# First-person past tense vs first-person present tense



## Panda (Apr 6, 2015)

I just got some feedback from a beta-reader for my Diversity Challenge entry, and was surprised to find out that she was really bothered by my use of a first-person present tense POV. She said that it took her out of the story, to the point where she had to mentally convert parts of it to past tense.

Is this a common reaction? I like present tense, as I think it adds tension to the tone of the story, but if it's distracting to readers then I'll avoid it in the future.


----------



## Steerpike (Apr 6, 2015)

First person present tense works fine, in my opinion. Some people have biases against certain points of view. I don't think it is rational, to be honest. You can't please everyone, so I say go with your gut.


----------



## Nimue (Apr 6, 2015)

I'd have to agree with your beta-reader.  If I pick up a book and it's in first-person present and I'm not already dead set on reading it, I put it back on the shelf.  I can power through it if it's a story I really want to read, and of course you get used to it once you're into the book, but... I mean, I couldn't get through the first chapter of the Hunger Games (mostly because the style and story weren't for me, but the POV and tense contributed to that.)

I don't think it's irrational.  90% of the stories we read and hear by word-of-mouth are in past tense.  If, as a reader, I'm accustomed to reading and translating words to mental images in a certain mode, changing that mode is going to throw a wrench in the mental gears.  It feels weird, conceptually--the character isn't relating something that happened in the past, or recording their thoughts, so...are they narrating their life exactly as it happens?

That having been said, this is a subjective issue.  First-person present is becoming more common in YA particularly, and I don't think you'd have as much issue with YA readers finding it off-putting.  It's just something you have to consider--you may be asking your readers to do more work to get into your story.  So start off with a gripping scene; make it clear why this immediacy and immersion is necessary.  It needs to be worked with differently than comfortable old third-person past.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Apr 6, 2015)

I think as we experiment with POV, tense, word choice, sentence structure, etc.  our style develops.  What works for one story may be completely inappropriate for another.  I, for example, have a bias against over-description.  I've complained multiple times on this forum about novel openings that you know, spend fourteen paragraphs on description as the MC rides into the city.  That being said...I just wrote something that opens with a ton of description.  It isn't a style choice I love, but in this case, the way I executed it, I'm very pleased with it because it does exactly what I need it to.  That still doesn't mean I enjoy it when I read paragraphs of static description and history to open a novel though.  My point is the stylistic choice needs to be part of the strength of the story.  Does it add tension?  Does it pull the reader into the character's predicament?  Does it create a seamless feel of sliding into body-temperature water?

I had a talk with a friend a few weeks ago about word choice.  He likes big words, unusual words, words he's compelled and inspired by...but words out of common use.  Now I'm a reasonably intelligent person, so I told him I'd gladly read his work, and after a slight apology at the top of the page, expressing how he thought it might be too "purple", I did actually read it.  And loved it.  It was a simple tale, broke a few "writing rules" and sort of did its own thing.  But it stood on its two feet proudly and gave me a serious run for my money (okay, I had to open the thesaurus twice).  I enjoyed every part of the sentence structure and paragraph pacing, though the style is out of favor in modern writing.  I. Loved. It.  Really good.  And for something he thought a big risk...I was really pleasantly surprised.  

I remember a few years ago when I refused to write FPOV because it sounded terrible.  "I did this.  I went here.  I did/ saw/ smelled..."  AAK!  It was bad.  But...um, that all changed when I went back and read one of my favorite books ever and found out...it was FIRST PERSON!  I couldn't believe it.  So...after that point, I firmly stand on the hill of "Do what you feel is right".  If you like FPOV, write it.  If you like present tense, write it.  If you like Omniscient, write it.  But with every selection we make as writers, there are challenges, and some of those are more challenging than others.  I've found that market research is a good place to start thinking about it.

Best wishes.  Every time you try something new, you learn, so if present tense works for you, it's a winner.


----------



## Steerpike (Apr 6, 2015)

I should note that there is plenty of first person, present tense fiction on the market, so i wouldn't take one beta reader's comment to represent readers in large part. I don't think most readers care about this if the story is good and well-written. And even if it were a majority, that's not a reason to avoid it. Fiction isn't always about sitting in your comfort zone. Follow your vision.


----------



## Steerpike (Apr 6, 2015)

@Nimue

Isn't it irrational by definition? Its a subjective aesthetic response. Like if I see a work of art and it elicits a powerful emotional reaction from me, but may not have the same effect on others. My emotional response isn't a product of reason and the rational mind. So, irrational. Or maybe that word is loaded. Non-rational? Arational?


----------



## Nimue (Apr 6, 2015)

I dunno, I take "irrational" to mean "without reason", and I think being accustomed to the majority of stories being written in a certain tense is a valid reason to find first-person present more difficult to digest.  For the same reason that most people advise against writing with accents or dialetics; it makes things more difficult to understand. (Obviously to a much lesser degree, but still.)

It is subjective though, for sure.  Many, probably most people have no problem with it.  I have a hunch that it might be from reading an excess of third-person past-tense books (almost exclusively) when I was younger, for me at least. But it is almost a physical "this is incorrect" reaction.

I think another part of my aversion to this (and first person in general) is that it seems to be used by not-great books as a shortcut to immersion or reader identification. Just because the writing is placing the reader inside the character's head doesn't mean that the reader will like being there.  First person works when the narrator has a great voice (see: Vlad Taltos), but too often it's misused for Spunky Teenager Who's Just Like You or Generic Snarky Thief #300.

...That may be a different discussion altogether, though.


----------



## Svrtnsse (Apr 6, 2015)

I guess this is one of those cases where it's better to get another beta reader - not because the beta reader is doing anything wrong, but because the story isn't told for them. If they're not comfortable with something as fundamental to the story as the narrative point of view, that's likely going to influence everything else as well - even if subconsciously. 
They may be competent and trustworthy, but if they're instinctively uncomfortable with the basics of how the story is told, it's probably better for all involved if you check in with someone else for feedback.


----------



## cupiscent (Apr 6, 2015)

There _are_ first-person present-tense books on the market, and to be honest, when I read them I have issues with the tense (not the first-person-ness, the present-tense) all the way through. Every time I pick it up again, my brain jolts and I have to get used to it all over again. (I particularly remember having a problem with this and _Girl of Fire and Thorns_.) I assume this is because the vast majority of books are past tense. (Though interestingly, fanfic is quite often present tense.)

Because it does cause problems, rational or otherwise, for so many readers, I'd usually suggest that it's something you only want to do if you have a reason for it. For instance, I've read books that have one storyline in present tense and one storyline in past tense, so the tense becomes a mental marker for switching between the two. Or the present tense is used as part of a narrator voice that is decidedly not reflecting on events, but telling them as they happen. (Though that plugs into some of my personal issues with first-person - those being that I need a reason for this person to be telling me their story; I need a reason to trust this person.)


----------



## Steerpike (Apr 6, 2015)

This is probably a side issue, @cupiscent, but what about an unreliable narrator. Whether in first or third person, there may be narrators who are by no means to be trusted in the telling of their story. Some of those are quite good.

I still think the author has to follow their vision for a story. I wouldn't want "the majority of stories are written this way" or other such considerations to make writers afraid to try something new, or push the boundaries a bit, or to move away from their vision of the story because it might be unconventional. Literature would be poorer, in total, and would I think become fairly generic, if everyone followed the same set of guidelines, based on whatever was deemed to be most proper or most acceptable by the majority. A lot of good books that wouldn't exist if that were the case.

Personally, I don't think it is good to talk writers out of stuff like this. If Panda likes present tense and that's how he/she views the story, then I think that's absolutely the way it should be written. And in this case, I think the vast majority of readers will go along with it (based on what I see in present tense, first person on the shelves). But even if they wouldn't, that shouldn't necessarily be a determining factor.

If Danielewski had posted for advice, or provided excerpts of _House of Leaves_ on a writing forum, I can only imagine the hue and cry that would have resulted, and the posts saying "you can't do that," or "readers won't accept this." But he must not have done, and it turned out to be a great book that wouldn't have worked half as well if written in a conventional manner. And in that case, he was making major deviations from what is accepted, whereas the tense/POV Panda is proposing is actually pretty common these days.


----------



## Nimue (Apr 6, 2015)

Well, I also beta-read Panda's short story (which she is doubtlessly working hard on right now) and the whole thing isn't written in present tense, just portions of it that take place in a dream.  To be clear, I don't have much of a problem with this!  It can be effectively used to invoke dissonance or indicate that a scene is taking place in a different time.  I probably wouldn't bat an eye at a short story in present tense--it's having a whole book in present tense that would really grind at me.  Every time you pick it up, you have to get used to the style again.


Also...This isn't terribly on-topic, but I've seen this a lot, and it always bugs me a bit when people bring up classic or renowned authors to justify flouting a rule of writing or two.  Let's be honest, 99% of us here are amateur writers, not masters of the craft.  Great authors get away with things because the quality of their writing can support experimentation.  Most of us need to think about what readers like and what does well.  Just kind of the way it is.

Back on subject a bit, I'm not saying that present-tense should be reserved for auteurs or anything.  Just that, agreeing with cupiscent, there needs to be a good reason for it, not just cause it sounds cool.


----------



## Steerpike (Apr 6, 2015)

House of Leaves was a first novel by an unknown author, published in 2000.


----------



## Nimue (Apr 6, 2015)

And the likelihood that anyone on this forum is the next Mark Danielewski is still slim to none.  If portions of House of Leaves were posted on this forum, the reaction would be amazement, not "don't use present tense!" because its merits are clear as soon as you read it.  No one here is saying "never use present tense"--if it's done well, you can get away with anything.

But if it's a general question about whether present-tense is off-putting, I'm going to assume we're talking about the average writer, not an exceptional one.


----------



## Steerpike (Apr 6, 2015)

I think that's an unfortunate approach to take with new writers. Who are you or I to say what they'll become in the craft, or to stymie them early on by telling them hey, you're really not that good, better keep it simple and just take your pat on the head? It's presumptuous, isn't it? What does either the new author or reviewer gain by it? 

I think any writer can learn how to pull off variations in POV or tense. Better to help them learn how to do it than tell them not to. That's my view.


----------



## stephenspower (Apr 6, 2015)

Haters gonna hate.

Or as they would have it:

Haters hated.


----------



## Nimue (Apr 6, 2015)

This was Panda's question:



Panda said:


> Is this a common reaction? I like present tense, as I think it adds tension to the tone of the story, but if it's distracting to readers then I'll avoid it in the future.



If someone is looking for advice and the perspective of people who don't like present tense, I don't think that trying to provide that is either "hate" or "presumptuous".  I'm kind of surprised by this reaction.  If I've come across poorly, that's one thing, but if honest crit and opposing perspectives aren't welcome in this board, it should probably be labeled "Writing Encouragement."


----------



## spectre (Apr 6, 2015)

It sounds more like an individual quark. People convert life into their own somatosensory state so some readers for whatever reason are bound to have a preference to specific styles of writing.


----------



## cupiscent (Apr 6, 2015)

Steerpike said:


> This is probably a side issue, @cupiscent, but what about an unreliable narrator.



I love love LOVE unreliable narrators. But that's my thing: all first-person narrators are, really, inherently unreliable. Our personal view of the world is inherently subjective. Except so few narrators are in fiction. So that's my thing: the narrator must have a reason for telling me this story, and s/he must have a reason for using these words and phrases. (I know: I'm a little weird.)



Steerpike said:


> I still think the author has to follow their vision for a story.



Yes, absolutely. But an author also has to consider the best ways to communicate their vision and story. A lot of decisions we make as writers are trade-offs between communication and style. Every time you deviate away from standard communication practices (grammar, structure, conventions of any kind), you need to consider whether you're getting enough oomph out of the deviation to weigh against the readers who may not get what you're saying now.


----------



## Legendary Sidekick (Apr 6, 2015)

Every tense and POV has its place, and has it's (breakable) rules.

* With first/present, the POV is severely limited to that of the MC—what s/he sees, in chronological order.
* With past tense, one difference is that the narrative can make the occasional jump in the timeline.
* With third-person, one difference is that the narrative can reasonably describe the look of the character or setting, whereas the FPOV character wouldn't narrate what s/he wouldn't really think about.

I didn't find it at all jarring that Falling was narrated in first-person. The switch to first-past wasn't the way I would narrate FPOV, but she was having the character reflect, so past tense was done right. (I didn't comment on the tense switch because I agreed with her use of it.)

I personally enjoy writing first-present, and it's possible that I'll stick to short stories… or maybe a novel done like Amy Tan's _Joy Luck Club_, which is really eight short stories that are connected to each other. I don't know what % of readers don't like it, but I try not to have my "writer hat" on when I beta read for people. Either I'm getting a visual or I'm not; if I'm not, I stop reading. That didn't happen when I read Panda's story, so it did the job for me.

Since it's due in two hours, her best bet (in my view) is to post and take comments.

But Panda, stich to first person if that's what you like to write. Find your voice, master the POV. And know it's easy to goof up. (In my Addy-Jobe story, I actually had Jobe putting on pants BEFORE Addy broke the shackles on his ankles. My biggest goof, which resulted from an edit that rearranged some paragraphs—and it got caught by the editor.)


----------



## Nimue (Apr 6, 2015)

When I gave Panda feedback about Falling, I just noted that if the dream perspectives are in present tense, that should be consistent (some of the dreams were in present tense, some of them were in past tense).  As I've said, I don't have any problem with it in that specific case.  I just wanted to say that, like her other beta-reader, I find present tense more difficult to read.



Steerpike said:


> Who are you or I to say what they'll become in the craft, or to stymie them early on by telling them hey, you're really not that good, better keep it simple and just take your pat on the head? It's presumptuous, isn't it?


That's absolutely not what I'm saying.  I'm saying that people should be thoughtful about what they write, consider the reasons for their stylistic choices, and their drawbacks.  I don't mean to offend.  I give the kind of advice that I want to get, and I want to know if there's a chance that I could improve something by changing it.


----------



## Legendary Sidekick (Apr 6, 2015)

Nimue said:


> When I gave Panda feedback about Falling, I just noted that if the dream perspectives are in present tense, that should be consistent (some of the dreams were in present tense, some of them were in past tense).  As I've said, I don't have any problem with it in that specific case.  I just wanted to say that, like her other beta-reader, I find present tense more difficult to read.


The action was also in present. Past was her having the character look back, reflecting on past dreams. Dreams that took place after the reflection were in present.

To be consistent(ly in present tense), she could have had the story take the reader through the dreams chronologically. I didn't suggest that, since the reflective nature of the character seemed to have a purpose, and I only recommend a change when I can see how that change would improve the story.


----------



## Nimue (Apr 6, 2015)

Well, I'm also kind of not sure about having dreams taking place in the present be in present tense, while action taking place in the present is in past tense.  I think it is all understandable, but might benefit from clearer delineation, like using italics.  But, uh, I already told her that, and at two hours to the deadline, I think all we can say is best of luck!


----------



## Penpilot (Apr 7, 2015)

Personally, when I read present tense I usually need a bit of time to adjust to it, but once I do, I don't even notice it any more. Yes, there are people who find present tense off-putting, and some who can't even read it for what ever reason. But I think there are probably more who don't notice or don't care.

Before I started studying writing, I read books that I didn't even realize were present tense. And when I mentioned these books to a friend who is a avid reader and who absolutely devours books, he didn't realize that some of those books were in present tense either.

The Hunger Games series is written in first person present, and it did OK for itself.

Also this is just one reader. Before you start worry too much about it, get some more feed back from people who have read your work. If only one person points out a problem out of many who have read your work, then it may not be a problem at all. And even if it is, if you like writing in present tense, the only way to get better is to practice. 

Present tense can and does work.

I used to write in present tense but decided to switch to past because I felt it let me mentally get into my character's skins more. But I found that the experience of writing in present tense helped me with my sentence flow and with my active voice.


----------



## Steerpike (Apr 7, 2015)

Nimue said:


> This was Panda's question:



I'm aware of Panda's question. If you go back and look at my initial post, where I mention _House of Leaves_, it seems to me pretty clear that I was making a statement about writing generally by that point, and the overall state of literature, in addition to talking about Panda's work in a general sense - in terms of his/her vision for the work. That's no longer a narrow, limited response to Panda's initial question but an extension of that question to a broader discussion of literature and how new writers are treated. It was to that comment that you made your reply lamenting the fact that people cite successful authors. 

No one is discouraging honest critique or criticism. However, if as a general principle your argument is that new writers should  be encouraged to be safe and conform to whatever the expectations of a majority may be, I disagree. I also disagree that successful authors who have forged their own path shouldn't be held up as an example - whether they're first time authors, established writers, or writers of classics.

If I've misread what you're saying and those aren't the positions you take, then I apologize. If it was a misreading, please clarify what you meant so I understand the point you're making.


----------



## Nimue (Apr 7, 2015)

I don't believe that new writers should mindlessly conform.  I think that writers, no matter how new, can do whatever the heck they want--but it's probably a good idea for them to be aware of possible difficulties and risks while they're doing this.  As I said before, it's just that things like present-tense narration should be used thoughtfully and for a reason, not just because they sound cool.

Maybe this is only my perspective, but if I'm worried about doing something risky in my writing, hearing something like "Tolkien did it!" not as an _example_ of how to do it well but as a _justification_ for why it's fine for me to do it--I would not find that helpful, because the fact that it's been done well doesn't mean it's automatically a good idea for me to do it.

If I've been an asshole trying to say this, or for saying this in the first place, I can honestly thank you for letting me know.  Writing for me is a self-critical process, but turning this type of criticism towards people who aren't asking for it is the surest kind of assholery.  One that I'm prone to, and I should really not reply to these kinds of threads because of that.  I need that reminder sometimes.


----------



## Steerpike (Apr 7, 2015)

Nimue said:


> If I've been an asshole trying to say this, or for saying this in the first place, I can honestly thank you for letting me know.  Writing for me is a self-critical process, but turning this type of criticism towards people who aren't asking for it is the surest kind of assholery.  One that I'm prone to, and I should really not reply to these kinds of threads because of that.  I need that reminder sometimes.



Not at all. You have a strong opinion on the topic, and a well-thought out rationale to back it up. Nothing wrong with that.

My general approach to any question a new writer asks that starts "can I do x" is YES. But the follow up question always has to be "did you do X effectively?" You can do anything you want, but you have to make it work, and sometimes as a new writer you're going to need other to tell you whether you made it work when you tried it.

I usually mention examples of things being done when it seems like people are saying "no, you can't do that." And, additionally, I mention them when I think they're examples of how another author actually did it well, because that can be helpful. But I do think it serves both purposes: 1) an empirical demonstration that yes you can do that, because someone has; and 2) an example of how to do it well.

But it still falls back, ultimately, to whether the new author has done it well in her given instance. If I don't think she has, I don't try to talk them into doing something else, but instead try to help them figure out why they didn't pull it off. 

My perspective may be different than most, because I as a reader I really don't care about things like tense and POV. First person, second, third, past tense or present...if it is done well I'll read it and I can't really say that I have a preference. Except, of course, that I prefer works that do whatever they're doing well over those that don't.


----------



## TheHeroOfCanton (Apr 7, 2015)

I'm with Steerpike, you can typically get away with breaking any norm, as long as you realize why and how you're doing it.


----------



## ksvilloso (Apr 8, 2015)

Nothing new to add to this thread, but this is one of those things that used to bother me in theory only. When I actually got the opportunity to sit down with a good book, I didn't even notice it was written in present tense. 

I think it all has to do with the writer's skill--writing in first-person, present tense brings you a lot closer than writing in first-person, past tense, and thoughts have a greater potential of really jumping out at you. So there is a sense of urgency that, if handled right, could make for an absolutely riveting experience. I can also see how it can be an absolutely terrible idea if, say, the writer has a very descriptive versus introspective prose.


----------



## Nimue (Apr 9, 2015)

Oh my god, I'm a ****ing idiot.  Panda's short story was written almost entirely in present tense, and the fact that I didn't really notice that after reading it three times makes me think that I have less difficulty with present tense than I think I do.  I will maintain that it can be jarring, and the shift between tenses did confuse me, but maybe this is one of those things that I only cared about when I was a crotchety teenager.  I wouldn't even read books in first person for a while there.

*goes to hide under a rock*


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Apr 9, 2015)

I like present tense for short stories. It can carry a sense of urgency and intimacy which enhances shorter pieces. For novels, I don't think I'd like it as much, but I'm not certain. I've never read a novel in 1st/Present.


----------



## Legendary Sidekick (Apr 9, 2015)

Nimue said:


> Oh my god, I'm a ****ing idiot.  Panda's short story was written almost entirely in present tense, and the fact that I didn't really notice that after reading it three times makes me think that I have less difficulty with present tense than I think I do.  I will maintain that it can be jarring, and the shift between tenses did confuse me, but maybe this is one of those things that I only cared about when I was a crotchety teenager.  I wouldn't even read books in first person for a while there.
> 
> *goes to hide under a rock*


Heh… I gave up trying to convince you of that. I figured you'd eventually notice.

But anyway, that you didn't notice the tense may demonstrate that she was doing present tense right. If you are jarred by present tense, it could be that the narrative is being treated like past tense but with present tense verbs. There's more to present vs. past than the form of the verb. There's a certain approach to the story you take in present tense, often pacing the story to "match" the visuals, and you keep everything chronological for the most part. That can be done in past tense as well, but in past tense you can also jump in and out of the timeline without "cheating."

The "sense of urgency" TAS mentioned may have to do with this: in first-person past, the storyteller is telling you somewhat that happened. S/he survived it. In first-person present, the POV character can die without the writer "cheating."


----------

