Hi,
Firstly, I am new to this site, so hello! Now here is my question.
When writing in the first person, should it sound as though the narrator is actually talking, or should it be more formal? The reason I ask is that I have had someone take a look at my work and they have suggested that some language which is common when speaking looks out of place in print. Here is an example:
I went back to the car. changed to...
I returned to the car.
The cafe was done up in a victorian style. changed to...
The cafe was decorated in a Victorian style.
It was not as tasty and greasy as what you got in the canteen. changed to
It was not as indulgent and greasy as what was served in the canteen.
Would the first sentences look bad to an editor? Initially I agreed, but on changing a whole chapter I now worry that it reads more like a report than someone telling a story.
I appreciate without more context it may be difficult to offer advice, but I would appreciate knowing if there is some standard expectation about avoiding verbs with prepositions when in the narrators voice, or if it just comes down to choosing a particular style and staying consistent with it.
Thank you for any help you can give.
Colin
Hi, Colin, and welcome to W&A.
Would he say, 'The café's decorated in Victorian style' or 'The café has a bit of a Victorian thing going'? If you put it into present tense as though he's speaking the words, you can more easily see if it suits his character.
There's nothing right or wrong about either way: it's down to what fits your particular book. A narrator can use the more formal version because it's not his spoken voice: it's filtered, in this case, by the change of tense to the past. What's said in the heat of the moment - live speech - isn't the same as when telling of those events after the fact.
It was not as tasty and greasy as what you got in the canteen.
It was not as indulgent and greasy as what was served in the canteen.
These don't say the same thing. 'Indulgent' doesn't sit right here.
Why not 'wasn't'? It would flow better.
It wasn't as tasty and greasy as what you got in the canteen.
It wasn't as indulgent and greasy as what was served in the canteen.
Is your character prone to talking to the anonymous 'you'? It brings the reader in closer to be addressed that way; and it suggests a sort of chumminess that the second definitely lacks, but it's got to be consistent throughout.
What relationship do you want your man to have with the reader? Why is he telling the story at all? If you know that, perhaps that will suggest how his voice must appear. Is he in fact addressing a particular audience - like a criminal talking to a cop - that the reader doesn't see, or in whose place the reader stands?
Simple answer - you've tried it both ways and you've seen which feels right, so go with your gut feeling.
An editor wouldn't reject those first versions if they are supported by the nature of the speaker. They serve a purpose, which should be obvious the more s/he reads.
Hope this helps.
Lorraine
Thanks Clare,
That is helpful to know.
Hi Colin,
I write in first person and tend to write more formally in the body of the text, and try to write the dialogue as the narrator/ character would actually speak. I prefer the second statements on each of these examples you've given above.
Not sure if this is right, but it works for me.
Hope this helps
Clare