Why you shouldn't be writing in first person.

[Talo Segura]

I'm not going to give my own thoughts and reasons only to repeat what this article illuminates. I agree with the author, novels are better written in the third person and a close third person has all the advantages of first person pov. and none of the disadvantages.

https://writersinthestormblog.com/2018/02/third-vs-first-person-narratives/

[Krista]

13 hours ago, Talo Segura said:

I'm not going to give my own thoughts and reasons only to repeat what this article illuminates. I agree with the author, novels are better written in the third person and a close third person has all the advantages of first person pov. and none of the disadvantages.

https://writersinthestormblog.com/2018/02/third-vs-first-person-narratives/

I found his entire post contradictory drivel, to be fair. He is attempting to persuade people that 'close third,' is how 'he' would approach writing, and how the 'gatekeepers' will more willingly accept third over first. The whole premise of seasoned vs. obvious amateur is where he lost me. There are restrictions to first, but it isn't a handicap, which is what he was loosely leaning his entire argument on. It is a perspective. He admitted that if it is done well, it is done well. You can't say something is heavily superior and then keep walking that back. He was attempting to defend his preferred narrative, because that is 'his' preferred narrative. He lost me again when he couldn't come up with any arguments for first person until the ending of his argument. It is a perspective, it has its pros and its cons, just as close third, and so on. If you're going to make the argument, then you need to state the differences, weigh the pros and cons of both. Form the opinion other than what "gatekeepers" prefer, and move your argument a bit higher than a thinly veiled opinion based on "published" vs "perspective," because that's what his argument seemed to truly be mired in. 

I mean his biggest arguments against first are what I would call 'writer choice,' not the choice in perspective they used. As he lists them: imitation, thinly disguised self-inserted autobiographies - meaning the character is just 'them' in fictional form. A philosophical/political commentary, and lastly chasing trends and what is most visible at the moment. None of which has anything to do with perspective, you can do all of those in close third, or any other perspective. What he is arguing, is "good writing choices," vs. "poor writing choices," and using the perspective to lean on that argument instead of outright saying that: Newer authors tend to lean into First person perspective over third -- Which is true. That newer authors also make a lot of bad writing choices when they first begin to write -- which is also true. While both statements are true, it isn't evidence condemning the use of First person perspective, especially in relation to close third. 

First person can work just as well as close third person, I mean, he stated it himself - you just simply change the pronouns. So, using his own words against him, it is again a preference, not an argument. 

And, I honestly didn't like his writing. It seemed entirely void of anything but the words he put to paper. 

And lastly, I'm going to overlook the weighty bait of a title you used to start this discussion, especially since you didn't supply your own reasonings and were willing to just play the parrot. 

Edited August 26, 2025 by Krista

[Jason Rimbaud]

14 hours ago, Krista said:

I found his entire post contradictory drivel, to be fair. He is attempting to persuade people that 'close third,' is how 'he' would approach writing, and how the 'gatekeepers' will more willingly accept third over first. The whole premise of seasoned vs. obvious amateur is where he lost me. There are restrictions to first, but it isn't a handicap, which is what he was loosely leaning his entire argument on. It is a perspective. He admitted that if it is done well, it is done well. You can't say something is heavily superior and then keep walking that back. He was attempting to defend his preferred narrative, because that is 'his' preferred narrative. He lost me again when he couldn't come up with any arguments for first person until the ending of his argument. It is a perspective, it has its pros and its cons, just as close third, and so on. If you're going to make the argument, then you need to state the differences, weigh the pros and cons of both. Form the opinion other than what "gatekeepers" prefer, and move your argument a bit higher than a thinly veiled opinion based on "published" vs "perspective," because that's what his argument seemed to truly be mired in. 

I mean his biggest arguments against first are what I would call 'writer choice,' not the choice in perspective they used. As he lists them: imitation, thinly disguised self-inserted autobiographies - meaning the character is just 'them' in fictional form. A philosophical/political commentary, and lastly chasing trends and what is most visible at the moment. None of which has anything to do with perspective, you can do all of those in close third, or any other perspective. What he is arguing, is "good writing choices," vs. "poor writing choices," and using the perspective to lean on that argument instead of outright saying that: Newer authors tend to lean into First person perspective over third -- Which is true. That newer authors also make a lot of bad writing choices when they first begin to write -- which is also true. While both statements are true, it isn't evidence condemning the use of First person perspective, especially in relation to close third. 

First person can work just as well as close third person, I mean, he stated it himself - you just simply change the pronouns. So, using his own words against him, it is again a preference, not an argument. 

And, I honestly didn't like his writing. It seemed entirely void of anything but the words he put to paper. 

And lastly, I'm going to overlook the weighty bait of a title you used to start this discussion, especially since you didn't supply your own reasonings and were willing to just play the parrot. 

I am not a fan for first person POV. I find it extremely limiting for my writing style. I think out of everything I ever wrote, I have only one story where I used first person POV. And oddly enough, it was an autobiographical story about the first time I went skinny dipping with a boy. Skip to the end, we touched wieners. 

I also very rarely read a story with first person POV. Mainly because the author tends to switch POV's every other chapter. If you want to tell your story from multiple POV's, then use Third Person. Switching POV's in first person makes me want to punch babies. Full disclosure, every baby I meet makes me want to punch them.

They also tend to write a scene with two characters, one chapter is from one perspective using first person POV, and then next chapter is from the other perspective using first person POV. Trust me, it takes real talent to make that exchange interesting and you aren't the person to do it. Just write in third person limited if you want that restriction of only seeing one characters inner dialogue.  

I tend to write in third person limited. I usually choose three to six characters to tell the story from their POV in third person. I rarely switch POV's for the same scene, preferring to stay with one person's POV for the entire scene. @Laura S. Fox used this technique wonderfully in her story Liar/Liar. She switches POV sometimes three times in one chapter. But for the story she is telling it makes perfect sense and is highly entertaining.

If you haven't read Liar/Liar, you really should. It is either complete or there is one chapter left. It's a 55 chapter story that mostly takes place in a single location. It's an indepth character story driven completely by the inner monologue of our two leads, a drummer and a rabbit. It truly is one of my favorite stories on this site and I can't wait to read the final ten chapters. (I stopped reading it at Chapter 45 because I wanted to binge the final ten chapters. 

My thanks to her for putting up with my wild guesses and absurd comments throughout the story thus far. 

There have been many popular novels written in first person so I'm not sure if the author of this article know what they are talking about. The Great Gatsby is first person, To Kill A Mockingbird, Adventures of Huck Finn, Catcher In The Rye, all first person and internationally known. I guess the gatekeepers missed those. 

All that being said, I think first person POV is easier for newer authors as they can easily put themselves into the situations. But it is also limiting which is why many authors switch POV in their first person stories. I would urge everyone to try third person as it opens up more creative freedom to really allow your characters to breathe, grow, and become fully fleshed out on the page. 

Of course this is just because I hate reading first person stories. So don't listen to me and write what you feel comfortable. 

J

 

[LJCC]

On 8/26/2025 at 12:59 AM, Talo Segura said:

I'm not going to give my own thoughts and reasons only to repeat what this article illuminates. I agree with the author, novels are better written in the third person and a close third person has all the advantages of first person pov. and none of the disadvantages.

https://writersinthestormblog.com/2018/02/third-vs-first-person-narratives/

I love 1st person POV. Some of the best first-person point of view (POV) stories include classics like The Great Gatsby, The Bell Jar, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, The Color Purple, and To Kill a Mockingbird, as well as more contemporary choices such as The Catcher in the Rye, Project Hail Mary, Gone Girl, and The Murderbot Diaries. These works are celebrated for their strong, distinctive narrative voices that effectively immerse the reader in the characters' experiences and perspectives. 

The problem is, almost all 1st-person POV stories require you to be a masterful writer. Almost all amazing 1st-person POV novels that have been made so far will make you forget that it's even a 1st-person POV. And not everyone has the, er, technical skills to manage writing in 1st person POV, nor the creativity and genius to write such. The minute the first line in a 1st-person POV novel bores me to death, I immediately chuck that in the bin.

Like Colleen's Hoover's, It Ends With Us:

Quote

As I sit here with one foot on either side of the ledge, looking down from twelve stories above the streets of Boston, I can’t help but think about suicide.

Compared to John Rechy's, City of Night:

Quote

LATER I WOULD THINK OF AMERICA as one vast City of Night stretching gaudily from Times Square to Hollywood Boulevard—jukebox-winking, rock-n-roll-moaning: America at night fusing its dark cities into the unmistakable shape of loneliness.

It's easy to identify the intro to a shitty book and one where the writing just takes you to places. Like...it's extremely easy with 1st person POV. 3rd person is a bit tricky. But with 1st person, you'd know right away which one's worth your time.

Edited August 27, 2025 by LJCC

[CassieQ]

I agree with @Krista.  That article was weird and condescending. 

[Talo Segura]

1 hour ago, CassieQ said:

I agree with @Krista.

30 love

[Laura S. Fox]

On 8/26/2025 at 10:30 PM, Jason Rimbaud said:

I am not a fan for first person POV. I find it extremely limiting for my writing style. I think out of everything I ever wrote, I have only one story where I used first person POV. And oddly enough, it was an autobiographical story about the first time I went skinny dipping with a boy. Skip to the end, we touched wieners. 

I also very rarely read a story with first person POV. Mainly because the author tends to switch POV's every other chapter. If you want to tell your story from multiple POV's, then use Third Person. Switching POV's in first person makes me want to punch babies. Full disclosure, every baby I meet makes me want to punch them.

They also tend to write a scene with two characters, one chapter is from one perspective using first person POV, and then next chapter is from the other perspective using first person POV. Trust me, it takes real talent to make that exchange interesting and you aren't the person to do it. Just write in third person limited if you want that restriction of only seeing one characters inner dialogue.  

I tend to write in third person limited. I usually choose three to six characters to tell the story from their POV in third person. I rarely switch POV's for the same scene, preferring to stay with one person's POV for the entire scene. @Laura S. Fox used this technique wonderfully in her story Liar/Liar. She switches POV sometimes three times in one chapter. But for the story she is telling it makes perfect sense and is highly entertaining.

If you haven't read Liar/Liar, you really should. It is either complete or there is one chapter left. It's a 55 chapter story that mostly takes place in a single location. It's an indepth character story driven completely by the inner monologue of our two leads, a drummer and a rabbit. It truly is one of my favorite stories on this site and I can't wait to read the final ten chapters. (I stopped reading it at Chapter 45 because I wanted to binge the final ten chapters. 

My thanks to her for putting up with my wild guesses and absurd comments throughout the story thus far. 

There have been many popular novels written in first person so I'm not sure if the author of this article know what they are talking about. The Great Gatsby is first person, To Kill A Mockingbird, Adventures of Huck Finn, Catcher In The Rye, all first person and internationally known. I guess the gatekeepers missed those. 

All that being said, I think first person POV is easier for newer authors as they can easily put themselves into the situations. But it is also limiting which is why many authors switch POV in their first person stories. I would urge everyone to try third person as it opens up more creative freedom to really allow your characters to breathe, grow, and become fully fleshed out on the page. 

Of course this is just because I hate reading first person stories. So don't listen to me and write what you feel comfortable. 

J

 

Thanks for the mention, enfant terrible! I never write 1st person because it would make me feel like such a big imposter... Clearly, some talented writers pull it off, I just can't do it. As for my 'technique' of going from one POV to another... Many years ago, my head-hopping was horrendous! I learned since then to give the characters sections in a chapter so the readers don't get all confused.

(And Liar vs. Liar has 55 chapters + epilogue, so if you check the story about the same time next Thursday, it will be complete)

[Jason Rimbaud]

4 hours ago, Laura S. Fox said:

(And Liar vs. Liar has 55 chapters + epilogue, so if you check the story about the same time next Thursday, it will be complete)

Can't wait to finish this tale!!!! That's good nose. 

 

J 

[Talo Segura]

6 hours ago, Jason Rimbaud said:

Can't wait to finish this tale!!!! That's good nose. 

 

J 

OFF topic! Please try to keep to the subject third v first person, thank you.

[Talo Segura]

While compiling an anthology of short stories, I made a startling discovery—the vast majority of contemporary fiction is being written in the first person, so much so that we seem to be suffering an overpopulation of first person narrators. It got to the point where I cringed every time I began a story and ran into that ubiquitous “I.” 

Stop Using the First Person! by Alexander Steele. https://www.writingclasses.com/toolbox/articles/stop-using-the-first-person

 

[Krista]

The first article was entirely contradictory and pretentious.

The second, entirely entitled.

Both openly admit that first person perspectives are perfectly fine. That it isn't their first choice in narratives. Which means, that no matter how one tries to spin the discussion it all comes back to: preference. 

--

First person is a perspective. It is a preference for readers and writers. It is a choice. There isn't a correct or wrong perspective based on the story one chooses to write. It takes skill to grasp all perspectives, but there isn't an inherent weakness or strength with any of them. They are simply tools, a guideline at which the puzzle has to come together to create the whole picture. That's it. It is up to readers to decide if they wish to read that perspective or not. It is not up to the writer to cater to the perspective of the reader. Most of the time it is not the perspective that makes the story bad, but the skillset of the author, the limitations they have with storytelling in general, and/or the lack of any quality editing. 

Wanting to pressure or push a narrative that one is better than the other, on the sole basis that there is "too much," of something, is also entirely based on an entitled thought process. It is no different than past discussions about Female authors writing M/M fiction. It is the same entitlement that makes the attempt to gatekeep. It is tiresome and unnecessary. Anyone caught making the attempt shouldn't be taken seriously. Writers who write solely in first person perspective isn't ruining the fun for everyone else, they're just having their fun the way they wish to participate. 

It is entitlement to tell someone how to write their stories. That their stories are better suited in a different perspective. To consider editing to overcome some perceived limitation in the writing and have the sole reasoning being, "it is in first and not third." It is entitlement to outright edit someone's work from first to third, unsolicited, and then try to convince them to see a favorable difference - based on preference. Especially if that story is simply existing. There are only a few scenarios where that behavior should be considered tolerable. One being if your beta/editor makes the suggestion, discusses the thought processes that led to that conclusion, and then work with you - if - you wish to move forward with that suggestion. 

The other may be with a publisher/agent who wishes to publish your writing, and they suggest they would work with you better if you considered publishing in third. They get a say, because they are taking a financial and time consuming risk that affects them, and they have every right to protect their interests.

I don't know why you're insisting on feeding the discussion by posting (opinion based) articles, and not offering any engagement to the discussion, for which you seem to have strong opinions on, but no ambition to share.

Edited August 29, 2025 by Krista

[Talo Segura]

7 hours ago, Krista said:

I don't know why you're insisting on feeding the discussion by posting (opinion based) articles, and not offering any engagement to the discussion, for which you seem to have strong opinions on, but no ambition to share.

I don't have any strong opinions although I can see the points which the articles are making in favour of third person over first person.

Feeding the discussion with these articles is because there are so many and they are all saying the same thing. I have yet to come across an article telling new writers using the first person is better.

I am interested in promoting the discussion on a broad author, reader base, and hearing different people's opinions and reasoning. I thank you for your response.

[LJCC]

2 hours ago, Talo Segura said:

Feeding the discussion with these articles is because there are so many and they are all saying the same thing. I have yet to come across an article telling new writers using the first person is better.

Most articles say 1st person is bad because of the abundant 1st-person books out there that are written badly. First person feels like it should be the easiest—you just slip into “I” and talk, right? But it’s secretly the trickiest POV because it traps you inside one skull, one pair of eyes, one set of biases.

Like, writing in the first person is writing in tunnel vision. You only know what this character knows. You can’t casually zoom out and show the villain twirling his mustache in another room. That can feel claustrophobic when you want to broaden the story. 

The “I” has to sound like someone. Not just narrate events, but carry personality in every sentence. If the voice is flat or inconsistent, the whole book feels flat.

And then there are the blind spots. First-person narrators are liars, even when they don’t mean to be. They misremember, exaggerate, or simply don’t notice things. Writing that in a way that feels natural (instead of sloppy) is a real balancing act.

Then you've got the show-and-tell trap. In third person, you can slide into description. In first, every detail has to be filtered through how the narrator notices it. You’re not just describing a storm; you’re describing how this person feels about the storm.

Finally, the repetitions. Too much “I did this, I thought that, I went here” starts to sound like a diary entry. You’ve got to vary sentence rhythm and sneak in sensory cues to keep it alive.

Overall, writers respect it, but many find it “the hardest to sustain well.” When it works, it feels like the narrator grabbed you by the collar and won’t let go. When it doesn’t… it just feels like someone’s diary nobody asked to read.

There are even established writers who avoid 1st person like the plague.

[Ron]

In the prompts there was a guest challenge to write a 500 word short story in first person without using “I.” As far as I know I’m the only author to take up the challenge. It was hard but I think it was worth the effort. I linked my work to the prompt so others could read my story (as every author who publishes a prompt response should do). 
 

Might some authors want to rise to challenge? Give it a try and show us just how 1st person point of view can be done well. Post a link to your work here, we’ll judge you so we can critique your work.

[Jason Rimbaud]

20 minutes ago, LJCC said:

Most articles say 1st person is bad because of the abundant 1st-person books out there that are written badly. First person feels like it should be the easiest—you just slip into “I” and talk, right? But it’s secretly the trickiest POV because it traps you inside one skull, one pair of eyes, one set of biases.

Like, writing in the first person is writing in tunnel vision. You only know what this character knows. You can’t casually zoom out and show the villain twirling his mustache in another room. That can feel claustrophobic when you want to broaden the story. 

The “I” has to sound like someone. Not just narrate events, but carry personality in every sentence. If the voice is flat or inconsistent, the whole book feels flat.

And then there are the blind spots. First-person narrators are liars, even when they don’t mean to be. They misremember, exaggerate, or simply don’t notice things. Writing that in a way that feels natural (instead of sloppy) is a real balancing act.

Then you've got the show-and-tell trap. In third person, you can slide into description. In first, every detail has to be filtered through how the narrator notices it. You’re not just describing a storm; you’re describing how this person feels about the storm.

Finally, the repetitions. Too much “I did this, I thought that, I went here” starts to sound like a diary entry. You’ve got to vary sentence rhythm and sneak in sensory cues to keep it alive.

Overall, writers respect it, but many find it “the hardest to sustain well.” When it works, it feels like the narrator grabbed you by the collar and won’t let go. When it doesn’t… it just feels like someone’s diary nobody asked to read.

There are even established writers who avoid 1st person like the plague.

As usual, someone else explains why I don't enjoy first person better than I could. And when I commented earlier, I did make clear that first person doesn't fit my style. Which is why I don't write in first person. 

What I failed to make clear, because I suck, that usually stories with gay themes, written in first person, are usually very angsty and I abhor stories written in that manner. I think what endears those characters to everyone else is the very reason I don't like them. They usually are weak on plot, and heavy on describing emotion instead of showing emotion through conflict. There is also a lot of internal monologues that rarely have little to do with the action that is happening on that particular time. Especially by amateur's or first time writers that you find on online writing sites.  

This is my preference, I have conceded that some writers can write amazing stories in first person, I shant be reading them as I see the pronoun "I" and I immediately stop. There are many amazing writers on this site that use first person. It's just something I don't enjoy to consume. 

I don't have a lot of free time, so when I do read a story, I don't have time to read everything, so I click on a story, I see first person, I skip to another story with my desired POV. It's nothing against that writer, it's just don't have the time to see if that writer can write in first person or not. Since I don't enjoy that format, I move on to a format I do like. 

The last book I read in first person was probably Interview With A vampire. And I only read that because one of my friends said it was a gay story. So I was disappointed in two ways. 

As for which is better, I guess that is up to the writer to utilize whichever form they desire. And I'll use my freedom as a reader to read only those formats I truly enjoy. We all win. 

J

[Krista]

7 hours ago, Talo Segura said:

I don't have any strong opinions although I can see the points which the articles are making in favour of third person over first person.

Feeding the discussion with these articles is because there are so many and they are all saying the same thing. I have yet to come across an article telling new writers using the first person is better.

I am interested in promoting the discussion on a broad author, reader base, and hearing different people's opinions and reasoning. I thank you for your response.

Ah yes, the weight of group think attempting to drive a narrative. Look throughout history and see just how much of a fallacy that is and how problematic that can be.

And, if you were wanting to truly feed the discussion you would make the attempt to find articles in support of first person perspective. You would agree that with both articles that you included - both writers agreed that first person perspective can be and still is a favorable perspective for people to write in. It just isn't their personal favorite. The fact that you don't seem inclined to do such a thing, makes this entire attempt rather biased. 

 

 

[Talo Segura]

7 hours ago, Krista said:

if you were wanting to truly feed the discussion you would make the attempt to find articles in support of first person perspective.

Isn't that for you to do? I have looked and found only amateur, would be writers, posing the question should they write in first person.

The one professional article I found on using first person said it is good for: short stories, autobiographies, and novels focused on one person's thoughts and feelings. However, that article explained nothing and gave no expansion or reasoning, so not very helpful.

If you find an article reasoning in favour of first person over third, then pop the link in here.

I did find this article which gives reasoning in favour of first and third person: https://www.masterclass.com/articles/first-person-vs-third-person-point-of-view#71S8bBld5kkxCa3iGPrso4

 

Edited August 30, 2025 by Talo Segura
To include one perhaps useful article

[Mikiesboy]

20 hours ago, Ron said:

In the prompts there was a guest challenge to write a 500 word short story in first person without using “I.” As far as I know I’m the only author to take up the challenge. It was hard but I think it was worth the effort. I linked my work to the prompt so others could read my story (as every author who publishes a prompt response should do). 
 

Might some authors want to rise to challenge? Give it a try and show us just how 1st person point of view can be done well. Post a link to your work here, we’ll judge you so we can critique your work.

I remember this, Ron. And your story.  I didn't try this at the time but i started one before heading to bed last night.. it's been fun so far. I should finish it today. Thanks for reminding us about this little challenge.    

[CassieQ]

I agree that it's a preference thing.  If a story is bad, changing it to third won't make it better.  

I think the responses that say "I won't read first person" are interesting.   I'll read both if the story is good and most times I won't even notice the POV much once I get started.   I did read a book once that changed to different  perspectives between 3 characters each chapter.  Two characters were written in first and the other was written in second.  There's no way that should have worked, but it did, and that is the mark of an extremely talented writer.  

Edited August 30, 2025 by CassieQ

[Jason Rimbaud]

1 hour ago, CassieQ said:

I agree that it's a perspective thing.  If a story is bad, changing it to third won't make it better.  

I think the responses that say "I won't read first person" are interesting.   

Oh my god @CassieQ I'm the only one that said I don't read first person, you can kick me in the head it's okay.  

Do you find it weird that I don't watch horror movies? I'm sure there are some amazing horror movies out there. But I don't like horror movies. I'm not going to slog through fifty movies to find the one good horror movie that speaks to me. I'm okay with "missing" out on that one horror movie. That's why I normally put on a comedy of Sci-Fi and enjoy my night.

It's the same principle, with first person. I have read enough stories to know I don't like that style. I have enough data to know there are more first person stories I don't like then ones i do like. So to save myself time, I go about my blissful way. 

If all this seems vague, it's because I don't want to use examples on why I don't like first person using stories posted on GA.  I have enough people mad at me already. I can use an example of an author that is no longer around for whatever reason.

I'll use DomLuka's The Long Way vs In The Fishbowl. The Long way is written in first person, and its sequel, In A Fish Bowl is written in third person limited.

Damn, it got to be so long I'm not going to post my entire critique first vs third. But I will quote the first two paragraphs from The Long Way 

"It wasn't my first day at a new school, I had actually been there for a little over a month, but I'd transferred in the middle of the year. I didn't really know anyone yet. I didn't really want to know anyone. I guess you could say, at the time I had a pretty shitty attitude about life in particular. 

The problem was people, I hated people. I know: that said, sounds like the problem was me. But it really was people. I hated people. I felt like every time I met someone new, or trusted even an old acquaintance, something bad came of it. I knew that this was a bit irrational, and I was working on it, I really was; but it was happening slowly."

For me, this is an example of telling. We are being told a bunch of stuff, he hates people, he's in a kind of new school, he had bad things happen and he was trying to be better. Then he spends the entire chapter not trying to be better. Matter of fact he never tries to be better. 

But more importantly, we live in this characters head.  For seven thousand words we are being told what happened to this character. No dialogue, no description of anything, just paragraph after paragraph of what happened. This is what I don't like about first person, show me the world, don't show me what's in one characters head and what he thinks the world is.

Next I'll use the sequel, In The Fishbowl. One of my favorites on this site, because of Travis Beltnick is an amazing character original to this sequel. 

"As Kyle Davis gazed past the glass of his round, fifty-gallon aquarium, past the fake plants and purple gravel to where the only goldfish attacked flakes of food, he thought of Travis Beltnick, as he often did at three-thirty every day when he fed his fish."

In just the first paragraph we get a real world, and a burning question what does Travis have in common with Kyle's fish. The rest of the prologue shows us why and gives us one of the saddest origin stories that is masterfully woven in the rest of the story. There is dialogue, character motivations, a sense of friendship, that is hard to achieve using first person. The entire story is set up and leaves us wanting more. 

In the first example, it's all internal, and DomLuka's most boring character's thoughts. In the second, it's a vibrant world that sets up a thrilling narrative that is a delight. 

One author, two different perspectives. One spoke to me on a very deep emotional level and the other fell flat for many reasons. 

I find it completely reasonable that I had found what I like and perfectly comfortable to stay within what I like. I don't have to give everything a chance. I can reach a conclusion if I have taken in enough data. That's like saying I don't like cilantro but haven't tasted every single dish cilantro has been put inside so I can't say I don't like cilantro. Yes I can, I haven't tried cilantro on pizza but I know I won't like it. I have the data that confirms it. 

And for clarity, my preference is third person, that is what I will read, and I will tell my silly stories in third person. It's not the only way or the correct way. Its just my way, the Log Way  

[Mikiesboy]

On 8/29/2025 at 1:52 PM, Ron said:

In the prompts there was a guest challenge to write a 500 word short story in first person without using “I.” As far as I know I’m the only author to take up the challenge. It was hard but I think it was worth the effort. I linked my work to the prompt so others could read my story (as every author who publishes a prompt response should do). 
 

Might some authors want to rise to challenge? Give it a try and show us just how 1st person point of view can be done well. Post a link to your work here, we’ll judge you so we can critique your work.

You can find my response to this prompt here. 

[Laura S. Fox]

20 minutes ago, Jason Rimbaud said:

Oh my god @CassieQ I'm the only one that said I don't read first person, you can kick me in the head it's okay.  

Do you find it weird that I don't watch horror movies? I'm sure there are some amazing horror movies out there. But I don't like horror movies. I'm not going to slog through fifty movies to find the one good horror movie that speaks to me. I'm okay with "missing" out on that one horror movie. That's why I normally put on a comedy of Sci-Fi and enjoy my night.

It's the same principle, with first person. I have read enough stories to know I don't like that style. I have enough data to know there are more first person stories I don't like then ones i do like. So to save myself time, I go about my blissful way. 

If all this seems vague, it's because I don't want to use examples on why I don't like first person using stories posted on GA.  I have enough people mad at me already. I can use an example of an author that is no longer around for whatever reason.

I'll use DomLuka's The Long Way vs In The Fishbowl. The Long way is written in first person, and its sequel, In A Fish Bowl is written in third person limited.

Damn, it got to be so long I'm not going to post my entire critique first vs third. But I will quote the first two paragraphs from The Long Way 

"It wasn't my first day at a new school, I had actually been there for a little over a month, but I'd transferred in the middle of the year. I didn't really know anyone yet. I didn't really want to know anyone. I guess you could say, at the time I had a pretty shitty attitude about life in particular. 

The problem was people, I hated people. I know: that said, sounds like the problem was me. But it really was people. I hated people. I felt like every time I met someone new, or trusted even an old acquaintance, something bad came of it. I knew that this was a bit irrational, and I was working on it, I really was; but it was happening slowly."

For me, this is an example of telling. We are being told a bunch of stuff, he hates people, he's in a kind of new school, he had bad things happen and he was trying to be better. Then he spends the entire chapter not trying to be better. Matter of fact he never tries to be better. 

But more importantly, we live in this characters head.  For seven thousand words we are being told what happened to this character. No dialogue, no description of anything, just paragraph after paragraph of what happened. This is what I don't like about first person, show me the world, don't show me what's in one characters head and what he thinks the world is.

Next I'll use the sequel, In The Fishbowl. One of my favorites on this site, because of Travis Beltnick is an amazing character original to this sequel. 

"As Kyle Davis gazed past the glass of his round, fifty-gallon aquarium, past the fake plants and purple gravel to where the only goldfish attacked flakes of food, he thought of Travis Beltnick, as he often did at three-thirty every day when he fed his fish."

In just the first paragraph we get a real world, and a burning question what does Travis have in common with Kyle's fish. The rest of the prologue shows us why and gives us one of the saddest origin stories that is masterfully woven in the rest of the story. There is dialogue, character motivations, a sense of friendship, that is hard to achieve using first person. The entire story is set up and leaves us wanting more. 

In the first example, it's all internal, and DomLuka's most boring character's thoughts. In the second, it's a vibrant world that sets up a thrilling narrative that is a delight. 

One author, two different perspectives. One spoke to me on a very deep emotional level and the other fell flat for many reasons. 

I find it completely reasonable that I had found what I like and perfectly comfortable to stay within what I like. I don't have to give everything a chance. I can reach a conclusion if I have taken in enough data. That's like saying I don't like cilantro but haven't tasted every single dish cilantro has been put inside so I can't say I don't like cilantro. Yes I can, I haven't tried cilantro on pizza but I know I won't like it. I have the data that confirms it. 

And for clarity, my preference is third person, that is what I will read, and I will tell my silly stories in third person. It's not the only way or the correct way. Its just my way, the Log Way  

The difference between the two quotes truly reveals what you said. Now that I think about it more, I come to the conclusion that it takes a lot of talent to make first person narrative work, and when it does, it might be for surprising reasons.

Did someone mention here The Great Gatsby? I hope I'm not imagining things. The first-person perspective there works because Nick Carraway is a witness, not the main character. Would Fitzgerald have been capable of pulling the same effect on the reader by having Gatsby tell his own story? I dare to think not. 

One of my favorite novels is Donna Tartt's The Secret History. Yes, it's a first-person narration... but again, Richard Papen - no matter how much he tries to say or prove otherwise - remains the 'outsider'. There was even one reviewer saying that they wouldn't rate the book five stars because of how Richard remains 'on the outside' and I found myself mentally screaming at the screen: but that's the whole point!

In contemporary romance - while I do occasionally read a first-person story - I find it... dishonest for lack of a better word. Whether you, as the person telling the story about yourself, talk about your good point or bad points, it doesn't matter. I will suspect you - yeah, it must be a personal flaw - of lack of sincerity. And lack of sincerity leads to lack of authenticity. And authenticity is that tiny thing that makes books great.

How do you escape - as an author who uses first person and this 'first person' is the main character - this issue? How do you offer a reflection of this main character that won't come across as phony? (Such as... just giving an example - I am not like other girls, I am a hunter, but I'm also pretty, but so not aware of it, I swear... You get the gist.) These are genuine questions - I feel the need to emphasize this, as sometimes, when posting opinions online, they might come across not as their author intended.

Again, I return to my first point - writing great prose in first person is a challenge and requires a lot of talent. (Not that any great story doesn't require the same thing, but I just don't see it as challenging.)

And what about... second-person? 

I only read 'You' in that style - the first book was great, the rest slowly diluted the main character and his motivations. And it worked there - a stalker's obsession, rendered brilliantly (just my opinion, of course).

[CassieQ]

30 minutes ago, Jason Rimbaud said:

Oh my god @CassieQ I'm the only one that said I don't read first person, you can kick me in the head it's okay.  

No, you're not the only one, I've seen these kind of conversations before. 

I also know you read What It Takes, which is also a first person POV and didn't seem to mind it.  Or you did, and are just being nice about it because you're scared of me.  

[Jason Rimbaud]

41 minutes ago, CassieQ said:

No, you're not the only one, I've seen these kind of conversations before. 

I also know you read What It Takes, which is also a first person POV and didn't seem to mind it.  Or you did, and are just being nice about it because you're scared of me.  

I did say that there are good stories I just don't want to wade through them to find the great one.. This third person only thing has just been in the last year. And I loved What it Takes! That's where I first got my innocent crush on you and of course I'm scared of you. 

[Krista]

Well, I guess now I know how to throw a curveball during the next Secret Author contest. I'll write it in third.