What's the best point of view for fiction?

[Captain Pike]

What is your favorite point of view when writing fiction? I ask this now because, in reviewing some of my work prior to sending something out for publication, I stumbled across an interesting observation.

When I write something which is actually semi-autobiographical, it seems, I tend to write in the first person. This kind of stuff comes out good. On the other hand, things I write in an omniscient, or third person viewpoint seem sophomoric and trite. I'll do well in character development, but then my plot seems to unravel and slowdown -- it gets boring.

Anyone have any ideas on this? Oh, one more thing: writers I'm influenced by seem to be writing in the first person. Stephen Crane, Robert Louis Stevenson for example.

[Countess]

It depends. I think third person is best for long works. Jules Vercini was a breeze because it was written in third person, I think.

Right now I'm writing from first person and I've had to come up with some creative ways of introducing ideas that originated outside of the character's experience. Bastat is a challenge, but for more than that reason. Fusing souls together and trying to create both a sense of individuality and unity simultaneously is hard as well. How much do they become one another and how much do they remain themselves? How does the introduction of another person's soul on another person influence that person, how much do traditional societal roles engrained in biology influence the development of the individual personality?

Lots of strange stuff going on in 1st person Black Panther and then Tristan meets Jesus...

Okay, that was a tangent. I'll shut up now.

[vin1391]

I like second person and third person more than first person...

But some first person fiction are really good...I think I like a mix of all three ...

[Rogers_68]

I don't really care which person it's in. If the character is interesting and the story is good, that's what I tend to notice. I like Stephen King's stories, like Misery, that are in the third person. Anne Lamott's fiction is usually in first. I like both.

[Captain Pike]

Well! I'm still digging out from the snowstorm dropped by the Countess. Have you written this, novel and screenplay Countess? I am reading the screenplay now but felt the need to post... couldn't continue to read, without knowing, I guess.

And this Bastat character, well, I suppose I'm out of touch. As if I've been living on an augmented planet. But how does his rap, and this Vercini dude impinge upon the discussion about point of view? Not finding fault, mind you, only, maybe I'm having a little digestive type problem. It's as if I'm eating strange food in a strange restaurant and I'm not sure how it's going to come out, so to speak.

Oh, and vin1391, what is the second person again? I forget.

I kind of hate this: I came in here to find something to read. And then I find out that this is a place for writers to argue, and so forth, so I come here for my writing, and wind up reading again. I suppose there are worse problems, right?

[Rogers_68]

I didn't finish my thought entirely...

Since I like reading both first and third person fiction, I have tried both. I feel that I can get into the character much more intimately if I write in first person. That doesn't mean that the character is just like me, it just means I my imagination seems to work a little better.

Does that help at all?

[Captain Pike]

Yeah, that does help. I think it's the same with me. I have made the mistake in the past of beginning things in the third person without the passion or authenticity of something as dear as a journal entry, say for example. You know, like, "Once upon a time there lived this beautiful princess..." -- kid stuff. Like, it wasn't ever intended to be really good or anything. Whereas if it might be me that I'm writing about, well there, now then, now I'm going to tell you something amazing that happened to me!

Good God, how self-righteous? I've got a long way to go!

[hockeychick8792]

I personally prefer first person, it usually gets a deeper meaning of the main characters emotions and thoughts.

[*Classic*Charm*]

I prefer third person- it leaves for room for individual interpretation.

[Adolescent09]

I prefer third person- it leaves for room for individual interpretation.

I agree with that. I'm writing my book in third person.

[Captain Pike]

This existentialist business brought up by the Countess is really bugging me. Allow me to quote:

... introducing ideas that originated outside of the character's experience. [...] Fusing souls together and trying to create both a sense of individuality and unity simultaneously is hard as well. How much do they become one another and how much do they remain themselves? How does the introduction of another person's soul on another person influence that person, how much do traditional societal roles...

okay, now I need to tell you, my writing doesn't often call for this. But it does raise a very interesting idea. Often, I do need to transpose a character's thinking with a completely external paradigm. Take, for example, a revelation: the protagonist suddenly has an awakening of sorts. So, here are some ways:
1he has a dream -- a Newton's Apple, round earth type revelational dream.
He picks up a hitchhiker, who straightens him around.
He has a spiritual upload.
He witnesses something horrific
this business of being bitten, by something that transforms us, that's a horse of another color where anything goes.

[THX-1138]

first person

[kandaurov]

Personally, I like viewpoint shifts, and similar unlinear narrating techniques

[Orual]

I think it depends on what you want, really. The first person point of view allows for the extensive development of one character, and if someone is writing a bildungsroman, I really think that this is the way to go. Nothing brings out the flaws and changes in a character better than his or her own voice. The difficulty in writing first person, of course, is properly separating yourself from the character. And the narrative portions tends to be more difficult in first person.

Third person is the point of view for an epic. It's not as close to the characters, allows for objectivity (though it is certainly possible and often necessary to lean in favor of a character or group), and captures a big picture better. Not to mention, action is infinately easier and smoother.

So no straight answer from me. :) My favorite book is first person; my second is in third (though it has very brief points of first person because Dostoyevsky is crazy like that). Both have their points of merit.

Oh, and omniscience--I think this is just a difficult point of view. Anna Karenina is the only book I've read in omniscient (I think), and I found it rather awkward even then, though that may just be from translation. I wouldn't even try it unless I had a very good reason, but I suppose it depends on one's strengths.

[hyperinsomnia]

I like first person better, I like Sally Beauman, who writes sections from different characters points of view throughout the book. You know what every main character is thinking, but the book is still personal.

[ae13]

I like first person for the fact that it ties a real reader to a real writer's experience. Of course the experience is not real, but it builds strong emotion and determination (of the desired outcome) in the reader. I'm new, hi there. I enjoy books that can switch between perspectives effectively, although there are very few (things can become too confusing and abstract). "Another Roadside Attraction" is a book I enjoyed that definately left you questioning the actual perspective of the writer.

[symphony]

i think third person as a writer gives more insight to all the characters and thus is much more enlightening.