Can First Person Present Tense Ever Be Subtle?

I've got a novel in edits that's FPP (it's dual POV, so a little different). There were two things I needed to do to get the narrative to work the way I wanted:

1) I had to be very much in each character's head when I was writing. That means I had to know what they knew in this moment, and I had to understand what they were believing in this moment. One character in particular is willfully blind to a lot, and I had to be clear in my own head what she would and wouldn't notice in a particular scene - as well as what I needed the reader to see in a way that she wasn't.

2) I needed to have a hypothetical "audience" for each character's narrative. One was easy (her POV is epistolary). The other was more difficult. Too much filtering ("I think" or "I remember" - that sort of thing) really bogs down a first person narrative, but a little can be an atmospheric tool. I tended to picture this character telling her story to a confidant, the way one sometimes tells stories of their day in present tense.

As a generality - I think it's more important to be present with your character when you're writing in first person, and even more so in present tense. With third person, I find I can be sloppier when I'm drafting, and clean up filters and phrasing that's too distant after the fact. If I try to draft a first person narrative like that, I lose track of the character too fast.

One of the things I vastly prefer about FP is the way there's a little more room for soupy philosophical digressions and how you can distance yourself from those digressions by letting the character speak and not necessarily sign off on them as the author. I also like exploring the gap between thought and action, how an MC presents themselves to the reader and what they do in the text can be very different, and trying to understand the character through that dissonance is where the fun comes in for me.

As for how to tone down the philosophical 'what is life, man' ramblings, well, I'm right there in the same boat as you. Usually I just have a giant robot crash through the ceiling halfway through, works better in some genres than others.

I wonder (from reading some of your past posts as well) if your focus on writing literary fiction is doing you a disservice. One of the issues with people's (mis)understandings of lit fic is that they think it allows you to break all the rules and focus hugely on (your) themes and thoughts.

It's not that simple.

It's a mistake many newer writers make, when they stand too close to their personal reason for writing, and forget that the reader needs a reason to read.

Think about stepping back. Write your historical novel, and then let Marketing decide whether to slap 'literary' on it. Don't try to write to a category - write the story, write the character, know the themes and the philosophy. Let them just happen.

As I've said before, if you want to push a political or philosophical barrow, the worst thing you can do is have the characters directly talking about the issues. It quickly becomes a ham fisted 101 tute that is unlikely to be published, let alone read.

My books always have a particular issue I'm flogging, but there are never (or almost never) people talking/preaching about the issues - the politics happens in the brain of the readers as they cope with the antics of my characters.

Prophecies said:

Any tips on incorporating subtlety in first person present tense is appreciated. Enjoy your weekend!

Click to expand...

Reading novels that accomplish it is always worthwhile.

Otherwise... be open to draft after draft. Rome wasn't built in a day and all that. It is okay to redraft. Do not expect immediate gratification.

Patty said:

Rome wasn't built in a day and all that.

Click to expand...

Rome took a lot of days

Yes. And it all came to tears in the end. Or ... religion.