Is it OK to refer to some characters by first name and to others by last name?
I'm writing the outline for my first novel, which has three main characters. I'm very happy with their names, however I recently noticed that I was naturally referring to the first two by first name, but to the third one by his last name. I think it is because 1) I like that last name, which is a very strong and rare one, and 2) it is the name of someone I've known for long and who I've always addressed as "Mr Last-Name."
The story is a thriller involving two members of the mafia and one old tired french cop, if it has any relevance to the question.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/4146. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
3 answers
You are accessing this answer with a direct link, so it's being shown above all other answers regardless of its score. You can return to the normal view.
In a variation of "Keep it consistent," you may change the reference to the character from last name to first if:
- The character is not the main character, and the main character's perception of this character changes. For example, your main character is a college student and the professor refers to all the students by last name. So she knows all her classmates as Smith, Jones, Johnson, etc. As you are writing about Jane meeting "Smith," you should refer to him as "Smith." Once Jane gets to be friends with him, you can change the references to "David," because her perspective on him has changed. (David Eddings was very subtle about this in the Belgariad; he referred to Belgarath as "Old Wolf" or "Mister Wolf" for at least a book or so until Garion learns that Belgarath is his ultimate grandfather, at which point the narration switches over to "Belgarath.")
- The character thinks of himself differently in different situations. At work, he thinks of himself as "Doctor Smith." At home, he thinks of himself as "Scott." (You still have to be consistent within a scene, however, unless something home-related happens at work and he would think of himself more in home-terms than work-terms.)
0 comment threads
It is one of those things that are a matter of personal taste. Sometimes referring to a character by its surname implies things - eg that they are inferior or superior to their peers depending on context, that they are old schoolfriends from the type of school where people are known by their surnames, that they are mysterious and don't reveal their first name to anyone, and so on. While consistency is good, you could also have a character whose last name is generally used except by one other character, implying a higher degree of intimacy between those two. But yes, you can call them by first or last names, or a mixture, as you feel correct.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/4151. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
Here's a set of guidelines I really like:
- You can refer to each character by the moniker most appropriate to him, so long as you use the same one consistently. Readers will happily accept any name that seems appropriate; the important thing is not to confuse them by referring to one individual by a dozen different tags.
- You can have different characters refer to an individual by different monikers, so long as they do so consistently. This is a natural detail in relationships - "Captain Jon Smith" is "Jon" to his friends, "Smith" to his boss, "Captain Smith" when he's introduced in polite society, and either "Captain" or "Ol' Waxwhiskers" to his subordinates, depending whether or not he's in earshot. But again - each character is consistent in their own name for this individual.
- For this purpose, narration is a point-of-view, so when you're referring to him in narrative (rather than a character mentioning him in dialogue), the name should be consistent, and probably should be the name you'd most like the reader to associate with the character, for whatever reasons or preferences of your own.
- If a single character is going to be addressed by several different names over the course of the story, then it's a good idea to introduce the character by his full name (and title, nicknames, etc.) the first time we read about him. e.g.:
Today was Captain Jon Smith's first day aboard the _H.M.S. Ratatouille_.Then you can slip right in to your chosen moniker ("What a great ship," Smith thought to himself, when he was interrupted - a kid was running towards him, yelling, "Captain! Captain! Come quick!"), confident that from then on, the reader will be able to identify the character from any of a variety of references. (Without that, your references could be choppy and confusing - consider:"So, first day onboard, eh, Jon?" said Bob. It was a nice ship, Smith had to admit - but just then, a kid burst out of nowhere, running towards him and yelling, "Captain! Captain!").
In conclusion, there's no problem referring to the third character differently then the other two, particularly since you like the name better and (it seems) feel that it suits the character well. Just be consistent in how he's referred to, and you're good to go.
0 comment threads
0 comment threads