Should I change from past to present tense to state a fact that continues into the present and is unyielding?
Within narration in past tense, should a statement of a universally true fact be in past tense or in present tense? For example, in the short text:
It was late afternoon in Zubrin. The air was perfect and the breeze was light. The sky glowed with the brilliance of Saturn's exotic face, a face that hung almost directly overhead and moved very little. This was due to the fact that, like Earth's moon, Titan's rotation is synchronous in its orbit. One side always faces the planet. It was a spectacular sight when the climate shield was high.
Is "is synchronous" correct, or should it be "was synchronous"? And then, "one side always faces" or "one side always faced" the planet.
I think this is more of a stylistic choice. Personally I disagree with Galastel and would keep consistency of tense. The …
5y ago
Yes, if the narrator is in the present telling a story about the past. The narrative is telling a story about somethin …
5y ago
General truths, such as "the earth is round" should be in present tense. Applying the past tense to such a statement wou …
5y ago
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/41059. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
3 answers
I think this is more of a stylistic choice. Personally I disagree with Galastel and would keep consistency of tense. The switch to present seems like the narrator is suddenly giving me a lecture rather than explaining a scene. If you think this passage
This was due to the fact that, like Earth's moon, Titan's rotation was synchronous in its orbit. One side always faced the planet.
sounds awkward, it's probably because it's too wordy and exposition-y rather than a tense issue. You could probably just cut it. This
It was late afternoon in Zubrin. The air was perfect and the breeze was light. The sky glowed with the brilliance of Saturn's exotic face, a face that hung almost directly overhead and moved very little. It was a spectacular sight when the climate shield was high.
sounds perfectly fine to me. Does the reader really need to know about Titan's synchronous orbit to appreciate the scene?
(Also, strictly speaking, no statement is universally true. There will come a time when Titan's orbit stops being synchronous. Your hypothetical readers then would find your present tense description of Titan rather jarring.)
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/41063. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
Yes, if the narrator is in the present telling a story about the past.
The narrative is telling a story about something that has already happened. So it's in past tense.
But then the narrative pulls you, the reader, aside to tell you something about the setting. And you know in this case it's just for the reader, because someone who lives in the Saturn system wouldn't know enough about the Earth system to use it as the base reference.
Using present tense is correct because the moons still exist, even though the story is over.
If the narrator is less personable and just simply describing, then using past tense is correct.
Frankly, either one will work. It's just a matter of how you are framing the story.
0 comment threads
General truths, such as "the earth is round" should be in present tense. Applying the past tense to such a statement would imply that the statement is not universally true, or might no longer be true.
Compare:
Winter is cold.
A general statement about the nature of winter,
to:
That winter was cold.
Implication being that other winters might not have been equally cold.
to:
It was winter, and thus - cold.
Which implies that winters are cold, but now might not be winter.
If you wrote "Earth was round", I would understand that either Earth might no longer exist, or it might no longer be round.
0 comment threads
0 comment threads