Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/37640
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

A narrator can mix up past and present tense without issues, especially if the narrator is telling a story now about events that happened in the past, but is giving their thoughts as to what they think now after the events have occurred. This way, you can disagree with actions taken by characters, or demonstrate certain actions were carried out based on wrong information etc. It's a very useful trick that can help the reader understand that characters have made the wrong assumptions.

Consider your two different versions: in the first, the narrator sounds like they're making a judgment in the present tense about an event that happened. In the second example, the narrator is revealing what they though at the time of the event itself (or they're revealing what someone else thought at the time).

There is no issue with either interpretation, but it only makes sense depending on which is correct in terms of your narrator's relationship to the story itself i.e. are they involved in the events, or are they telling a story that they know about, but weren't involved in.

The only way this would prevent getting published is if it becomes so muddled that it's never clear when the narrator made their judgment, or if you mix up when the judgment was made and subsequent actions e.g. in one part of the story you suggest the narrator is making a judgment in retrospect, but later in the story, the narrator or someone carries out an act in the past based on that judgment.

Original score: 3