Printable View
Which perspective do you like best. The 1st, aka I do, 2nd, aka he/name does. Or third, the writer/readers knows everything that everyone is thinking and doind in the story.
I personally like 2nd best because I think 3rd is just unrealistic and 1st is rather dull, its always I this, I that. Though now i'm writing a story and 1st seems quite appealing.
It really depends on the book and story, doesn't it? Some stories work better from the first person perspective, while others work better from the third. Second-person perspective, however, is rarely engaging.
your right about that... though in my oppinion its the other way around... 3rd is rarely engaging while i like 2nd best 1st is nice at times too... What I do like though, but only when done right, is switching between those perspectives... i one can do that properly, I truly respect him
Hmm, allow me to clarify, 'cause I think we may be using terms differently.
First person: "I ran home crying like a sissy to mama."
Second person: "You ran home crying like a sissy to mama."
Third person: "Lemur ran home crying like a sissy to mama."
Generally lying down in the bath.
I agree with Lemur. Second-person narrative uses "you" mostly and I don't think it's very effective for stories and novels. I thought second-person was strictly for recipe/guide books, but maybe that's just in English.
I don't particularly have a preference between 1st and 3rd. It depends on the genre.
I think there is a mixup...
I'm going to try to explain this as good as possible.
You have:
1st person, 2nd person, 3rd person. A.K.A. I, You, He/Name. (What lemur posted).
And you have:
Perspective, and perspective isn't entirely the same as person.
1st perspective is written in 1st person, you read the book and see everything as the main character sees it, and he is also the one that tells the story, hence he reffers to himselfs as I.
The 2nd and 3rd perspective are written in 3rd person both. But in the second perspective you also see the story through the eyes of the main character, you know what he thinks and you see what he does, if he misses something, you miss it too. But he isn't the one that tells the story, someone else does it for him. Hence he is referred to as "He" or as "Insert name".
3rd person is what I like to call "Godmode". You follow the story from a distance, from above. You can see what happens before the main charactar might see it, you can know what other people than the main charactar think while he does not. The purpose and fun of this style usually is to see the main charactar find it's way through the maze while you already know the way out, so not the way out but the way HE get's out is the fun. Think of Columbo. The main charactar is also referred to as "He" or "Insert name".
I think we're getting at the miscommunication, here. The confusion comes from using "second" as a description -- 2nd person is generally accepted to mean "you," but you were using it differently.
Are you comparing third person singular to third person omniscient?
Third person singular: Lemur ran home like a sissy to mama.
Third person omniscient: Lemur ran home like a sissy to mama, while his mama thought, Lemur sure is a crybaby.
TS means second perspective, not second person.
Edit: seems it's different in English and Dutch ... atleast how it's teached to us at secondary school
can be both 2nd and 3rd perspective. (to keep it simple, this is what i mean with 2nd)Quote:
Third person singular: Lemur ran home like a sissy to mama.
Can only be 3rd perspective.Quote:
Third person omniscient: Lemur ran home like a sissy to mama, while his mama thought, Lemur sure is a crybaby.
So the answer to your question is Yes I quess.
To me it does not matter much. As long as the book is well written.
Depends, though I was quite smitten with an excerpt narrated in the 2nd person; it was taken from an un-novel by Italo Calvino. I don't know the name of the English translation, but the book was centered on the reader reading the book he's reading and then it's a bit dodgy to explain. Never found the book from local libraries, though. Gotta get my hands on that piece of literature some time.
Edit: It's the book If on a winter's night a traveler
I guess this was the root of my misunderstanding. Obviously, "person" is different from "perspective," so I got kinda lost from the start, especially since there are accepted ways of talking about this stuff among writers.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Stranger
What you call "god mode" is commonly called third person omniscient. A third-person narrative that confines itself to a single focal character is called third person, limited.
And going back to the base question, I just like a well-written book, period. Well, except right now. I'm hammering toward the end of a draft, so for this lemur, reading a good book is like seeing your neighbor speed past in a Porsche while your car is up on blocks with the radiator blowing steam. It's just irritating. So at the moment I'm consciously reading trash, which is much more motivational.
It's nice to read absolute junk and tell yourself, "If this mook can get published, I'll have no problem."
:yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
So in that case I prefer third person omniscient. Although a limited perspective is great when the scene is shown and not told so you have to come to your own conclusion.
I don't think The Quiet American would work so well from another perspective...
I really think it depends on the book and what it is about.
I like both 1st person and the all-knowing 3rd person. They are two different flavours. For comedy I think 1st person is more appropriate, but for action definitly 3rd person, with a little ambiguity for the enemies. (ie the narrator doesn't quite know everything the enemy is thinking).
Hmm the difference was in the language, every dutch person probably would've understood me, the rest of the world, probably not :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
and about the last part, :P I do exactly the same!! :2thumbsup:
Lemur is righting a book???? This has to be a sign of the apocalypse *opens bible* Yep, there it is. If I understand the question correctly I prefer reading books in the second format. I like it to go like this. "He sat silently reading To Kill a MockingBird while thinking to himself, who would publish such lousy dribble." Occasionly First person is also fun to read if the character we're viewing the story through changes throughout the book or if it is a series of books whith each character getting his own book. EX: "Animorphs series" Wow, its been a while since I've read those. Actually its been a while since I've done much reading at all. I had to read To Kill A mockingbird in school about a year ago and it killed my love of reading. Harry Potter 7 was the first book I've read without being forced to in the last year.
3rd Person limited and 1st person, both for different reasons.
Anything by Raymond E Feist. So Third Person Omnisciant.
Plus i wrote a story using it.
3rd person neutral.
"It rubs the lotion on it's skin..."
3rd person, or 1st person where the "I" character is of minor importance.
And congrats to moderator position, Lemur!
I like the second perspective best. I don't like to know everything that is going on in everyone's head necessarily. It makes for a more boring read I feel.
I prefer the second view, but it really depends on the view. (Where's the GAH?)
GAH is same as the 3rd option :P
congratz lemur... what are u moderating?
I've been asked to moderate the Hardware/Software forum. And I'm far from the geekiest or cleverest poster in there, so I'm going to have to be cautious.
I perfer to wrap my mind around one character and see the world through their eyes, although a good third person omnicient is a good read, I still perfer third person limited. This doesn't seem to be the most popular vote... oh well, I'm a minority.