Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Post History

66%
+2 −0
Q&A First or third person

I don't think readers notice 3rd person view as another character observing the MC. I have read many books written in 3PL (3rd person limited; narrator only knows the thoughts and feelings of the ...

posted 5y ago by Amadeus‭  ·  edited 5y ago by Amadeus‭

Answer
#5: Post edited by user avatar Amadeus‭ · 2020-02-08T11:25:30Z (almost 5 years ago)
  • I don't think readers notice 3rd person view as another character observing the MC.
  • I have read many books written in 3PL (3rd person limited; narrator only knows the thoughts and feelings of the MC, everything else is seen through the MC POV), and I recall scenes of masturbation, or celebration when alone and something great happens, or grief in solo, etc. I never lose my reading reverie and think "somebody is watching this girl crying alone in her room!" or anything close to that.
  • There are many things that **_do_** break my reading reverie, but that isn't one of them. I will tell you what one is though: Somebody that is supposed to be going through extreme trauma, physical pain or betrayal or confusion, being drugged or poisoned -- yet is strangely articulate and descriptive of their own chaotic state of mind, feelings, the situation, etc. That does not _feel_ realistic.
  • Because of that, I recommend 3PL, it offers more flexibility. The narrator can describe how the MC feels when the MC would not plausibly be able to do so.
  • We similarly don't mind the narrator describing settings and scenes in detail that it just isn't plausible for the MC to do in thoughts or impressions; because whatever the MC thinks, in images or words, takes **time** in-story. But the reader gets the sense that the narrator is exempt from time and outside of it, when it comes to descriptions of setting and scene, or description of characters or devices.
  • The narrator can tell us, at length, about what the MC _already knows_ without the MC having to consciously review what she already knows. Also about what the MC _has experienced_ without the MC having to consciously review it. It doesn't read like an authentic thought to say _I trained six years in Wing Tsun Kung Fu, at my father's insistence, always afraid I'd be raped, like his sister._
  • But it is fine if the narrator mentions something like that, and relates a paragraph about it, to provide details about what the MC already knows and experienced, so the reader is not blind-sided when the MC defeats two armed muggers in a few seconds, leaving them incapacitated in an alley. To me, it is far more difficult for a first-person narrator to do anything similar without it sounding awkward and unrealistic.
  • This is particularly true in **skills** the MC may have, like the martial arts example. In situations where we (humans) apply our skills, we don't think about the history or learning of them, we just **do** things. The whole point of martial arts training (particularly in the martial arts) is to build the moves and reactions into muscle memory, so we don't have to think about it, we just do it. Other skills, like typing, playing a musical instrument, operating various vehicles, are all the same.
  • A final difference is the problem of the reader being alienated by lines like "I did X" when in fact they would never do X, whatever it is. At times such lines remind them they are _reading_ in a way that "She did X" or "He did X" would not. Such lines can break reader immersion and create a mix in which sometimes the reader identifies with the MC as themselves, and sometimes is forced to not identify, and see the MC as somebody speaking to them. Whereas in 3PL, it is consistent and always "She did X", the reader is always the invisible observer, and the narrator basically disappears.
  • I believe most novels are written in 3P or 3PL for a good reason, it is because of the greater leeway it provides you as an author, that slight distance from the MC is useful. I think you will have an easier road to success if you do the same.
  • I don't think readers notice 3rd person view as another character observing the MC.
  • I have read many books written in 3PL (3rd person limited; narrator only knows the thoughts and feelings of the MC, everything else is seen through the MC POV), and I recall scenes of masturbation, or celebration when alone and something great happens, or grief in solo, etc. I never lose my reading reverie and think "somebody is watching this girl crying alone in her room!" or anything close to that.
  • There are many things that **_do_** break my reading reverie, but that isn't one of them. I will tell you what one is though: Somebody that is supposed to be going through extreme trauma, physical pain or betrayal or confusion, being drugged or poisoned -- yet is strangely articulate and descriptive of their own chaotic state of mind, feelings, the situation, etc. That does not _feel_ realistic.
  • Because of that, I recommend 3PL, it offers more flexibility. The narrator can describe how the MC feels when the MC would not plausibly be able to do so.
  • We similarly don't mind the narrator describing settings and scenes in detail that it just isn't plausible for the MC to do in thoughts or impressions; because whatever the MC thinks, in images or words, takes **time** in-story. But the reader gets the sense that the narrator is exempt from time and outside of it, when it comes to descriptions of setting and scene, or description of characters or devices.
  • The narrator can tell us, at length, about what the MC _already knows_ without the MC having to consciously review what she already knows. Also about what the MC _has experienced_ without the MC having to consciously review it. It doesn't read like an authentic thought to say _I trained six years in Wing Tsun Kung Fu, at my father's insistence, always afraid I'd be raped, like his sister._
  • But it is fine if the narrator mentions something like that, and relates a paragraph about it, to provide details about what the MC already knows and experienced, so the reader is not blind-sided when the MC defeats two armed muggers in a few seconds, leaving them incapacitated in an alley. To me, it is far more difficult for a first-person narrator to do anything similar without it sounding awkward and unrealistic.
  • This is particularly true in **skills** the MC may have, like the martial arts example. In situations where we (humans) apply our skills, we don't think about the history or learning of them, we just **do** things. The whole point of martial arts training (particularly in the martial arts) is to build the moves and reactions into muscle memory, so we don't have to think about it, we just do it. Other skills, like typing, playing a musical instrument, operating various vehicles, are all the same.
  • A final difference is the problem of the reader being alienated by lines like "I did X" when in fact they would never do X, whatever it is. At times such lines remind them they are _reading_ in a way that "She did X" or "He did X" would not. Such lines can break reader immersion and create a mix in which sometimes the reader identifies with the MC as themselves, and sometimes is forced to not identify, and see the MC as somebody speaking to them. Whereas in 3PL, it is consistent and always "She did X", the reader is always the invisible observer, and the narrator basically disappears.
  • I believe most novels are written in 3P or 3PL for a good reason, it is because of the greater leeway it provides you as an author, that slight distance from the MC is useful. I think you will have an easier road to success if you do the same.
#4: Attribution notice removed by user avatar System‭ · 2019-12-19T22:13:55Z (almost 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/48159
License name: CC BY-SA 4.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
#3: Attribution notice added by user avatar System‭ · 2019-12-08T13:01:22Z (almost 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/48159
License name: CC BY-SA 4.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
#2: Initial revision by (deleted user) · 2019-12-08T13:01:22Z (almost 5 years ago)
I don't think readers notice 3rd person view as another character observing the MC.

I have read many books written in 3PL (3rd person limited; narrator only knows the thoughts and feelings of the MC, everything else is seen through the MC POV), and I recall scenes of masturbation, or celebration when alone and something great happens, or grief in solo, etc. I never lose my reading reverie and think "somebody is watching this girl crying alone in her room!" or anything close to that.

There are many things that **_do_** break my reading reverie, but that isn't one of them. I will tell you what one is though: Somebody that is supposed to be going through extreme trauma, physical pain or betrayal or confusion, being drugged or poisoned -- yet is strangely articulate and descriptive of their own chaotic state of mind, feelings, the situation, etc. That does not _feel_ realistic.

Because of that, I recommend 3PL, it offers more flexibility. The narrator can describe how the MC feels when the MC would not plausibly be able to do so.

We similarly don't mind the narrator describing settings and scenes in detail that it just isn't plausible for the MC to do in thoughts or impressions; because whatever the MC thinks, in images or words, takes **time** in-story. But the reader gets the sense that the narrator is exempt from time and outside of it, when it comes to descriptions of setting and scene, or description of characters or devices.

The narrator can tell us, at length, about what the MC _already knows_ without the MC having to consciously review what she already knows. Also about what the MC _has experienced_ without the MC having to consciously review it. It doesn't read like an authentic thought to say _I trained six years in Wing Tsun Kung Fu, at my father's insistence, always afraid I'd be raped, like his sister._

But it is fine if the narrator mentions something like that, and relates a paragraph about it, to provide details about what the MC already knows and experienced, so the reader is not blind-sided when the MC defeats two armed muggers in a few seconds, leaving them incapacitated in an alley. To me, it is far more difficult for a first-person narrator to do anything similar without it sounding awkward and unrealistic.

This is particularly true in **skills** the MC may have, like the martial arts example. In situations where we (humans) apply our skills, we don't think about the history or learning of them, we just **do** things. The whole point of martial arts training (particularly in the martial arts) is to build the moves and reactions into muscle memory, so we don't have to think about it, we just do it. Other skills, like typing, playing a musical instrument, operating various vehicles, are all the same.

A final difference is the problem of the reader being alienated by lines like "I did X" when in fact they would never do X, whatever it is. At times such lines remind them they are _reading_ in a way that "She did X" or "He did X" would not. Such lines can break reader immersion and create a mix in which sometimes the reader identifies with the MC as themselves, and sometimes is forced to not identify, and see the MC as somebody speaking to them. Whereas in 3PL, it is consistent and always "She did X", the reader is always the invisible observer, and the narrator basically disappears.

I believe most novels are written in 3P or 3PL for a good reason, it is because of the greater leeway it provides you as an author, that slight distance from the MC is useful. I think you will have an easier road to success if you do the same.

#1: Imported from external source by user avatar System‭ · 2019-09-24T11:10:58Z (about 5 years ago)
Original score: 1