First-person past tense vs first-person present tense

[Panda]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

@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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

 

[Nimue]

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]

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]

Haters gonna hate.

Or as they would have it:

Haters hated.

 

[Nimue]

This was Panda's question:

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]

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]

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.)

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]

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]

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.

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.