You guys said that, without cheating, nothing can be withheld from the readers with a 1st person narrative. That is not only false, it’s encouraging bad writing. Withholding information is one of the MOST IMPORTANT aspects of using a 1st person pov. The things 1st person narrators say, and what they do not say, illustrate to the reader what kind of a character this person is. If a guy is telling an entire story about he’s a victim and no one gets him, then offhandedly mentions that he can’t go to a certain town “because of that thing that happened with the girl in the woods. Once I put my hands on her, her eyes went fire-wild. Eventually she got quiet.” OK, that’s a crappy thing I just wrote, but look at what is not said. Clearly, this character has done something that borders on assault or was violent or god knows what else. Clearly information is being withheld. Based on what the character has said in other places in the story, times when he may have been very forthcoming with information, the reader experiences moments of less than explicit description as more meaningful and more revealing of character.

So, having things NOT explained fully or withholding information through a 1st person pov is, in my mind, one of the main reasons why you would want to use the technique.

Now…the can of worms? What was it…ah, yes. Here we go: altering the fundamentals of a story to create something unique. (i.e. having a story sit in a single specific location, or throwing out the existence of time in a story)

I have not yet read a book or story that switched between 1st and 3rd persons without getting very angry.

I just finished Dan Simmons’s _Iliad_ and it’s a very good book, but every time we switched to Hockenberry’s pov, suddenly everything’s in 1st person present, and I would audibly growl.

an exception — _The Kents_ actually did this. But that’s a special case of 1st person. The 1st person is being related by a different narrator. When all the 1st person bits are journals or letters being read by someone, suddenly it makes sense. When you do 1st and 3rd, you tend to confuse who the narrator is. He’s not omniscient, because there’s 1st person, so where am I getting this 3rd person information?

ok, if anyone ever comes back and reads this there will be disagreement and people will say it can work.

But I’m going to say even if you can get a case I’ll agree with, you’re using a single exception to say the rule is universally false. Rules are made to be broken, but only if you break it on purpose and with a specific goal in mind. When you consider switching pov, remember that it’s usually a bad idea.

I wanted to point out that Agatha Christie wrote a first person mystery where the narrator kept a secret: the Murder of Roger Ackroyd. It was all revealed in the end, of course.

I tend to write first person over third, but I rely on my history with acting on storytelling. I’ve also seen good examples of people who write in first person, then turn the story into third person to end up with a solid close third person story.

What I would like you guys to talk about is the realization of first person narrators who know they are telling a story…. I still struggle with that bit of meta-fiction. Why is the character telling the story? How can I avoid making it all sound like Grampa Tolkien telling his story at bedtime? For an example, Escape Pod recently released MK Hobson’s God Juice, and there are places where the first person narrator says things like “I call him the ice princess.” These aren’t snips of dialog, but directed at the reader (listener in this case), like the narrator knows they are narrating.

How much should a first person narrator give in to this?

Thanks for the compliments. And for the record, I LOVE the podcasts where I discover something new during the recording. But I also love the podcasts where I get to make a joke at the expense of somebody else.

Dan’s comments as “Admin” above, regarding POV and “Howard wants to kill you” had me laughing out loud. It’s also a great thumbnail sketch of POV.

Re: Cinematic — the principle difference between this POV and others is that you never get character thoughts. You only get expressions, like a movie-goer might see on the big screen.

Yes!!! He (Steven King) does do it alot. It’s ok sometimes, but other times it’s just annoying.

I wanted to post a bit on this topic of POV. I really prefer third person, myself. I find 1st person a little annoying to read, especially if the main character isn’t one I particularly identify with (that is, isn’t like me). I think that is a real risk with 1st person–if your reader doesn’t identify with that character, they may lose interest. And what are the odds you can come up with a character most people will identify with?

I recently read a short story in the July issue of Asimov that was written in 2nd person present. It might have been a great story, I don’t know, because I stopped reading it after a few paragraphs. If you want to annoy your reader, then try 2nd person present. lol

I have heard it said that writing is done well when it is INVISIBLE. Using uncommon tense and POV combinations draws attention to your writing, which kills the suspension of disbelief–you never forget you’re reading a story.

From reading the posts, it sounds like some people are confused about the difference between 3rd person limited and 3rd person omniscient. I too recommend Card’s book for getting these down.

I think a POV violation is one of the surest ways to throw the reader out of the story. If the reader is also a writer (or knows a bit about it) it will be even worse. It’s been said that once you know and have mastered “the rules” you can occasionally break them. A good example of this is Stephen King’s The Drawing of the Three, which I’ve been reading this week. The story is told in 3rd person limited, however, there are times that he will tell you what a character other than the POV character is thinking, without the obligatory scene/chapter change or line break. When he does it, it’s only a line or two. Personally, I would prefer he didn’t do that because it throws me off a bit, but he does it well enough that you still know what’s going on. I’m curious if he still does it in his later books, because I know he wrote that book quite a while ago.

***

7th Son, chapter 1

Little Peggy was very careful with the eggs. She rooted her hand through the straw till her fingers bumped something hard and heavy. She gave no never mind to the chicken drips. After all, when folk with babies stayed at the roadhouse, Mama never even crinkled her face at their most spetackler diapers. Even when the chicken drips were wet and stringy and made her fingers stick together, little Peggy gave no never mind. She just pushed the straw apart, wrapped her hand around the egg, and lifted it out of the brood box. All this while standing tiptoe on a wobbly stool, reaching high above her head. Mama said she was too young for egging, but little Peggy showed her. Ever day she felt in every brood box and brought in every egg, every single one, that’s what she did.

Every one, she said in her mind, over and over. I got to reach into every one.

Then little Peggy looked back into the northeast corner, the darkest place in the whole coop, and there sat Bloody Mary in her brood box, looking like the devil’s own bad dream, hatefulness shining out of her nasty eyes, saying Come here little girl and give me nips. I want nips of finger and nips of thumb and if you come real close and try to take my egg I’ll get a nip of eye from you. ..

***