kayd_mon
Sage
Is this the new thing? I see this more and more often, and usually, it feels weird to me as a reader. I've never tried to write in this tense, but is it something I should practice?
-
Welcome to the Fantasy Writing Forums. Register Now to join us!
Writing in the Present Tense
- Thread starter kayd_mon
- Start date
It is becoming increasingly popular, in my experience. Seems to be gathering a lot of steam in YA. It's no harder to write in than regular third person, past tense, but until you get used to it you may inadvertently find yourself shifting. I don't mind it at all as a reader - it works just fine for me. I wouldn't change my stories to it just because other people are doing so, however. If you prefer past tense, write that.
I have read some successful novels in present tense, and some less so. The present tense does suggest urgency "I am reaching for the knife" as in it is happening NOW and you need to FOCUS on this immediate thing that is happening NOW. In my meaning, it is suitable for certain kinds of tales where you really benefit from the urgency of the now-thing.
Does it have that sense of immediacy for you as a reader? I know when I write in present tense I can feel it, but when I am reading I don't. I note the tense at the outset like I always do, but then it quickly fades into the background as I am reading.
Xaysai
Inkling
I find that writing in present tense is easier because I can picture in my mind that I am the character performing the action in the scene and can describe what I am doing as it's happening.
In past tense I feel like I have to describe something which has already happened, and it's harder to imagine events which have already passed.
In past tense I feel like I have to describe something which has already happened, and it's harder to imagine events which have already passed.
- Thread starter
- #6
kayd_mon
Sage
@Steerpike
I do feel that urgency, but sometimes it feels forced. I think that a good writer can make it fade into the background, and then it feels natural.
I do feel that urgency, but sometimes it feels forced. I think that a good writer can make it fade into the background, and then it feels natural.
Yes, I think the skills of the writer are most important. A good writer can make any tense or POV work. 1st person, 2d person, 3d person, past, present...I've read good stories in all of these where the writer was able to make you forget about the chosen style.
Yeah, I'm noticing it more too. But I'm noticing it in literary fiction more. Don't mind reading it but it takes a bit of a mental adjustment.
Personally I wrote my first novel in present tense. It wasn't the smartest thing for myself to do. The sense of immediacy I got masked the flaws in story telling to myself but not to readers. Also the constant in-the-now feel made it harder for me to flow into introspection which left the story rather flat emotionally.
Not something I'd recommend for a newer writer.
Personally I wrote my first novel in present tense. It wasn't the smartest thing for myself to do. The sense of immediacy I got masked the flaws in story telling to myself but not to readers. Also the constant in-the-now feel made it harder for me to flow into introspection which left the story rather flat emotionally.
Not something I'd recommend for a newer writer.
The Hunger Games is written in the present tense, and it works well for that story. It really ramps up the tension.
I feel that it worked very well in the first part and in the actual hunger games, but that it was less successful in the parts where Katniss is not in danger. Also, the perspective became very limiting in the second part (partly) and in the third part (all the time).
Fyri
Inkling
I started out writing in third person past tense. After realizing how fun it was to write in a different character's point of view, I journeyed onward to see what writing in first person would be like. Then, I read a book (probably Hunger Games) that was in present tense. So I tried that out. Now I find that when writing in present tense, I find it easier to write in first person at the same time. I think it's good to expand your abilities as a writer but it isn't a need-to-do thing. I'm not published (yet) but I'm sure your work will be accepted in whatever tense you like. If you like it, someone else ought to as well.
- Thread starter
- #12
kayd_mon
Sage
I agree with this.
The last first-person book I read where the tense wasn't even noticeable was The Night Circus. I noticed it for a page, and that's about it.
I write in present tense sometimes. I'm using it for my current WIP, and I think about half of the stories in my anthology are in present tense (two in first person, one in third). There's a couple benefits to it:
-- It makes it easier to write in flashbacks. If you have a need to move seamlessly from talking about the past to coming back up to speed, present tense is the best. That's why I used it for my story Transilience -- it's a story about a character who's sort of "unstuck in time" and the present tense helps to tease out what's happening in-the-moment story-wise when you have a complex timeline.
-- Your narrator doesn't know what's coming. It can help you sell a twist ending in first person. Which is why I used it in my story Blackwood; the narrator is just as surprised by where he ends up as the reader.
-- You go through things with the narrator. Sort of like the last point -- when the narrator experiences something, you do it at the same time so there's no cognitive distance, no time to think about what's happening or look at it in retrospect. Sometimes this immediacy is great. Sometimes it's crippling.
And you know, it's funny....I had completely forgotten about The Hunger Games having been in present tense. I guess that means it worked
Although in general I think the books suffered from being trapped in a first-person narrative that it had clearly outgrown.
-- It makes it easier to write in flashbacks. If you have a need to move seamlessly from talking about the past to coming back up to speed, present tense is the best. That's why I used it for my story Transilience -- it's a story about a character who's sort of "unstuck in time" and the present tense helps to tease out what's happening in-the-moment story-wise when you have a complex timeline.
-- Your narrator doesn't know what's coming. It can help you sell a twist ending in first person. Which is why I used it in my story Blackwood; the narrator is just as surprised by where he ends up as the reader.
-- You go through things with the narrator. Sort of like the last point -- when the narrator experiences something, you do it at the same time so there's no cognitive distance, no time to think about what's happening or look at it in retrospect. Sometimes this immediacy is great. Sometimes it's crippling.
And you know, it's funny....I had completely forgotten about The Hunger Games having been in present tense. I guess that means it worked
Although in general I think the books suffered from being trapped in a first-person narrative that it had clearly outgrown.
He doesn't like first-person narrative. It doesn't bring him into the moment because he's not actually in that moment, only the character is. And what the character is doing is in the past. For example, as I write this I remember a first-person narrative in which the character reads a book. The character likes the book. He smiles, enjoying the feel of the paper and the smell of the book. He remembers that he reads this same book when he is twelve and he enjoys the feel of the paper and the smell of the book even then. I enjoy the smell of my keyboard as I write this. You smile as you read this comment, enjoying the play of words and the smell of irony.
This is all happening right now.
This is all happening right now.
This is how I feel when I'm writing (in first-person present)... I'm picturing myself as the character and watching events unfold before my eyes.
It does have its challenges, but I feel like it's a natural way to tell a story. I agree with comments like Steerpike's which say that tense won't matter if a story is well-written.
I do get a kick out of this comment, so much so that I'd rather just enjoy it and not contradict any of it. But the part I emboldened is where I disagree. At least in first-person present, you the reader are viewing the action from in the character's head. If I tell a story in first-person past, you the reader are listening to the character tell her story, which already happened.
What separates the two (besides the verb form):
In present, the events are happening. Every event, every thought, every moment is written chronologically. Yeah, the character can reminisce, but past tense verbs would be used to show the character's narrating her past. For present tense, word order (example: cause before effect) has to be chosen carefully or you're not really in the moment; you're time-jumping. Picturing events unfolding as I write helps me minimize careless errors (I still make 'em), and hopefully, it translates to reader feeling he's in the moment with my character.
In past, the events happened. You can shuffle the order of events and even use simple prepositions (before/after) or narrate effects before causes (which comes more naturally, but is technically reverse-chronological). In other words, you have more freedom regarding word order because it's all in the past.
The same story can be told in present or past, but it's not as simple as changing verbs. And the feeling is different (this is happening vs. this happened). Which feeling works better may depend on the story.
One more thing to add: past, present and future tense verbs can all work well if, for example, your story is a diary from a zombie apocalypse survivor/victim. Each entry would be the character's present on that day, but he could write about what happened that day, what he's doing/feeling as he writes, or his hopes/plans for whenever he gets to escape the corner he's cowering in at the moment. He'd narrate all of the verb tenses and it would be appropriate.
The point of that^ being that a writer might consider how verb tense works best for his/her particular story.
Addison
Auror
I'm having a similar problem with my new narrative. It's not first person, but it's not third person. It's a mix of sorts.
In the prologue the narrator is introduced. He's a dead guy who is sentenced to write the story of Rian Harper. So there will be "he said", "his foot", "their path" etc. But because it's not actual third, and the reader knows there's an actual character behind it, there will be sarcastic things. Like the cracks and whining you find in a first person narrative.
But how do I draw a line? How do I give enough narrator-personality and comments without throwing the reader off? Keeping the narrator and actual story character balanced?
For example, here's this part from the beginning: "One black eye or two Nick? You decide." Wow, so chicken-limbs here gave Nick, big guy by at least ten pounds, a black eye?
And: Rian was quick to answer, "So you want the jacket to make up for your lack of character? Tough." I like this kid. Why did he say character? Well just looking at Nick he probably hopes the magic will bring character. I mean seriously the kid has a broad chin but his buzz cut on that cone-head makes him look like a cartoon.
Narrator doesn't give his two cents every paragraph but there are/will be comments like this in places, or at least the tone.
In the prologue the narrator is introduced. He's a dead guy who is sentenced to write the story of Rian Harper. So there will be "he said", "his foot", "their path" etc. But because it's not actual third, and the reader knows there's an actual character behind it, there will be sarcastic things. Like the cracks and whining you find in a first person narrative.
But how do I draw a line? How do I give enough narrator-personality and comments without throwing the reader off? Keeping the narrator and actual story character balanced?
For example, here's this part from the beginning: "One black eye or two Nick? You decide." Wow, so chicken-limbs here gave Nick, big guy by at least ten pounds, a black eye?
And: Rian was quick to answer, "So you want the jacket to make up for your lack of character? Tough." I like this kid. Why did he say character? Well just looking at Nick he probably hopes the magic will bring character. I mean seriously the kid has a broad chin but his buzz cut on that cone-head makes him look like a cartoon.
Narrator doesn't give his two cents every paragraph but there are/will be comments like this in places, or at least the tone.
Last edited:
Addison, I'm not exactly clear on what you're asking so correct me if I'm misunderstanding what you're asking.
In third person limited there are various levels of closeness you can get to the character. You can stay totally cold and not get into the character's thoughts. You can get into their thoughts but in a very objective way. And Finally, you can get in really really close in a subjective way. You can mix an match the levels or you can stick to one level.
Here are a couple of examples from one of my writing books called Characters and Viewpoint by Orson Scott Card. Can't recommend it enough.
Objective level example:
Subjective level example:
Notice the second example we get Pete's personality but there's still a bit of third person distance. It's still a step removed from first person. If it was first person, the last paragraph might be like this.
From your examples, Addison, you're dropping right into first person with a lot of the feeling of an "I" narrative and from the small snippet it feels like it might be too much, too close. IMHO you want to pull back every so slightly so it's third person but really close third person and strategically sprinkle in the super close first person. Notice in the second example "A blue dress. No, not just blue. Vivid blue, like neon woven into cloth." is Pete's direct first person thoughts carefully mixed in. The reader probably doesn't even realize it dropped into first person for a tiny bit but it did.
I'd suggest picking up a few books written in third limited and study a few paragraphs here and there to see how others approach this. I think it might help you in balancing things.
In third person limited there are various levels of closeness you can get to the character. You can stay totally cold and not get into the character's thoughts. You can get into their thoughts but in a very objective way. And Finally, you can get in really really close in a subjective way. You can mix an match the levels or you can stick to one level.
Here are a couple of examples from one of my writing books called Characters and Viewpoint by Orson Scott Card. Can't recommend it enough.
Objective level example:
Subjective level example:
Notice the second example we get Pete's personality but there's still a bit of third person distance. It's still a step removed from first person. If it was first person, the last paragraph might be like this.
From your examples, Addison, you're dropping right into first person with a lot of the feeling of an "I" narrative and from the small snippet it feels like it might be too much, too close. IMHO you want to pull back every so slightly so it's third person but really close third person and strategically sprinkle in the super close first person. Notice in the second example "A blue dress. No, not just blue. Vivid blue, like neon woven into cloth." is Pete's direct first person thoughts carefully mixed in. The reader probably doesn't even realize it dropped into first person for a tiny bit but it did.
I'd suggest picking up a few books written in third limited and study a few paragraphs here and there to see how others approach this. I think it might help you in balancing things.
Last edited:
Jamber
Sage
For me, the 'immediacy' of present tense is an affectation, a ruse, because of course the narrator can't be telling the story at the same time as living it. This makes it ideal for literary fiction, where its dreamlike or scriptlike feel and the central untruth (the narrator isn't experiencing at the same time as telling) is mildly distancing.
By contrast, past tense narration doesn't seem to feign anything; it's quite possible the narrator is speaking directly to the listener. In that way, I'd almost argue that past tense is (or can be) more immediate, because it doesn't draw attention to the subtle 'glitch' in its method of telling.
Just some thoughts, not sure if they help,
Jennie
By contrast, past tense narration doesn't seem to feign anything; it's quite possible the narrator is speaking directly to the listener. In that way, I'd almost argue that past tense is (or can be) more immediate, because it doesn't draw attention to the subtle 'glitch' in its method of telling.
Just some thoughts, not sure if they help,
Jennie
For narrative wrapped within narrative I always recommend Joseph Conrad. Try Lord Jim. There's no first person, but there are layers within the narration.
Addison
Auror
Sounds like I'm going for a subjective third. I just have to hold the dead-guy's voice in my head while I write.
