Thoughts on voice in 3rd person vs 1st person POV?

SwallowFeather · Jan 13, 2015

My problem is, I've fallen in love with first-person POV, and my next book has to be third. It has to, because it has 3 to 5 POVs! (On the, ah, other writing forum I just came from, everyone's always going "Oh just do multiple 1st, or mix 1st and 3rd!" and it drives me up the wall. You're not going to do that, right? Pretty please?)

I did my previous book in 1st, and I loved my narrator's voice. She talked directly to the reader (not breaking 4th wall, just rhetorical stuff) and she would do asides on what she thought about people, and there'd be subtext in there about what kind of person she really was versus what she thought she was, and as her character changed there was a newly growing sense of honesty and directness in her narration and less hedging, and I just loved doing that.

She is one of the POVs in this new book, and I'm not greatly looking forward to doing her in 3rd, but beyond that... I do truly believe that you can get just as deeply into a character with 3rd, but voice seems to be another matter. As I start writing myself into my 3 to 5 new POVs I'm still trying to put my finger on how much far I can go into voice compared to my 1st-person novel.

I'm noticing how much easier it is to slip into "writerly" prose in 3rd, and trying to figure out where the boundaries are. In 1st, for instance, it's abundantly clear that you mustn't use a metaphor that would be out of character (poetic when your character is practical, etc.) So should I apply that rule just as strictly in third? Should I write only sentences that I could hear my character saying? I'm trying to think this through right now. I feel it's very important for these POV characters to have unique and distinct voices, and I also feel like voice is really important for showing character, and even character change (like I talked about above.) But I don't know whether I can do quite as much with 3rd as I did with 1st, and whether I should try.

Does anyone have experience with this, or thoughts?

thothguard51 · Jan 13, 2015

Sounds like you want 3rd person close, or limited. Just like 1st person but you get to pull back when needed. Me, I have lots of PoV characters in my books besides the main character/s, but I limit it to one PoV per chapter so as to avoid confusing readers on who is on first...

SwallowFeather · Jan 13, 2015

Yeah, I used to do the 1-chapter-per-POV thing, which is a really nice way of making things clear, but because of how much I've got to cover, this book has to be tight, tight, tight. So there'll be some quick switching, which is one of the reasons I want the voices to be recognizable--it'll help the reader know who's who.

Do you think a close 3rd is really almost like 1st, though? I used to, but I am finding more differences as I go on...

Mr Flibble · Jan 13, 2015

You can do 3rd in a similar way to first, if you are close enough -- observations, asides etc. One of my current 3rd characters does this.

Example. Crappy example:

Bob walked down the road, and all was right with the world until he passed the skip. Was that a...lion? It looked like a lion, it was tawny with a big mane and bigger teeth and...it was not a lion. Bob refused to believe it. It must be those new pills the doctor had put him on, or that bottle of rum last night. Or something that was not a lion anyway. In his world, lions existed in zoos and on David Attenborough documentaries. Not in Purley.

A good close third should be as distinctive in voice as first

Gringa · Jan 13, 2015

SwallowFeather said:
I'm noticing how much easier it is to slip into "writerly" prose in 3rd,

This. I hear ya.

BethS · Jan 14, 2015

SwallowFeather said:
Does anyone have experience with this, or thoughts?

Of course. We live for this.

She talked directly to the reader (not breaking 4th wall, just rhetorical stuff) and she would do asides on what she thought about people, and there'd be subtext in there about what kind of person she really was versus what she thought she was, and as her character changed there was a newly growing sense of honesty and directness in her narration and less hedging, and I just loved doing that.

No reason you can't do that in third person. Really, you can.

But.

I'm going to do the annoying thing and suggest that you retain the first person POV for that character, and do the others in third. There are many successul precedents of this technique, though that's not why you should do it.

The reason you do should it is because the readers who connected with that character and fell in love with her voice are going to be mightily pissed off and turned off if you try to write her in third person.

Don't mess with a good thing.

Lauram6123 · Jan 14, 2015

I just read this book, Rivet Your Readers with Deep Point of View, and found it to be very helpful.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B007PUMQ1O/?tag=absowrit-20

It's a short, easy read and shows multiple examples of how to really get the most of out 3rd person limited in terms of feeling close to the character.

Katharine Tree · Jan 14, 2015

You've already gotten good technical advice. I just want to do some cheerleading about trying a new thing with your writing: you'll learn a lot, grow as a writer, and discover strengths you didn't know you had. Enjoy!

Jamesaritchie · Jan 14, 2015

SwallowFeather said:
My problem is, I've fallen in love with first-person POV, and my next book has to be third. It has to, because it has 3 to 5 POVs! (On the, ah, other writing forum I just came from, everyone's always going "Oh just do multiple 1st, or mix 1st and 3rd!" and it drives me up the wall. You're not going to do that, right? Pretty please?)

I did my previous book in 1st, and I loved my narrator's voice. She talked directly to the reader (not breaking 4th wall, just rhetorical stuff) and she would do asides on what she thought about people, and there'd be subtext in there about what kind of person she really was versus what she thought she was, and as her character changed there was a newly growing sense of honesty and directness in her narration and less hedging, and I just loved doing that.

She is one of the POVs in this new book, and I'm not greatly looking forward to doing her in 3rd, but beyond that... I do truly believe that you can get just as deeply into a character with 3rd, but voice seems to be another matter. As I start writing myself into my 3 to 5 new POVs I'm still trying to put my finger on how much far I can go into voice compared to my 1st-person novel.

I'm noticing how much easier it is to slip into "writerly" prose in 3rd, and trying to figure out where the boundaries are. In 1st, for instance, it's abundantly clear that you mustn't use a metaphor that would be out of character (poetic when your character is practical, etc.) So should I apply that rule just as strictly in third? Should I write only sentences that I could hear my character saying? I'm trying to think this through right now. I feel it's very important for these POV characters to have unique and distinct voices, and I also feel like voice is really important for showing character, and even character change (like I talked about above.) But I don't know whether I can do quite as much with 3rd as I did with 1st, and whether I should try.

Does anyone have experience with this, or thoughts?

POV isn't about deep or shallow, it;s about distance. Of course you can get as deep with third, but what you can't do is get as close. There will always be a difference between a character who is the narrator, and a narrator who's outside the character. This is the point of different POVs.

Third limited, however, has the same basic restrictions as first. The narrator can only reveal what the POV character sees, hear, feels, smells, tastes knows, thinks, or believes. This means you do need to stay in the character's voice. It really isn't very difficult. If you can do it in first, you can do the same in third limited. I've known several writers who write such characters in first, and then switch to third in the next draft.

But there's nothing at all wrong with mixing first and third in the same novel. A boatload of exceptionally good novels have been written this way.

Aggy B. · Jan 14, 2015

SwallowFeather said:
Yeah, I used to do the 1-chapter-per-POV thing, which is a really nice way of making things clear, but because of how much I've got to cover, this book has to be tight, tight, tight. So there'll be some quick switching, which is one of the reasons I want the voices to be recognizable--it'll help the reader know who's who.

Do you think a close 3rd is really almost like 1st, though? I used to, but I am finding more differences as I go on...

It all depends on how deep you write. I tend for very deep 3rd person where the narrator is right in the character's head. This means the narrative tone will shift between characters because the characters' voices and observations are different from each other. (This also means vocabulary and sentence structure in the narrative are different depending on the POV character.)

I have also been told that's wrong. That an external narrator must always sound like itself. I have deliberately chosen to have varying narrative voices in 3rd person, depending on the POV character. YMMV.

heza · Jan 14, 2015

Aggy B. said:
I have also been told that's wrong. That an external narrator must always sound like itself.

I've heard this before, but I feel like I've been told it about omniscient third.

ohheyyrach77 · Jan 14, 2015

I don't have a ton of advice but I thought I'd do a little cheerleading.

I had a similar situation with my nano back in November. I ALWAYS write in the first person but my nano had two MC's who were equally important. Certain scenes I wanted his POV and others I wanted hers. I tried briefly to do one chapter in her POV and the next in his but it just didn't work out. So I finally caved and committed to writing in the third person.

It was an adjustment, yes. I found I did have a ly problem but it was good that I recognized the problem, almost any time I ended a word in the dreaded ly I could usually reconstruct the sentence to avoid it.

Honestly, this third person POV is actually I really, truly believe the best work I've done yet. So don't get discouraged.

rwm4768 · Jan 14, 2015

I agree with BethS. I'd keep the one character in first person and write everyone else in third. It's not that unusual of a technique.

Jamesaritchie · Jan 14, 2015

Aggy B. said:
I have also been told that's wrong. That an external narrator must always sound like itself. I have deliberately chosen to have varying narrative voices in 3rd person, depending on the POV character. YMMV.

Whoever told you that was wrong. I suspect it's impossible to write third limited exactly like first person, and your narrator is not in the POV character's head. Only first person can do this. But voice still can, and should, come through.

I do get tired of hearing about "deep" third, as if there's such a thing as shallow. "Deep" really has no meaning.

Axl Prose · Jan 14, 2015

Go read some books in 3rd person by some good authors, where they use multiple pov's. If you do that, I promise you will find that 3rd can be almost as effective as first.

BethS · Jan 14, 2015

Jamesaritchie said:
I do get tired of hearing about "deep" third, as if there's such a thing as shallow.

I think there is. It's a measure of POV distance. The viewpoint camera can travel far (deep) into a character's psyche, giving the reader full access into who that character is in his deepest self, or it can stay near the surface, showing or describing only a little of the character's thought processes. By that measurement, the objective POV would be the most shallow of all, because it never enters the head of any character. But shallow, in that context, doesn't mean superficial or lacking depth or nuance.

SwallowFeather · Jan 14, 2015

Wow, this is a really active board. That's great. Nice to meet you all, etc. And thank you very much for all your thoughts.

Maybe I should share why I'm not going to mix 1st and 3rd. I do hear what you're saying (to some extent... we can maybe have that conversation later?), but here's the story: the first book in this series was in third. The second, focused on a different main character in the same unfolding historical situation, was in first--the one I described. I cleared this with my editor ahead of time.

My editor then left for a better offer. My new editor told me (after I completed the first draft) to switch to third for "consistency." And also, let's face it, because she didn't like my character voice. I put my foot down and the managing editor assigned me a new editor who did like my voice. She told me it was OK to keep it in first because it was good. It was very clear that she was making an exception and this publisher is not into that sort of thing.

Maybe folks who are published could enlighten me on how common it is to be that conservative, because this is the only publisher I've worked with. They're a Christian publisher which may have something to do with it. They certainly seem to think their audience is easily "jarred."

The other thing is that in this particular novel mixing third and first would be jarring to anybody. The narrator from Book 2 is going to be a secondary character, perhaps the least central POV, and I'm going to switch POVs frequently in each chapter for a fast-paced story with a good deal of action. (It's a WWII story in France with Jewish teens hiding from the Nazis.) Add in the fact that though I try to be literary in the sense of writing good prose this is definitely not Literary Fiction, and there you are. I think, given the minor role of Previous Narrator, the people who liked her will forgive me. I think they would forgive me less if I cut her, because I kinda foreshadowed that she'd be smuggling some kids to Switzerland in this book.

This post is long enough, so I'll post it and try to write another interacting with all your good 3rd-person advice a little later. Thank you all for offering it!

Roxxsmom · Jan 14, 2015

I suspect the "values laden" nature of the word shallow (as the natural opposite of the word deep) is the reason why some people use the terms close versus distant third (or tight versus loose third) instead. Writers don't really have standardized language to describe things like pov, narrative distance, and so on. Even when terms are pretty standard (show don't tell, for instance), people don't necessarily use/mean them in the same exact way.

This is probably one of the most frustrating things about being a budding writer. Knowing when people are actually saying the same things with different terminology rather than disagreeing about something.

SwallowFeather said:
Maybe folks who are published could enlighten me on how common it is to be that conservative, because this is the only publisher I've worked with. They're a Christian publisher which may have something to do with it. They certainly seem to think their audience is easily "jarred."

Not coming from a place of personal experience here, but it's my understanding that publishing houses or imprint that specifically call themselves Christian have a pretty set interpretation of what that actually means and they do indeed have tighter restrictions than you find in other genres (or publishing demographics). If you want to work with them, you probably do need to toe the line, especially if you're a first-time author.

But every publisher (and editor) will have their likes and dislikes, based at least in part on what they think will work for what they see as your book's target audience.

It's certainly possible to write a third person story where the voice and personality of the character is present in the narrative, but if your editor disliked your character's voice in first person, he or she probably won't like it if you take a "deep" or "close" approach to writing in third person with that character.

Mr Flibble · Jan 14, 2015

SwallowFeather said:
My editor then left for a better offer.

I had that happen to me at a small press, and it sucked. The new editor clearly didn't like it as much as the old and...yeah. But! It can work really well. New eyes and all that.

Maybe folks who are published could enlighten me on how common it is to be that conservative, because this is the only publisher I've worked with. They're a Christian publisher which may have something to do with it. They certainly seem to think their audience is easily "jarred."

It doesn't sound usual to me, but tbh, it doesn't sound like it's beyond the realms of possibility. Christian publishers have a raft of stuff to consider that a more general imprint does not. (What those things are often escapes me as I'm not Christian!) Possibly they are very sensitive to what their readership likes. Maybe they are only working on what they *think* their readership likes. It may be worth probing, diplomatically, with your editor as to what the sticking point is.

All that said, you can absolutely get a great deal of the same voice in third. It won't sound as...cosy? Intimate? But it can sound just as voicy. Some of my third characters have as many or more asides etc as my firsts. So it can be done, but it'll have a slightly different feel.

It depends on whether this is the battle you want to pick?

Unimportant · Jan 14, 2015

Jamesaritchie said:
I suspect it's impossible to write third limited exactly like first person, and your narrator is not in the POV character's head. Only first person can do this.

Dunno. Have you read Stacia Kane's Chess Putnam series? It's third person, but the narrator is most definitely the POV character; the book reads exactly like first, only with different pronouns.

SwallowFeather · Jan 14, 2015

Roxxsmom said:
I suspect the "values laden" nature of the word shallow (as the natural opposite of the word deep) is the reason why some people use the terms close versus distant third instead. Writers don't really have standardized language to describe things like pov, narrative distance, and so on. Even when terms are pretty standard (show don't tell, for instance), people don't necessarily use/mean them in the same exact way.

Yes, I think this is a good conclusion to the close vs. deep debate: they are different words for the same thing, but maybe it's true that "close/distant" is a less potentially misleading way of saying it.

We should have a conversation sometime about misuses & misconceptions of show don't tell, I have ALL THE THOUGHTS about this. Not today. Gotta ration myself & actually have time to write.

I'm trying to write myself into a new character just now by writing some rambling thoughts & memories of his in first-person, so I just "translated" a passage of this that I rather liked into third. It's... pretty good. Mm, OK, I just did another, mentally, and it's just fine. And it was definitely voicy.

I think something that's coming clear in my head now is this: the things you can't do in third-person don't have to do with how close you are to the character, but with the nature of the character's relationship with the reader. There's a trust, or lack of trust, that grows between the two. Someone telling you their story, that's a different animal in some ways than someone telling someone else's story. I mean, a 3rd-person narrator certainly can't inform the reader that he's going to tell them what really happened because he's sworn never to lie anymore!

I fell in love with that direct address to the reader, but I think maybe what I'd forgotten is that that's not everything voice is, and it's not necessary to voice. This can be a really good book without it. In fact it might be inappropriate in some ways here. My previous novel was really a character study in a lot of ways--it used first to really go deeply into one person's subjective world, and let you see her distorted perspective and then see it get corrected. Multiple POVs give you different angles on events till you might get some approximation of objectivity. In this case there'll be a lot about the contrast in the way you see things depending on whether you have safety & power--whether you're the person at risk & in hiding or the "rescuer." Maybe a little distance is needed for that. Trying to get the reader into this special, trusting relationship with each POV character sounds like too much of a tangle.

I also think maybe the "history" I related about editors, etc, might have given me a bit of a mental block about 3rd. I was so angry about the idea of rewriting that book when I'd put so much into the very thing they wanted me to take out.

OK, it's officially too late at night (by young-mom standards) for me to make any further sense of this, but I think it's a start.

Thank you all very much for helping me think this through, and for the cheerleading.

quicklime · Jan 14, 2015

welcome to aw, swallow. let's look at your stuff, and my thoughts, a bit at a time:

SwallowFeather said:
My problem is, I've fallen in love with first-person POV, and my next book has to be third. It has to, because it has 3 to 5 POVs! (On the, ah, other writing forum I just came from, everyone's always going "Oh just do multiple 1st, or mix 1st and 3rd!" and it drives me up the wall. You're not going to do that, right? Pretty please?) again,, my thoughts, but I think they're telling you that because it makes sense. You can choose to "do it your way" like Sinatra, I don't get a cookie or free toaster oven for converting you, but I will say this: Very, very many newbies assume they need, for whatever reason, to do some particular thing some particular way. They're often wrong, and worse, they also often choose their path for the wrong fucking reasons. Are you new? I don't know. But that's a recurring theme here. There is no reason I can fathom that you can't flip a first to third and vice versa, besides choice. And choice is fine, but if that's the case, own it. For us, and moreso for yourself. It will help you to write knowing your honest reasons. Even if they are "cause I freakin want to!"

I did my previous book in 1st, and I loved my narrator's voice. She talked directly to the reader (not breaking 4th wall, just rhetorical stuff) and she would do asides on what she thought about people, and there'd be subtext in there about what kind of person she really was versus what she thought she was, and as her character changed there was a newly growing sense of honesty and directness in her narration and less hedging, and I just loved doing that.
this is all good and well, but I sincerely doubt you can't do these things in third. They may be a BIT harder to do at all, but about equally hard to do well. As an example, King has a LOT of racist folks, and it is never "Jim thought all Irish were lazy drinkers," it is dialogue "Off to your whiskey, my bog-trotting friend" or asides that are still part of the narration, just in third "Tommy was late, but that wasn't a shock: the fucker was Irish, if he wasn't smacking the wife around, he was plowing through his screw-top wine, and a fellow only had so many hours in the day, so how could such a dedicated piece of shit possibly arrive on time?"

In either case, you can show just as much personality in third as first. First, badly, might be easier, but if you handle either one with any finesse, you can also do the other.

She is one of the POVs in this new book, and I'm not greatly looking forward to doing her in 3rd, but beyond that... I do truly believe that you can get just as deeply into a character with 3rd, but voice seems to be another matter. As I start writing myself into my 3 to 5 new POVs I'm still trying to put my finger on how much far I can go into voice compared to my 1st-person novel. again, imho, EVERY bit as deep. Read "every Shallow Cut" by Tom Piccirilli, for example, and you have supremely bitter guy, in first, but the narrative is written in such a way that you could flip pronouns to third and still have every single bit the same feel--none of it resorts to "I felt" or "i thought." Nor does Pic write them "he thought." Because the person who "thinks" these things may be wrong, and fucked up, but they're also certain; that's the tragedy of prejudice in general, it is letting one's certainty hop into bed with their own ignorance. So there is no, in forst OR third, "Bill thought." There is only the things they are certain of, and which color their view of the world. "Mitch took the last cookie, but everyone knew the fat bastard would." versus "Andy thought Mitch would take the last cookie, Mitch was fat and Andy assumed this meant he was greedy and slovenly."

I'm noticing how much easier it is to slip into "writerly" prose in 3rd, and trying to figure out where the boundaries are. definitions vary, I tend to use "writerly" as shorthand for overly self-aware, florid, and/or pretentious......if that's the case then learn to just tell the story....no matter the POV. It will only strengthhen your writing in EITHER POV.

In 1st, for instance, it's abundantly clear that you mustn't use a metaphor that would be out of character (poetic when your character is practical, etc.) So should I apply that rule just as strictly in third? yes. maybe not to omni, but in third you are STILL relaying the pov character's thoughts and impressions and voice. Should I write only sentences that I could hear my character saying? generally I'd say yes; again third and omni are very different things I'm trying to think this through right now. I feel it's very important for these POV characters to have unique and distinct voices, which they can in third as welland I also feel like voice is really important for showing character, and even character change (like I talked about above.) which they can in third But I don't know whether I can do quite as much with 3rd as I did with 1st, and whether I should try.

Does anyone have experience with this, or thoughts?

first/third really is mostly pronoun usage. Yes, there is some extra nuance, but I believe the idea one can better capture voice is entirely false. I think a lot of your issue may b e that you're thinking of some variant of omni, where you have an external narrator--any good third shows voice of whomever is being written about...

Celimlodyn · Jan 17, 2015

I'll start by saying I almost always prefer 3rd person to 1st. So maybe I'm biased.

But you say this:

Someone telling you their story, that's a different animal in some ways than someone telling someone else's story. I mean, a 3rd-person narrator certainly can't inform the reader that he's going to tell them what really happened because he's sworn never to lie anymore!

And I want to ask, 'Why not?' The only thing I can think of right now that first person can do that third can't is address the reader directly as 'you'.

Unless I'm misunderstanding, what it sounds like you're talking about is the difference between the character and the narrator. But the character can be the narrator in 3rd as well as in 1st.

Compare: I ain't gonna lie ~~to you~~. I swore I'd never lie to no one. "I hate that woman," I shouted. "I truly do."
to: She wasn't gonna lie. She'd sworn she'd never lied to no one. "I hate that woman," she shouted. "I truly do."

Roxxsmom · Jan 17, 2015

Unimportant said:
Dunno. Have you read Stacia Kane's Chess Putnam series? It's third person, but the narrator is most definitely the POV character; the book reads exactly like first, only with different pronouns.

First can vary in narrative depth as well. A story told by someone looking back on a situation years later (and with lots of perspective that they wouldn't have had at the time) will feel very different from a first-person tale where the narrative literally feels like it's unfolding as things happen (even if it's in past tense).

I lunged for his throat. At the time, I didn't know about his shielding brooch. Imagine my amazement when my blade turned aside, screeching and sparking as if it had hit a brick wall.

vs

I lunged for his throat, but my blade turned aside, screeching and sparking as if it had hit a brick wall. What in the hells? Magic. It had to be. But how?

It's even possible to have an omniscient first-person narrator (Kurt Vonnegut's Galapagos comes to mind).

As I understand it, third versus first person (or second person, for that matter) designates how the narrator uses pronouns, not the narrative perspective or depth itself.

Calliea · Jan 17, 2015

Celimlodyn said:
I'll start by saying I almost always prefer 3rd person to 1st. So maybe I'm biased.
But you say this:
And I want to ask, 'Why not?' The only thing I can think of right now that first person can do that third can't is address the reader directly as 'you'.

Unless I'm misunderstanding, what it sounds like you're talking about is the difference between the character and the narrator. But the character can be the narrator in 3rd as well as in 1st.

Compare: I ain't gonna lie ~~to you~~. I swore I'd never lie to no one. "I hate that woman," I shouted. "I truly do."
to: She wasn't gonna lie. She'd sworn she'd never lied to no one. "I hate that woman," she shouted. "I truly do."

First person narrator by no means has to break the 4th wall or address the reader directly. I've never heard about that being the primary reason to choose it.

To me, it sounds much more in the character's head. Afaik it's completely personal, and to some people there's no difference between experiencing 1st person POV and a deep 3rd one.

But when I read something like:

The cow field burned before my eyes. I could count the purple spirits rising into the sky. The tragedy was hard to comprehend.

I feel the narrator feel the tragedy, I feel it's their tragedy to feel, and the action unfolds right before my eyes.

When it's simply:

The cow field burned before her eyes. She could count the purple spirits rising into the sky. The tragedy was hard to comprehend.

I see the character standing in front of the field, but I'm further away. I watch it more from a bird's perspective, than standing right where she is.

If that makes any sense.

Thoughts on voice in 3rd person vs 1st person POV?

Oops I just swallowed a feather

A Gentleman of a refined age...

Oops I just swallowed a feather

They've been very bad, Mr Flibble

Þæt wæs god cyning

Not as sweet as you think

Awesome.

practical experience, FTW

Oops I just swallowed a feather

Beastly Fido

They've been very bad, Mr Flibble

No COVID yet. Still masking.

Oops I just swallowed a feather

all out of fucks to give

Beastly Fido

Hush, hush...