[POLL] First vs. Third Person?

[bury the year]

Not sure this is something for Literature or here, but since I'm asking in terms of what you guys prefer as writers it'll go here. Anyways, recently I've been experimenting with first-person when writing, and I've found it offers a lot more in terms of getting into a character's head. Heck, if you have two characters, you can alternate their POVs between chapters and have twice the fun. But, that's just me. Which do you prefer from a writing standpoint and why?

[.Rai]

Both have their great advantages. I usually love more writing based on filling out backstory and environment so third person is ideal for my style. Just for the omnipresent, and omniscient, view.

First person, of course, is better for characterisation and other things for personality. I've always loved the concept of alternating POV between chapters.

But second person writing is a whole new subject. There are a few books that do it well. Not sure what they were called, but amazingly written.

[Dr. Cakey]

Third-person is usually better. The two prime problems with first-person are a) can't reveal information the character doesn't know, and everything in the story is filtered through the mind of the character, so it commonly gets less...impact might be the right word.

...er... b )

[Cozmosus]

I, as a reader, prefer reading things that are written it first person, but I like to write in third person. I've tried writing in first person before, and my story started off great. I could really write it realistically, since the character was being portrayed as me, but as I got farther in, his thoughts as a character began to lean towards my thoughts as a writer, and not as a person, making his thinking unrealistic. Then I just got bored. Third person just gives me more creative freedom in what I am writing. First person is always much harder to write for than third person, but of written well, it can be amazing.

[Hydra of Ages]

I find writing first person more natural, but third is more practical; as such, I tend to the former for my more recreational writing, and the later when it's a bit more serious.

They both have their advantages, of course. I tend to do a lot of character inner-commentary, which is far more awkward in third person.

[Agro]

For why first person can be amazing, read [i]Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close[/i]. Great book. Getting a movie soon too.

[AsianGuy1137]

First person is actually easier to develop since you won't have to find a way to describe things in an awkward narrative style. That's my preference since I like developing things a la stream of consciousness style where you can get a pretty good development of the plot, characterization, and setting from a more unique perspective than a generic description, but third person can accomplish the same thing with more effort. Both have their merits, so... I choose both, everybody wins!

[CrabHelmet]

First person is harder to do well, but also more rewarding. You can't cheat and reveal information your protagonist doesn't know, all information is delivered as the protagonist perceives it, and if your protagonist's personality is boring, the story will probably feel boring with it. On the other hand, if you can develop an enjoyable and engaging character voice, a first person narrator can be extremely rewarding, and it also lets you play fun games when your narrator's perception of reality - either because of their incomplete information or because of their skewed interpretation of information - does not match reality itself.

[Twig]

First person is easier for me since I like to characterize a lot.

[Smear]

I like to read and write in third person. I don't know, I just really like third person better. :L

[CrystalCyae]

I find writing well in first person extremely hard to achieve, but I prefer reading it in that way.
Third person is easier to write for me, but it is far easier to simply get left behind, because you know more than the protagonist, and it is harder to get a real feel of the characters.
I'll go a)

[Umbra]

I tend to write in third person,but I enjoy writing in the second.

[DARKPLANT RISING]

I have a habit of making my stories with several first persons, if that makes any sense.

Sorta like Bartimaeus, for example.

[Lunar Origins]

I myself find third person a bit boring, and second person pretty odd. First person just suits me.

[Catterjune]

I used to prefer third person, but then I found myself writing long winded exposition as opposed to moving the story along and I didn't like it. I'm stick with first for a while.

[The King of James]

I wish to state that I only have finished one first-person novel, and only three first-person short stories. As a reader I appreciate those who can effectively pull off a first-person perspective and make it seem realistic for the character's age, background, environment, and the events that occur around them. However, as a writer I can also appreciate the hard work that goes into making novels that keep the same perspective while not ruining the plot.

It is of course, incredibly difficult, and after having several of my reading-literate friends do a comparative review of the four first-person works I finished, alongside four of my favorite self-written and finished third-person works, the results were horrifying initially. While i received mixed reviews, as expected, I received much more positive feedback from those who reviewed my third-person works as opposed to my first-person works.

My first-person works either received minimal positive feedback, or only constructive criticism upon how to improve their quality. While all agreed that my organization, spelling, grammar and punctuation were nearly flawless in the eight works reviewed, the first-person works all lacked much in the way of personal impact and character emotion. One of my protagonists from the my first-person work "Terror Begets Despair" was described as "Apathetic in the midst of a cesspool of immorality".

By sheer contrast, my third-person novel, which I wrote as a prequel written after my first, named "The Four Races War", received the following common feedback from the three people who chose to review it, and I quote from the anonymous words of my first reviewer:

"The stunningly vivid descriptions of both scenery and the appearances of characters, both minor and major, was kept alive throughout the story by the change in the descriptions. Also, as the intricate yet fast-paced plot unravels the characters themselves all act in such realistic, reasonable ways, as well as making deep and difficult personal decisions, that to say the personas imposed by these characters are nearly as deep as that of real people, is only scratching the surface of even deeper truths about them." ~ Anonymous for identity security reasons.

The results of this review showed the differences in the skills I possess for writing first-person and third-person works, and because I place my heart and soul firmly into every story I create, as if it were to be my last ever, I can see the variance in difficulty level for effectively creating a masterpiece in both the first-person and the third-person literate arts.

Thus, I prefer to read a well-written first-person work over one that is third-person, because from my personal experience, to make a single-minded story into a masterpiece is much more difficult than it is to do so from an omnipotent view, such as that of the divine overseer known as the fiction author.

Before I give my closing words, I must also note that second-person work, which is written from the narrative of someone who is close to, or spends ample time with the protagonist, is something I have not practiced nor wish to, because it is the territory of those who wish to master an entirely different mindset as an author should they embark upon the long and difficult journey of life to accomplish a masterpiece from such a perspective.

However, many non-fictional works, such as biographies of people, are often written in second person, and in such masterful detail that an author must marvel at the wonderful, albeit mysterious brain, of the one who wrote the biography. Of course, I have not yet read nor heard of any autobiographies, or self-written biographies, that have been of any value when written from the second person perspective.

To write with competent detail and complete accuracy about oneself in the second-person view seems to be the epitome of improbability for a second-person story author, and with this knowledge, I know that this path is not the one I am on, nor one that I plan to take or stray to as I continue to read and write to the end of my days.

To my eyes, I see a clear road paved before me, in which I would prefer to master the fine art of novel creation, not just between the eyes of the omnipotent onlooker, but also in the shoes of the actual character, or in other words, third-person and first-person work, respectively.

With these words, I close my article.

Sincerely,


The King of James

[Alice Moonflowyr]

first person, definatly. Because Roger Zelazny.

[Thar]

I usually write in third person.

But first person I find enjoyable as well.

[Quiksilver]

I like to use both forms, but if I have to choose one over the other, I'd pick first person. Why?

Mainly, the amount of character development that can be achieved in first person as opposed to third person is astounding. It is more difficult to do, of course, with the writer having to constrict themselves to one point of view and thus having the entire story hinge on whether or not that POV conveys the story correctly. For this reason, many experienced writers will advise less experienced writers to use third person...or, at least, in the beginning. That last part seems to be forgotten, though, and suddenly - first person is something to avoided at all costs.

But I digress.

In any case, if done well, first person can be incredibly enjoyable to read. As was mentioned by a poster above me, playing with the writer's perception/giving them incomplete information can be a great plot device, once again if done correctly.

[Kaisu]

For me, it just depends, really.

I'm more used to third, but it all depends on the story I'm writing. I'll generally use third, but even then it's often just following a certain character. If I want impact or something that would show perspective, sometimes even just to trick the reader then I would use first. If it's a darker piece, then I'll use first often.

As a roleplayer and actor, I find it important to get into the heads of the character you're playing, be it in a thread or on a stage. First person helps you do that, but it can also cause some bias from your own perspective. But, I think I can manage it quite well.

Again, it depends on what I'm going for. If it's emotional, third person can just get awkward, but first person can have a lot of impact. On the other hand, writing in third can get tedious with exposition, at least for me.

So... Either or, really. But first person is a lot of fun.

[Northern Sage]

Could we start another poll with omniscient versus limited perspective too?
OT: Always preferred third person personally.

[Pichu]

I tend to alternate between the two. I find it better to write in third person.

[ordont]

Most of the novels I have read always assume the first person point of view because some consider that a story is best told that way. And while that can be totally right, having a third party point of view means that you can tackle and touch a lot other areas of concern that might find to be very helpful with how the story will move forward.

I prefer to write on the first person however.

[Shalltear Bloodfallen]

I don't know why but I've as far as I remember allways liked third person perspective much more than first person when both reading and writing