For Authors: March 08, 2006 Issue [#912] |
For Authors
This week: Edited by: Holly Jahangiri More Newsletters By This Editor
1. About this Newsletter 2. A Word from our Sponsor 3. Letter from the Editor 4. Editor's Picks 5. A Word from Writing.Com 6. Ask & Answer 7. Removal instructions
“Nothing, not love, not greed, not passion or hatred, is stronger than a writer’s need to change another writer’s copy.”
Arthur Evans
“All of us learn to write in the second grade. Most of us go on to greater things.”
Bobby Knight
|
ASIN: B01CJ2TNQI |
Product Type: Kindle Store
|
Amazon's Price: $ 5.99
|
|
Point of View
I had a question about first, second and third person perspective. I would appreciate some feedback with examples of each. I am pretty sure about first and third, but second... I am a little iffy!
First, let me give examples of each:
First person
Here, you are limited to describing the world through a single character's senses, just as you would be if you were telling a story from your own experience. You cannot go "head hopping" through the thoughts of other characters (unless your main character is conveniently psychic).
Someone was in my driveway, honking incessantly. I grabbed my coffee and flung open the door, ready to shout at whoever it was to shut the hell up. It was Henry, standing next to a shiny, candy-apple-red Porsche, dangling the keys and grinning like a fool. "Want to take her for a spin?" he asked. How could I resist?
Second person
Many readers find this POV annoying. It can be done; however, just because you can doesn't mean you should. Second person is a very difficult POV to pull off effectively.
You really can't imagine it until you've experienced it; the incessant honking of a car horn in your driveway at six in the morning. Saturday morning. You open one eye and your first thought is to kill whoever it is making that awful racket. Don't they know you're trying to sleep through a nasty hangover? You grudgingly get out of bad. By the time you've navigated the stairs and reached the front door, you're so angry you nearly yank it off the hinges. "Stop! Just stop!" you cry. And then you see Henry, standing next to that shiny, candy-apple-red Porsche, grinning like a fool. He twirls the keys on his finger.
"Want to take her for a spin?" he asks.
It's hard to stay mad, under the circumstances.
Third Person
It is debatable whether first or third person is the easiest POV to write, particularly for novice writers. Third offers a lot of flexibility not available with first, but it also provides many opportunities for sloppy, unbelievable writing. Overly convenient "head hopping" is probably the most common abuse of third person. Jumping from one character's point of view to another's can be very disorienting to a reader.
Someone was in Joe's driveway, honking incessantly. Joe looked over at his alarm clock. 6:00 AM? He tried pulling a pillow over his head, but he could still hear the blare of the car horn through the goose down. Joe pulled on a pair of sweat pants and, grumbling, made his way downstairs. He threw open the front door, ready to confront the rude visitor with a string of epithets that would make a truck driver blush.
"Hey there, Grumpy," said Henry, laughing. Next to Henry was a shiny, new, candy-apple-red Porsche. Joe gawked at it as Henry twirled the keys and grinned. "Wanna take her for a spin?" he asked.
Joe's anger suddenly turned into the glee felt by a six year old on Christmas morning.
With third person, you have to make some choices: limited or omniscient point of view. If limited, you are confined to the thoughts and knowledge of the character. You cannot go "head hopping" through all your characters - you write as if you only know what's going on in the world from that one character's point of view. (It's a little like first person POV in that respect, but you refer to everyone as "he" or "she.") With omniscient, you get to play God; you get to know (and selectively reveal to the reader) everything everywhere. Beware of the head-hopping, though - too much of it can become very confusing to the reader, and sometimes it's just too easy for the writer. It tends to lead to what I think of as "cheating" - making up easy explanations for things, or rationalizing weird character behavior by explaining things that are only happening mentally - that maybe you should make the reader figure out as the story progresses. In some ways, 3rd person omniscient is the easiest to write - but can lead to some of the worst writing on the planet.
Challenge:
Write a scene in first person POV. Now, rewrite that same scene using second person POV, third person limited POV, and third person omniscient POV.
Which one works best? (Your answer may vary, depending on the needs of the scene, and that is as it should be. Put your scenes into a single static item and send me a link via the Feedback box at the bottom of this newsletter, and I will feature them in my next issue.)
Using the Internet as a Research Tool
tahubley wrote, in response to my last editorial:
I disagree that the internet is not an acceptable research tool. You overlook some excellent search engines (such as the highly respected PubMed or http://www.eric.ed.gov/, which is both a search engine and repository). There are primary materials to be had on the internet and many well known journals all e-access to academics.
I challenged tahubley to write a rebuttal, citing good sources of information – preferably free – available on the Internet. And here is the result:
| | Invalid Item This item number is not valid. #1069827 by Not Available. |
|
Have an opinion on what you've read here today? Then send the Editor feedback! Find an item that you think would be perfect for showcasing here? Submit it for consideration in the newsletter! https://www.Writing.Com/go/nl_form
Don't forget to support our sponsor!
ASIN: B07K6Z2ZBF |
Product Type: Kindle Store
|
Amazon's Price: $ 4.99
|
|
Favorite Grammar Books: Why NOT Strunk & White?
Why don't you like Strunk and White?
And a great example of a primary document is the [d]iary of Anne Frank.
I have nothing against Strunk and White's Elements of Style. It's a good primer. But everyone recommends that one – you didn't need me to tell you about it, surely. And, as others wrote in to say, it's not the most entertaining grammar guide available. You have to stay awake through the lesson for the information to sink in. --Holly Jahangiri
I have a copy of Strunk & White's Elements of Style and keep thinking I'd learn so much if I could just read throught the whole thing, but I find myself nodding off whenever I try. Thanks for offereing some alternatives!
Jessie,
What a great newsletter! I've always been one of those writers who generally gets grammar right without being able to point out in "technical" terms what I did. Every time I've tried to read Elements of Style, I end up falling asleep, so I've despaired of ever understanding what a dangling particple is and how to use semi-colons properly. But the books you've recommended have given me hope .
I enjoy my grammar with a healthy dose of humor. Thanks for linking the books in your article. I own Eats, Shoots & Leaves, another funny grammar book.
Oooh! Grammar books I've never heard of! But I can't believe you didn't mention Eats, Shoots & Leaves, it's so cool!
It wasn't really an oversight. Eats, Shoots & Leaves is a very popular book, and deserves credit for making grammar and punctuation "cool." I thought I'd bring some newer or lesser-known ones to your attention. But by popular demand:
ASIN: 1592400876 |
|
Amazon's Price: $ 12.98
|
|
Many writers spell "grammar" incorrectly. They spell it "grammer." I had to chuckle when I read in today's newsletter that Serena spelled this word "grammer" even as she told you that part of your information was incorrect.
That is the only correct spelling isn't it, with the "ar?" I couldn't find the "er" spelling in Word Web.
Oh well. It was something that stood out.
Carol McKenzie
These are the things that keep us humble, Carol. If you read through the public reviews regularly, you'll notice an amusing little quirk – it happens to us all – as we point out errors in others' work, we're quite likely to insert errors of our own into the critique. We will spell words in ways we'd never dream of spelling them under other circumstances. We will mangle rules and misname verb tenses. We will misuse punctuation in exactly the ways we tell others not to. All we can do is slap our foreheads and laugh it off, then make a note to proofread more carefully next time.
As a general rule, I don't edit feedback unless it's unclear. Including (sic) just calls more attention to spelling errors. I did format book titles in today's feedback, but that's about it.
Think of the popular "Blooper" shows. (The reason actors don't object too strongly to some of these is that it gets them free publicity and makes them look…human.) If your "bloopers" are embarrassing, proofread more carefully. Otherwise, just smile and say – "Yeah, yeah, I had peanut butter on my fingers when I typed that…" --Holly Jahangiri
Writing & Formatting a Press Release
Hey Jessie! Great newsletter, as always. I was wondering if you know anything about the correct format for a press release. I would be happy for any information or a shove in the right direction. Thanks!
Matters of Style and Grammar
this is just crazy, as I'm on the internet trying to find a MLA guide I deside to check my mail here at WDC and then I read this newsletter. How strange is that haha.
In response to your answer to spazmom: "Wouldn't it be easier, and serve you better in the long run, to learn and practice the basic rules of good writing?"
Yes, it is much easier to self-edit. However, more often than not, we tend to miss things. For example, most authors at magazines will self-edit a piece they have written 2, 3, even 4 times, but they always have several editors that comb through the piece as well. Sometimes it takes a well-trained eye to catch those mistakes.
I wasn't talking about those sly, sneaky little errors that inevitably appear after the final edit. I was talking about the basic mechanics of good writing. I stand by what I said; it's far too easy for the editor who receives submissions to toss a sloppy manuscript into the trash. Don't be too quick to assume that they need your work so badly they'll spend time and resources to fix a slew of typos and bad grammar. –-Holly Jahangiri
Thanks for the plug on one of my academic papers. It is much appreciated. [" ADHD: Disorder or Temperament Variance?" [ E]] uses ASA style for citations. I don't know if this is different from APA, but in my 400 level Sociology course this was called American Sociological Association style.
Thanks for all of the valuable information in this newsletter.
Write On!
Beth
Thanks for the reminders on subject/verb agreement. Those little buggers can be tricky if you aren't paying attention!
Thanks for being so informative, Jessie!
Dr. Von Neuman played a huge role in inventing the computer. He was in a tiny minority of Hungarians for what reason? Hint: The Gabor sisters were also in that Hungarian minority.
I love getting feedback on the For Authors Newsletter – it lets me know you’re reading, and it tells me whether I’m writing about the subjects that interest you. Please keep those questions and comments coming!
|
ASIN: B07RKLNKH7 |
Product Type: Kindle Store
|
Amazon's Price: $ 0.99
|
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, click here for your newsletter subscription list. Simply uncheck the box next to any newsletter(s) you wish to cancel and then click to "Submit Changes". You can edit your subscriptions at any time.
|
This printed copy is for your personal use only. Reproduction
of this work in any other form is not allowed and does violate its copyright. |