[Kiva]

Occasionally, I receive messages from members who are considering writing a story to post on FCF for the first time and ask me for advice. I recently had a nice discussion with a prospective writer about techniques for crafting stories. We thought it might be fun to share with the rest of the forum. I know this is basic primer to many of you, but everyone is welcome to share ideas, insights, or questions.

I am not an expert writer. I have published copyrighted nonfictional work related to my nursing profession. I once won a college short story contest, but that’s the extent of my writing career. I still make plenty of mistakes. We are all learning.

After you’ve outlined your story (more on this on another post), decide if you want your story told from the vantage point of a first- or third-person narrative.

First Person Narrative
The story is told from the perspective of one of the characters, usually, but not always, the main character. The narrator uses the pronouns “I’ and “me”.
Pros:
1.   Builds an intimate connection between the character and reader. If done well, readers will embrace the character by knowing his/her thoughts, feelings, observations, reactions, etc. The hope is that readers will want to join the character in the journey that lies ahead.
2.   High level of emotion and intensity. As the tension builds and the narrator faces conflict, the reader will experience the character’s ordeal. A fight scene could have a higher visceral level that might be more difficult to achieve with a third person narration.
Cons:
1.   Limited information. Since the story is told through the eyes of one character, only information that is known to that character can be provided to the reader. The story can only use scenes where the narrator is present. Any information about other characters or situations can only be provided through what the narrator knows or thinks. Thus, first person narrative may seriously restrict your story telling.
2.   May not easily accommodate complex backstories or world building.
3.   Need to find creative ways to avoid overuse of sentences beginning with “I”.

Third Person Narrative
Story is told by an impartial narrator who is not in the story. The narrator is “all knowing”. Information can be given to the readers that may not be available to the characters. Uses pronouns “he”, “she”. “they”, etc.
Pros:
1.   No limitations to what information is given. The writer may explore the minds and motivations of several characters. Permits complex interactions and relationships.
2.   Readers know more than any of the characters, which might be enjoyable as the action unfolds.
3.   Plots can develop more quickly. Easier to establish backstory and set-up for the action.
Cons:
1.   Readers might not have the same emotional connection to a character as in first person stories.
2.   Writer needs to decide which characters and scenes require focus. Stories that jump around to different scenes and have too many characters might be confusing.

My Take:
The majority of my stories use first person narration. I like my stories to be psychological and emotional. I chose first person for Nurses Eat Their Young, The Poacher series, Kiva’s Fight Journal (KFJ), The Better Woman, My Little Sherry and others. KFJ, in particular, is based on the “real life” me and I have great fun with the fictional Kiva. The Poacher series allowed me to explore secondary characters, like Brad’s lifelong relationship with Kristin as she fights Paula and Henry’s indifference of his wife’s fight when he learns she is a serial cheater. First person fits my preferred style of storytelling.
I will use third person narration at times. In If I Should Fall Behind, the dynamics between the four characters was critically important. For Waiting At The Door, the inter-relationships in the neighborhood and Margaret’s attitude and social standing allowed readers to form their own opinion of whether or not her dislike of Patsy and her family were justified and who they would like to see win the wrestling match. These were better communicated by an “omniscient” third person narrator.

My Advice:
For first time writers, use third person narration. Develop your skills in storytelling and characterization without the burden of limiting your story to one character’s point of view. In time, you will have fun really getting into the heads of your character in first person.

Next up: Present vs. Past tense

[rin753]

First person writing is problematic if you are a guy and your narrator is female.  So I suggest a female "nom de plume" if you really want to do that.

[Kiva]

First person writing is problematic if you are a guy and your narrator is female.  So I suggest a female "nom de plume" if you really want to do that.

Good point, Rich. A writer who identifies as male, but writing as a first person female POV might have difficulty in getting readers to suspend their disbelief. A man using a non de plume needs to be very careful to avoid the many errors I commonly see that indicate he’s not really a woman.

I think a first person male POV can tell a highly effective story. I tried this with two of The Poacher stories and My Little Sherry, and some of The Catpin Chronicles stories. It can be as simple as a husband watching his wife fight, then going through all the psychological ramifications as the action unfolds.

Btw, I think your The Diner series is an excellent example of how a third person narrative can be compelling. You did an excellent job capturing the nervousness and awkwardness of two women meeting for the first time, entering an arranged fight, then building it into a full blown competitive rivalry.

[rin753]

Btw, I think your The Diner series is an excellent example of how a third person narrative can be compelling. You did an excellent job capturing the nervousness and awkwardness of two women meeting for the first time, entering an arranged fight, then building it into a full blown competitive rivalry.

Thank you Kiva.  I chalk that success up to the blind squirrel/nut theory.

Rich

[Phoenix_Falcone]

It's an interesting discussion.  I have thought about how to blend and play around with perspective in my writing at times.

I'd agree that third person is the way to go for most beginners, unless you've witnessed something yourself and are writing a narrative around it.  I also tend to agree with the concept of writing as the opposite sex in first person.  You're at a natural disadvantage, but it can be done.

I tend to go down the 3rd person route, simply because I don't traditionally utilise an outline like a lot do.  My stories chop and change a lot during the writing process, and I tend to find that it gets very confusing with a first person viewpoint.  Mind you, the trap a few will get into, is having a fight with two women, and explaining what both are feeling, when the emphasis is on only one of the characters.  Like, for example, you're writing it as a narrator narrating one character's viewpoint, almost as if it's 1st person, but then providing context on both character's thoughts.  It doesn't really make sense for someone to know what the other person is thinking...

But yes, it's an interesting, and in a lot of cases, vitally important topic for budding writers.  And yes, like Kiva said, we are all learning.  I too have plenty to learn, especially as I try to work on new things and keep them fresh...

[Kiva]

I should briefly mention second person narration. This is rare in literature. The reader is immersed in the story as a character, referred to the narrator as “you.” The idea is for the story to feel intimate and can be fun ONLY if the reader buys into it. I don’t think there’s any particular advantage to first person narration and can feel awkward.

It might work as a customized story for specific readers. I once did an impromptu customized story in the chat room for a member about a man watching his wife fight. It had lines something like this:

You can barely see her face as she is trapped on her back with her opponent sitting on her chest. You watch her legs uselessly kick. “Come on Denise, you got this,” you scream, but your voice lacks conviction. You wonder if she hears you at all as her head is squeezed by her aggressor’s thighs, her arms trapped beneath knees. Briefly, the woman dominating you wife makes eye contact with you and smirks as if to say, “watch me finish her.” You call her name again. The leg kicks have slowed down, degenerating into uncoordinated random flailing. You feel a horrible knot in your stomach as you see the energy draining from her exhausted sweaty body.. Your face grimaces in despair as you struggle to deny the inevitable conclusion.

[sinclairfan]

I view the 1st person / 3rd person choice as an autobiography / documentary choice.

What I mean by that is:

The 6-part TV special, 'The Last Dance', on Michael Jordan's career, especially his 1998 final season with the Chicago Bulls, was an autobiography.

Among the important consequences of that choice were that:

<> Iffy topics, such as Jordan's gambling addictions, could be gracefully spun / explained away in the most favorable possible light to himself.

<> 'Supporting characters' such as Gary Payton, Charles Barkley, and Scottie Pippen who made the mistake of thinking they were appearing in a documentary came off as looking foolish; so much so in Pippen's case that his relationship with Jordan was permanently ruined.

<> The only two 'supporting characters' who were momentarily allowed to share the pedestal with Jordan were Phil Jackson and Steve Kerr;  Jackson because of the sheer weight of his own accomplishments post-Bulls, and Kerr due to a poignant personal parallel with Jordan--the tragic murder of each of their fathers (which, interestingly, each confess to never discussing IRL).

<> 'Supporting characters' who refuse to 'play along' with the autobiography format, such as Ron Harper and Luc Longley, are simply written out of history.  Harper's erasure is in at least two guises:  as Jordan's backcourt-mate on the Bulls, and as the Cleveland Cavalier who should have been guarding Jordan in the iconic 1989 Craig Ehlo shot.

So, what's the point?

If you write in the 1st person, you're writing an autobiography.  You get only the hero's perspective, but you know who the hero is.

If you write in the 3rd person, you're writing a documentary. 

[MikeHales67]

What you didn't mention was how much more real the characters become and how they almost 'talk' to you. I was writing a character and suddenly realised she was born in Shrewsbury was a big Ian Hunter fan and went to the same Ian Hunter concert in Manchester I went to. I wouldn't have realised all this if I had been writing this third person. It sometimes feels like the person is talkingt to you as much as telling a story. You can also add "What II found outr later.." sentences..

What is also a lot of fun is 'Unreliable first person' narratives, where the person telling the story is lying, missing stuff out and exaggerating! I had all the characters calling each other 'Ducking Coats' because the narrator didn't like swearing! I have  NO idea how good it was,  but it was just SO much fun to write!

Also, there's a 2nd person narrative, where instead of "I did this" it's "You do this", "You do that...", it has a lot of the intimacy of using "I" but with the added "But what you don't know is..." sentences. A write called Scarlett Morales  did a story called "THe Beach" in 2nd person narrative

[Nutmeg]

A couple things: If you don’t want to write in first person but do want to get in the mind of one character there is third person limited. In many ways it is similar to first person but has some advantages. Say your main is 18 years old but you want to use language that an 18 year old might not use but also want only her thoughts revealed. Third person limited would likely work better.

At least one author some of you may have heard of uses multiple third person limited perspectives in his books.  George RR Martin’s Game of Thrones / A Song of Ice and Fire is third person limited that changes perspective each chapter. This lets you into a variety of characters without odd exposition dumps “We aren’t so different you and I. Let me tell you MY motivation and backstory for 10 minutes”

An easy application to a fight story: One chapter features each of the two fighters and the fight itself could be from the perspective of an observer. The story told could be the feelings of both women going into it then how the fight itself is seen from the reason for it The man, woman, small dog etc.. they are fighting over. Does that person have a favorite, are they torn up by all this, are they just happy to see two crazy bitches fighting over them or are they annoyed they have to see this when neither really appeal to them? You could have the exact same action and tell very different tales.

Finally you could do third person where y absolutely no inner feelings or thoughts are revealed. I wouldn’t recommend it unless you really know what you want since this would be like doing a movie and can come across very detached.

I would also say it might be worth looking up if any writers you enjoy (likely off this site) do any blogs or discussion about how they write. I am a fan of Joe Lansdale and he seems to post now and then on what he does writing wise. A couple bits I recall: Enjoy what you are writing about or at least be excited by it. If not, you are just doing hard work.

 He mentioned an exercise to help you write more concisely. Write a few pages.  Come back in a day or so and rewrite the same thing but shorter.  Repeat until you feel you got what you wanted to say but now in a neat little package.

[FyreCracka]

  Kiva nails my thoughts on so much of this topic and it also a topic that I think about quite a bit. I will also say that I can pretty much find agreement with everyone else's posts as well as there really isn't a "wrong" or "right" way to write stories- though, I would say that Kiva's guide of Pros and Cons would make you better at your chosen style.

  For me, the biggest factor is "for what purpose" are you writing the story- especially, since most of us aren't getting paid for this and doing it as a hobby. For me, I love to emotionally explore and live vicariously through my stories- meaning they are primarily written for myself (and my husband) but some of my favorite things to do are to tease, entertain and weave in things that other people have asked me for or that I have figured out that readers like into my stories. Which is why I used to do requests and still try to do collaborations (Hi Kiva!). Since, I am primarily writing for myself (fitting for someone writing in 1st person, eh?), I would take any of my advice with a grain of salt.. especially since I'm probably the least technical writer in this thread.

  One of the things I have a love/hate relationship with is the "limited information" that occurs when writing in first person. Usually I do a ton of background work into creating my characters, venues, etc. a lot of the stuff doesn't get into the stories because story "Kelli" doesn't have access to the information.

 The reason I give everything such deep backgrounds is because I find it helps me to keep the characters logical, realistic and authentic. Besides extra character development, it the biggest reason I enjoy writing "The Catpin Chronicles" and the MvsM series. I get to use a lot of that stuff and practice writing from other perspectives (some are 1st person narrative and some are 3rd person narratives).

  Also, I do understand the possible issues with writing from the PoV of the opposite sex, but...
1. It can be fun and/or very interesting for someone who really like to "feel" their own stories. For example it wrote a story from my ex husband's perspective as I fought his wife. It still is one of my favorite stories, though it is one of the most emotionally challenging ones I've written (there's a lot of my real history on it).

2. If you really reason through the character and why "they do what they do" I doubt anyone will even notice since you're telling a compelling story.

And 3. Personally, I'm fascinated with the differences between men and women. Getting the opportunity to really climb into a man's head and try to think the way he thinks is too much fun... except my husband knows when I'm working on male pov stories because, evidently, I stare at him like I'm trying to psychoanalyze him. Which, of course, is exactly what I'm doing.

Oh dear... I'm rambling again. I think I just wrote 10% about different POV narrative styles and 90% about random Kelli thoughts.

In all seriousness though, I do think what you want to accomplish drives the style you choose. Do you want to see through someone's eyes and live a different life for a while? Do you want to imagine your perfect partner fulfilling your favorite fantasy or fetish? Do you want to tell an epic story full of world building and deeply developed characters? There definitely a style for whatever you're wanting to do.

My 2 cents.... plus about a $1.55 of other stuff. I really should look into that guy that shortens his stuff and makes it more concise... I should but I'm not gonna *sticks out tongue*
-Kelli

[Sinful Senorita Carmen]

honestly I would like both if a story were being made about one of my matches.   I could write it from the perspective of me in the ring or like to see how a witness sees it.  I have experimented with both at the same time when writing. 

[Kiva]

Thank you, all. I’m happy to see this topic generated interest. I appreciate all your comments and I pretty much agree with them. If you don’t write but enjoy reading stories, please feel free to comment and tell us what you like and why. I’ll start a new thread on another aspect about writing shortly.

[bigfan877]

Sometimes I'm just happy I can string words together to make a story.

An interesting one for me, was writing the View of Kelli's Lady Lone Star vs the Priestess. A rare time I wrote in the first person for a story, but determining what I could and could see from Kelli's description was fun, so I had to read the story to decide what I could comment on and what would have been out of view for me. Mostly I find the easiest thing for me is Third Person, when I can get the words to come out.

[MikeHales67]

Just had to add this on the Lonsdale advice.
It is true, I think, when you are writing exposition you really do need to cut out unnecessary clutter. Think "For sale: baby shoes, never worn."

HOWEVER
When writing a fight. You want to add details. If you cut out unnecessary details you end up with a list:
A punches B
B punches A
B pulls A's hair.

I tend to start out with the list (the Choreography as I think of it) and then you add details which make it mote vivid (I call this bit Colouring it in). I think Joe’s advice is excellent apart from this particular genre.

[Kiva]

Just had to add this on the Lonsdale advice.
It is true, I think, when you are writing exposition you really do need to cut out unnecessary clutter. Think "For sale: baby shoes, never worn."


HOWEVER
When writing a fight. You want to add details. If you cut out unnecessary details you end up with a list:
A punches B
B punches A
B pulls A's hair.

I tend to start out with the list (the Choreography as I think of it) and then you add details which make it mote vivid (I call this bit Colouring it in). I think Joe’s advice is excellent apart from this particular genre.

I agree, Mike. Fight scenes can be a challenge to write. Too little detail can make the fight narrative sound like a report on a news ticker tape. Too much detail can slow down the action. The aim is to write a scene that describes the facts of the fight while infusing the right amount of emotion, intensity, (and sexiness  ). I would love to devote an entire post on writing fight scenes.