aurorawatcherak "I hold it, that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical."
It’s coming! After a bit of a struggle with the scheduled book in the “What If Wasn’t” series, I decided to work on the next book in the “Transformation Project” series – “Corralling Liberties”. Having survived the apocalypse, Emmaus sends a delegation to the constitutional convention, only to discover that someone doesn’t want the end of the world as they knew it to stop.
It’s in final editing phase now and will go to formatting soon, so it’s time to reveal the cover.
And not to worry. The next book in “What If Wasn’t” is back on track and publish toward the end of the year.
Do you have advice for changing perspective? For example, switching from writing exclusivly in third person and switching to first person? Or do you have a reason for staying with the perspective you do?
Rules:
1. Link your blog to this hop.
2. Notify your following that you are participating in this blog hop.
3. Promise to visit/leave a comment on all participants’ blogs.
4. Tweet/or share each person’s blog post. Use #OpenBook when tweeting.
5. Put a banner on your blog that you are participating.
For a long time, I wrote exclusively in the third-person viewpoint. I just could never get comfortable with the first-person view. It’s why Daermad Cycle and Transformation Project series are written in third-person viewpoint. I do switch character viewpoints, but I originally felt weird trying to write character thoughts rather than actions. I think this was a holdover from my reporter’s training, although I also wrote fiction when I was a reporter, so maybe it’s just how my brain works.
Or used to work.
Advantages of Third Person
There’s something to be said for being an omniscient narrator. You can feed information to the reader about every character and situation, even when the individual characters are unaware of the greater circumstances. You can even provide information that none of the characters knows. Many writers who write in first-person concentrate solely on one character, so there is a lot they don’t know unless they’re present for every pivotal scene, which I find unrealistic and awkward, not to mention you can’t know another character’s thoughts or motivations. The main characters is left with no way of gaining access to other characters’ states of mind.
I like to have more than one viewpoint character and for many years, the “experts” said if you were going to write in first-person, you had to concentrate on one character or you’d confuse the reader. I think novel writers have evolved beyond that sort of rote rule and readers have embraced that.
First Person
Although I struggle through some first-person perspective work in creative writing courses, I didn’t really embrace the POV until I was writing a short story for a libertarian anthology and found I really needed to cut several thousand words to meet the submission guidelines. Because it was a short story, I only had one viewpoint character. It was an alternative history and in third person, it had a lot of explanatory narratives. When I cut the explanatory narrative, the story felt incomplete. So I experimented and wrote the first scene in first-person. Written from Lai’s perspective, I could avoid explaining some things and just express his feelings about them. And those thousands of extraneous words just disappeared. The resultant short story became one of the anchors of Echoes of Liberty, an anthology by Agorist Writers Workshop.
You know how sometimes you try something for a particular reason and you like it so much, you want to expand it to all of your writing?
I had a problematic work-in-progress that would become the What If Wasn’t series. I didn’t like it in third-person. There was too much explaining of feelings. It’s a young-adult novel and that just didn’t feel right. Peter should feel his emotions, not have a narrator explain them. Show, don’t tell, right? So I tried rewriting it in first-person. It still didn’t feel right and a beta reader said “You need the perspective of others in here.” Well, that was the whole point of writing it in third-person. Peter is part of a community of characters and his actions affect them all. But I really liked the first-person perspective, so I took another run at it.
The more I played with it, the more comfortable I became with writing multiple viewpoints in first-person, just sticking with one character in every chapter which I clearly label. I was basically doing what I had been doing in third-person but with much more intimacy. I have now written three of the novels in multiple-character first-person viewpoint and I like it. My beta readers like it. I’ve gotten messages from readers saying they like it. It makes a faster story that can express feelings and inner dialogue so much better than third-person can. Multiple-character first-person allows for richer character development without devolving into head-hopping. Humans are complex and fictional characters must be complex as well to be believable. A primary goal in fiction is to engage the reader — to make them feel like they could be there in the action. A great way to do that is to put them in the head of the viewpoint character.
I wish sometimes that I could go back and rewrite the other two series in multiple-character first-person, but that would be way too much work and might throw off already engaged readers. It is a jolt though, every time I go from first-person back to third-person. It’s an adjustment I have to deliberately make.
But, hey, I bill myself as a multi-genre writer, so why not also a multi-perspective writer? I wonder what my fellow blog-hoppers are thinking on this subject.
Texting is a free-for-all in books, especially the e-book field. It’s not writing, but it’s not narrative. And there were lots of options when I researched it. So, I invented my own texting for my books.
In print books, I give them their own font, different enough to be distinctive. In ebooks, you can really do that, so I type the name of the texter in ALL CAPS and bold and then I put the text itself in bold italics. That works great for single texts, but I often have text conversations. I indent the reply, put the name in all caps and bold and the text in bold italics. It looks pretty good.
JAZZ – Where are you? The natives are getting restless.
SHANE – What do you mean? It’s a convention of government nerds.
JAZZ – They’re screaming at one another and bringing up crap that happened before the Bombs.
SHANE – So the tribes are banging their drums. I wish I was there. Sounds entertaining.
JAZZ – You like living dangerously. Mike’s worried.
SHANE – Coming.
It’s simple and makes it clear this is not dialogue or a letter.
aurorawatcherak 