second person story in anything except present tense, so I guess I've come to associate the two.

Therefore, on reflection, I would have to say I'm speaking of second person.

I do agree with pdr that it would take exceptional skills to write effectively in second person, but I cannot concieve of a reason to actually do it except as a display case to show off the fact you had developed them. I don't think the average reader enjoys it, it is no longer experimental literature, and the effort could easily go toward something more marketable.

I personally believe the reader of a story should be able to choose: which character they relate to, if any; how much they relate to each character, if at all; the way they relate to the character, if it be love or hate.

Second person tends to take these options away from the reader.
 

Writing Again

Re: present tense

Going back I see my original statement was:

I would think second person, any tense, would be very invasive if it made assumptions about the reader with which they were uncomfortable.

To which Jamesaritchie replied:
I don;t think present tense is invasive in any way, it's just too immediate.

My original statement was primarily to second person any tense: Jamesaritchie was thinking of present tense when he replied: When I replied I was still thinking second person, but talking present tense.

The conversation sort of skewed out of whack. I think we were all reading and replying too fast or we'd have noticed.
 

Jamesaritchie

relate

"I personally believe the reader of a story should be able to choose: which character they relate to, if any; how much they relate to each character, if at all; the way they relate to the character, if it be love or hate."

I can only say 300 years of research disagrees with this, particular a blue ton of research done in the 20th century.

The vast majority of readers, well over 90%, want a single character to relate to, to live the story through. They want to get inside the skin of that character and stay there as long as possible, and they want that character to be the protagonist. They do not want a choice.

Choices too often mean no choice at all because there's too much distance between reader and character.

Distance is the entire point of tense, and by design, each tense places the reader at a certain distance from the POV character(s).

First person has the least distance, of course. Sometimes this can place the reader too close, though it's still a very popular tense in several genres.

But readers vastly prefer third person limited because it lets them become the protagonist, and remain the protagonist, for long periods. Sometimes for the entire novel. It doesn't give readers a choice; it's the POV character or no character at all, and readers eat it up.

Incredibly few readers like being pulled out of the head of one character and stuck in the head of another, nor do they want a choice of which character to enter. They really can't have a choice very often, anyway.

Even with Omniscient, the writer must pick a central character, and it's this character readers will grab and stay with as long as the writer lets them.

Who the reader relates to is the choice of the writer and the tense used, but the writer has to pick a central character, just as Tolkien did, no matter how many main characters there are. This central character will be the one the vast majority of readers will relate to, and want to relate to.
 

Writing Again

Re: relate

A note to Mr. Jamesaritchie:

I'm not putting this post up specifically to argue with you. I suspect you are as fixed in your opinion as I am in mine on this issue and argument would be pointless.

I am putting this post up so the readers of this discussion who are undecided in the matter have a fuller view of both sides and will be better able to make an informed choice of their own.

Thank you.




Don't know about the research, or where you found it. However when it comes to opinions of this nature I tend to trust my own empirical standards.

Virtually every top writer today: by this I mean the top selling, mainstream writers, not the ones the critics laud, not the genre bound, but those who earn the biggest bucks, whose names are most widely known: Stephen King, Danielle Steel, Dean Koontz, Mary Higgens Clark, and so on down the list: do certain things.

They all change POV's in one way or another, to one degree or another, in almost all, if not all, of their novels. Mary Higgens Clark, I believe has been cited as the worst, I believe it was she who once used two POV's in a single paragraph, or was it sentence? Dean Koontz pretty much sticks to one chapter one POV.

I cruise book shops and talk to people buying books. Second hand book shops are especially conductive to this practice; the more relaxed, casual atmosphere making friendliness easier than the larger, more formal, Barnes & Noble type stores. Something about being in tightly cramped spaces smelling old volumes opens people up.

Many tell me how they love the type book where an author changes POV each chapter.





As to who, whom, the reader identifies with and likes the most in any given novel:

One of the things that makes the big and little screen more successful than novels is the fact they are more responsive to audience input than novelists are.

Fonzie was not the original protag / centerpiece of Happy Days. Ritchie was. People liked The Fonz: he got bigger and bigger parts.

Magnum P.I. was supposed to be the primary focus and remained so: But the curmudgeon he had to deal with every day got so much fan mail his part was increased.

The Six Million Dollar Woman was only supposed to be a guest shot on the Six Million Dollar Man. She was liked so much she got her own spin off.

Frank L. Baum chose the heroes of his next Oz novel based on the fan mail from the children who wrote him. He had the most popular series going. I think much of that success can be attributed to his responsiveness to his audience.

Piers Anthony is highly responsive to his audience, even going so far as to adjust the ending to one of his series, "Split Infinity" to accommodate the perceptions of them.



Even when you write in the first person you will receive fan mail which tells you, "OH, I just loved such-and-such" who was a minor character: often followed by, "Can you do more of him/her?"

When I get enough letters like that you can bet I'll say, "You bet."


My current WIP is an epic fantasy. Many POV's are used. Different beta readers like different characters. I do not plan on ever writing a sequel. However, if it generates enough enthusiasm I will. Guess what? The characters and conflicts that appear in any sequel will reflect what my audience has indicated to me to be their desires.
 

katdad

I have read one Pat Cornwell novel and I quit while I was ahead.

The synopsis:

Someone gets murdered. Everyone else goes skiing.
 

Writing Again

Been gone a few days on a trip. Grabbed a novel on CD, "The Last Girls" by Lee Smith, read by the author.

I sometimes found the tenses, and changes in tenses jarring.

Sometimes she would have to shift back into the past tense, because it happened in the past; that jarred me: Then she would go back to the present tense; that jarred me more.

I had trouble picturing simultanious actions happening in the present tense. My mind sort of expects sequentiality in the present tense, one thing happens, then the next. "He kissed her while she stroked his arm," makes sense to me: My mind rejects "He kisses her while she strokes his arm." For some reason I don't understand once he kisses her in present tense my mind wants to move on to the next thing done, not linger on what else happens at the same time. This may be just me.
 

Stace001

Katdad,

I used to be a huge Patricia Cornwell fan, her earlier stuff I found quite interesting, but particularly her last two novels, you've hit the nail on the head...the synopsis is as simple as that. I won't be buying any further novels by Cornwell, because if i wanted to know about skiing, i'd turn on the travel channel.:)