How I Chose What Perspective to Write In

The perspective that you write in has more impact than I realized. A refresher in case you forgot. First-person is when you narrate the story through the eyes of the main character. In this style, you're more likely to see the words I and Me. Third-person is when you move the "camera," so to speak, and focus it on the world itself.

Second-person is what I'm writing in now. I actively engage and knowledge you, the reader, by making you a part of the story. This one can be a gray area. I've read several novels where the character will step out of bounds and say something like "you know when" or "you get it." I'm hesitant to call this an example of second-person storytelling because it could be the author showing the character's train of thought.

There are two different kinds of third-person accounts. There's third-person limited, where the narrator only knows details about a specific character. It makes it clear which person is the focal point of the story at any given time. Third-person omniscient is when the narrator knows the thoughts and feelings of every character at any time.

So, why does any of this matter? Perspective can play a vital role in the tone and framing of your story. My experience with storytelling perspective gives me a few hints as to when to use these narrative types. The point of view really relies solely on the author's preference, but here are some tips that I've encountered while changing up the perspective of my WIPS.

• First-person.

I see this one as the default for many stories. I use it more than any other perspective out there because it's more convenient to use. Before I use this form of storytelling, I ask myself how important the main character really is.

No, I'm serious. Having a non-narrative character isn't a bad thing. Especially if you are writing a cast of main characters rather than one person. For example, the Hunger Games is written from Katniss' point of view. The reader is engaged in her family, social life, and trauma. Her stance on events heavily influences the opinion of the reader.

Having a first-person narrative makes it easier for me to foreshadow. Giving your readers a hint or clue to speculate about makes the story more engaging for me. A character off-handly mentioning the snide comments of peers or the strange lights in the woods is more subtle than another party bringing it to the reader's attention.

Of course, each perspective has its drawbacks. Writing in the first person can be difficult if you want to highlight more than one character. An example I always go back to is Allegiant by Veronica Roth. Barring the fact that it was the first and last book to have two points of view, the dual narrative from the first-person just didn't work. The characters were nearly identical. In Roth's defense, the characters were romantic partners, so they're bound to have similar traits, but they were hard to distinguish. Having a back-to-back change with I and me statements got repetitive.

I also find it easier to fall into tropes. The famous "letting out a breath I didn't know I was holding" line. We've all read a scene where the protagonist describes themselves by looking in the mirror. That being said, it can be hard to organically describe your character externally during the introduction of your WIP. You get an unlimited look into the lead role but a limited look into their world.

• Second-person

Every piece of writing advice I've gotten has told me to use second-person sparingly. For one, it can be verbose to constantly read the word you. Giving the reader a list of commands can make them lose interest.

It was always a strange concept to me. Shouldn't I want my reader to feel engaged and acknowledged? Of course, it can be too much of a good thing.

The best time to use the second person, in my opinion, is in short pieces. Blog posts, letters, and poetry are all brief enough for the language to not get repetitive and long enough to be effective. The occasional fourth-wall break works, as long as it's in character for the narrator.

• Third-person

To me, third-person has always been the balance to first-person. Instead of a look into the character, the reader dives deeper into the world itself. When I use third-person limited, I use it to write high-fantasy.

Walking to Starbucks is something most readers can envision. They don't need a ton of descriptions. Walking to a marketplace with magic stands? You'd definitely want to spend more time elaborating on that.

In this context, your character is already accustomed to your world-building. Having an outside party detail both the environment and the protagonist helps combine the two. With such a broad genre, the perspective really does depend on the story itself.

• Bonus! Third-person omniscient

Honestly, I've never read anything where the narrator knows every thought and feeling of every character. It's a bit much. There are a few instances where it can be useful.

Prologues and epilogues provide the reader with context. A prologue will set the stage. It gives the audience a general understanding of what's going on before getting to know the characters. An epilogue explains the story's end and can be set years after the final events transpired. While characters telling their beginning and end can be helpful to characterization, third-person omniscient provides an unbiased look and can encompass many people.

That's my take on the first, second, and third perspectives. Outside of an English lesson, I think understanding how a point of view frames a piece of writing is crucial to people as a whole. Things like news articles should be in third-person unless it's a personal account. The first person can be unreliable since it focuses on the narrator's thoughts alone (like the Great Gatsby.) Applying these writing tools can vary based on the writer, but hopefully, this provided some advice. Happy writing!