Back when I was still working on my first novel, I mentioned it to a bibliophile acquaintance who had been in academia for many years. She cheerfully turned to the woman next to her and said, “Did you hear that? Pat’s working on a novel! And it’s in the third person!”
I spent years being slightly taken aback by this reaction, as third person seemed to me to be the obvious choice. After all, at least 80% of the books I read and loved were in third person. It was somewhere between five and ten years later, when the book was finally finished, sold, and published, that I found out that in some literary circles, it was a given that a) first-time authors always wrote their first novel in first-person, because that was the most easy and natural viewpoint for a beginner, and b) such novels were always inferior in some way, because writing “the easy way” was guaranteed to produce an inferior product.
I have no idea where this prejudice against first-person originated, but I’ve run into them quite a few times since that first encounter (when the only response I could manage was “Really? I mean … Really? People really believe that?”). Fortunately, I am now a lot more articulate about what I think is wrong with those opinions and why.
To start with, a first-person viewpoint is not “easy and natural” for all writers. All seven of the then-unsold writers in my first critique group more or less automatically began with a third-person viewpoint. So did the four or five just-published writers I connected with at my first SF convention, and most of the not-yet-published writers I corresponded with back then. Several eventually went on to write a third or fourth or seventh book in first person, and struggled mightily with the switch to this supposedly-easy alternative.
First-person is, above all, a character-centered viewpoint. It therefore demands two things: a solid, in-depth knowledge of whichever character is the narrator, and a voice that clearly belongs to that character and no other. Writers who are naturals at plot or structure can have a difficult time getting the narrator’s voice and emotions down, especially if the narrator is not much like the writer.
Voice and viewpoint are inseparable in any type of viewpoint, but it’s particularly important to get the voice right in first-person. In first person, the viewpoint character is the putative storyteller, so that character’s voice is the narrative voice. A bland reportorial style implies a bland viewpoint character, which can work in cases where a) the first-person POV is a sidekick, and b) the protagonist is sufficiently interesting and/or charismatic to overcome the lack of interest generated by the viewpoint. It is far more effective, in most cases, to take advantage of a first-person narrative voice to display a POV character who is as interesting as the main character. Smart-aleck, opinionated sidekick Archie Goodwin makes a memorable and interesting viewpoint character, even though Nero Wolfe is an equally memorable detective-protagonist.
Similarly, the writer has to really know their POV character in depth, because the narrator’s thoughts and reactions are all visible right there on the page. The reader has a far more intimate view of the character right from the start, and sees everything through that character’s eyes, through that character’s reactions, and through that character’s opinions. If the narrator’s opinions and reactions change over the course of the story, the reasons will play out on the page; this isn’t a viewpoint where the writer can surprise the reader with a totally unexpected change of heart in order to salvage the plot at the climactic moment.
“Knowing the character” doesn’t necessarily mean being able to fill out a twenty-page questionnaire on their likes and dislikes; it can mean an intuitive knowledge that this narrator would never say that thing or would automatically do this other thing.
The perception that a first-person first novel must automatically be inferior arises, I think, from two problems: first, it can be difficult for a beginning writer to really get into the character and voice of someone who is only a little different from themselves, which can make a first-person first novel sound like a Mary Sue wish-fulfillment; second, it is remarkably difficult for any writer to write a first-person narrator who is annoying or unsympathetic, while still making that character intriguing enough that a reader will stick with the story in spite of the annoyance.
The thing is, if first-person is the viewpoint that comes naturally (or that your first story absolutely requires), the potential problems and requirements don’t matter. That’s what you’re going to write, and you have to figure out how to make it work. If it doesn’t come naturally, writing a story in first-person can be a dynamite way to up your characterization skills, but you might want to wait until you have nailed down some of the other basic writing skills in a third-person novel or two.
That was really interesting. I obviously don’t get out enough, since I missed that particular literary bias (for which I think I am grateful), but wow.
As I look back on my writing history thus far, I must suppose that first person does not come naturally to me.
At my current count, I’ve got 6 novels, 6 novellas, 5 short stories, plus WIP (another novel), and none of them are in first person. (Although novel #6 included a series of short excerpts from character correspondence that was first person.)
Some years ago, I wrote two story starts that were in first person. I loved them, but the one was in a character voice that I couldn’t imagine ever having the energy to maintain through an entire novel.
The other was demanding as well; I might have been able to pull it off for a short story, but the tale that coalesced around it proved to be a novel. I loved the idea so much that I did write the novel, but I wrote it in tight third.
I’m amused about the literary bias, because the one I’ve run into is that first person is inherently superior. Its advocates insist that it’s more immediate and intimate. I, on the other hand, often find it pushy and intrusive. Yeah, not a fan.
Which is not to say it can’t be done well. There are books I’ve loved that are in first person. It’s a down-check for me, but it’s not a deal-breaker. And I’ve written a couple of stories in first person, though never anythng as long as a novel. I prefer third as both a reader and a writer, but sometimes first is just the right choice for the story.
The view I’ve held for the longest time is that first-person looks easier, but isn’t. I’ve encountered lots and lots of stories in various on-line fora, mostly written in first-person by mostly novice writers, and when I suggest trying third-person instead, the answer is that third-person is both too hard and not as good. Apparently it’s not just “experienced” literary types who believe that first-person is the most easy and natural viewpoint for a beginner.
I’ll confess that my first two completed novels are in first-person, along with my fourth (the third novel in that series). But everything else I’ve done is in third-person, including the unfinished novel I first tried to write as a sprout, my third novel, my current WIP novel, and all my shorter pieces.
For that matter, I did seriously consider writing, or rewriting, the first-person works in third-person instead. But there were reasons why those novels “needed” (or at least “wanted”) to be in first-person.
“First, it can be difficult for a beginning writer to really get into the character and voice of someone who is only a little different from themselves, which can make a first-person first novel sound like a Mary Sue wish-fulfillment; second, it is remarkably difficult for any writer to write a first-person narrator who is annoying or unsympathetic, while still making that character intriguing enough that a reader will stick with the story in spite of the annoyance.”
Another way to look at it might be that a first-person narrator has a narrower appeal than a third-person viewpoint character. This predicts that Mary Sue-ish characters are better tolerated by readers when written in third person than in first, and that readers find it more enjoyable to be a fly (even a telepathic fly) on the wall of a villain’s lair than to have the villain rant at them directly. It can even be amusing to be that fly when the villain is a total waste of oxygen and even more disgusting otherwise.
But yeah, it didn’t hurt in my own case that the first-person protagonist in the three novels where I used him is the character of mine who is most like me.
“It is remarkably difficult for any writer to write a first-person narrator who is annoying or unsympathetic….”
It’s not at all easy in third-person, either. I’ve been fighting a while with a story whose main character cannot see his own faults, though they are legion. I think the solution in this case is to turn it into a two-viewpoint story, but that presents its own problems.
Seconding this. The book I just finished was supposed to have a (third-person) MC who was a right b@stard. He… ended up being, not nice, but a lot more sympathetic than I’d intended.
Oh! That’s happened to me, too. Twice. Where the character I envisioned when dreaming up the story becomes nicer once I’m actually writing. I can’t sustain the level of meanness or arrogance (or whatever, fill in the blank with an undesirable trait). It bugs me, honestly. I want to be able to write mean/arrogant/etc. when my story calls for it.
I know! We should be able to write rotters if we put our minds to it, shouldn’t we?
I was aiming for kind of a rotten human being who the reader ends up liking anyway. My alpha reader likes him. So… batting 500?
Sometimes it’s easiest to put it in the point of view of a less important but more sympathetic character dragged in the wake of the MC.
There’s a distinction between giving the POV to an unpleasant protagonist and having villain-POV scenes in multiple POV works.
As you pointed out, the former is not easy in third-person (and even harder in first-person). Which is why, as has also been pointed out, stories about such characters are often written in first-person from the POV of a Watson or Ishmael.
(I vaguely recall certain Sherlock Holmes stories told from Holmes’ POV with Watson absent – and in them Holmes griped that his tellings were inferior, as stories, to the ones from Watson’s POV.)
With villain POV scenes in a multiple POV story, the reader can just enjoy the spectacle. In fact, it can be a problem if the villain is made too likable or sympathetic in those scenes.
I liked the point about Nero Wolfe. I read Wolfe mysteries just because I love to listen to Archie talk.
I have a character written in a tight-third POV; that is, everything the reader knows is either something that character knows or something someone else tells him. That seems to be the best way for me to work. But this guy is a nice fifteen-year-old who hasn’t any faults and hardly any quirks. I tried to make him afraid of going into combat, but it didn’t last. Should I just let him be a Watson to his two companions, one an experienced fighter and used to taking charge, and the other a youngster who, if not exactly a scholar, can at least read (not common in the Dark Ages setting they’re in)?
One of the things that struck me about the older middle-grade novel Hey, Didi Darling by S. A. Kennedy is how well it pulls off an unreliable first-person narrator. The POV is a teenage girl who prides herself on being perceptive and a Natural Leader, but it’s clear to the reader that a lot of the more subtle dynamics in her group of friends go right over her head.
The only point of view with higher demands on voice is epistolary. Which is the odd-ball point of view for good reason.
I’m of the opinion that ALL narration is done in first person. Even a third-person narrator should be a solid character (if only in the writer’s mind) and so is telling the story with his/her own voice.
I hadn’t come across that bias either.
What I can’t figure out is when a first-person novel passes my personal criterion of unbelievability.
Every once in a while I am reading a book, where the first-person protagonist’s diary?? includes stuff which there’s no way the protagonist would be writing that down.
But most *all* first-person works would seem to fail that criterion, but only occasionally do I find my irritation button pressed.
I discovered the bias against 1st person slightly before I started writing, but a lot of the stories I loved used it. A lot of classics and name writers uses it as well. I find I prefer it for my longer stories because of the greater empathy and so I can control the clues the reader gets. I’ve seen too many stories (usually cross genre) where the writer gave too many clues in the 3rd POV that it made the leads look like total fools to ignore the marching band. I don’t care for stories where stuff is pulled out of nowhere because clues and facts were never on camera. I want my characters and readers get the same clues.
But because of that bias, I have sometimes made an effort to do more 3rd person.
Thanks for writing this. I had not realized that the problems readers have with my unsympathetic main character are enhanced by the first person POV. Insightful.