Hmm.

[katallison]

OK, I'm still trying to write a Vividcon con report, with marked lack of success, but in the meantime -- I'm very curious about something I've come across a couple of times lately in LJ comments, and that is the issue of the name you use to refer to a character when you're writing a close-3rd-person-POV story about that character.

Ahem. Let me see if I can be clearer. Say I'm writing a story in 3rd person about Fraser, where he's the POV character. I always refer to him as "Fraser" because that's, y'know, what I call the guy. But I've seen a couple of people lately saying that in such situations the name used should be the one that the character himself uses when he thinks about himself, so the question is does he think of himself as Fraser, or Ben, or Benton, or whatever?

See, in my head this is kind of, sort of, related to the issue flambeau was talking about a while ago (here, to be specific), where you can't sneak in descriptive stuff by having the POV character musing about his own tautly muscled abs or emerald eyes or whatever, or on the other hand providing detailed descriptions of scenes he regularly moves through and is familiar with to the point of obliviousness. You have to maintain the authenticity/integrity of the character's own awareness. And one could argue, I guess, that using the name the character would use about himself inwardly is part of that authenticity-maintenance, except -- I dunno, I just have never thought of it that way. It feels strange to me, and I'd love to hear others' views.

Comments

[eliade.livejournal.com]

I have so much trouble with that! Well...come to think, more with reading than with writing. It's most notable for me with Fraser (Ben) and Snape (Severus), just off the top of my head. I've gotten bettern in both cases at accepting the first names, but often it'll read weird to me. Especially with Fraser: "Ben" is incredibly difficult to accept, as we almost never hear it on the show.

I am unhelpful, but thought I'd peep. *g*

[merryish.livejournal.com]

I had the same issue with Fraser in the Great Epic of Long Unfinishedness. I did decide to go with "Ben" in his inner voice, in the end, because a guy who thinks of himself as "Fraser" isn't the guy I was writing, and because his dad (if memory serves) refers to him occasionally as Ben. It seems likely to me that he'd think of himself by the name his parents called him. And "Benton" is just too stiff for the character I'm writing.

It's also a cool way to signal a POV change when I'm not planning to use more than a section break -- the flip to Fraser puts it firmly in Ray's PoV without me having to do any extra work (and I am aaaaaalll about me having to do no extra work).

Bottom line, though -- I know it's probably going to mean a sacrifice to a lot of fans in terms of readability, but it's the only way I could make it sound right to *me*. And since I'm not really in the fandom and don't expect it to make much noise when I finally post (Merry WHO?), I'm mostly just doing it for myself.

[hesychasm]

Instinctually, I'd say referring to him as "Fraser" is okay because it's still third person. It's from his POV, but even so there remains a bit of omniscient distance from him for both writer and reader.

This is kind of related to a question I've always had about people who write Mulder. In XF fic, whenever he's thinking to himself about something, or addressing himself in his own thoughts, more often than not authors would still have him use his last name. As in, "Mulder thought to himself, Mulder, you should really quit yanking Skinner's chain."

It always threw me off -- for all the show made a habit of "Mulder this" and "Mulder that," it was still, in a way, third person. So wouldn't the character, talking to himself in second person, at least address himself as "Fox"? Or did fanfic writers consciously choose to portray him as that dysfunctional?

[zoerayne]

So wouldn't the character, talking to himself in second person, at least address himself as "Fox"? Or did fanfic writers consciously choose to portray him as that dysfunctional?

I don't know how dysfunctional it is, but I firmly believe that Mulder thinks of himself by his last name. He makes it clear early on that he really hates his first name and that no one uses it (except maybe his mother). A story where he thought of himself as "Fox" would throw me out so fast that I'd probably never finish it. YMMV.

[yonmei.livejournal.com]

I think there are two forces at play here, and for good fanfiction, I think you need the conflict between the two forces, rather than for one of them to win.

Force One: The POV character should refer to themselves by the name which they think of themselves. So for example, if you are writing a story in which Methos is the POV character, if you wish to write him referring to himself as "Adam Pierson" (or any other temporary name) you have to be conscious that you are writing him as someone who steeps himself so deeply in his current character that he does not think of himself as anyone but his current character.

Force Two: The wish to use the name by which the character is commonly known to fans, by which they will expect to see the character named. If you avoid using this name, I think you then have to work twice as hard to make sure that the character is visibly, audibly, at all times, in character* - that even without the known name in use, a casual fan reader would still know who the character was.

To a certain extent (this is the only thing that explains the success of bad fanfic, IMO) people read fanfic for the names. Maybe Fraser does think of himself as "Ben", but if you write a Fraser POV story where "Fraser" is only used when someone in the story is speaking to Ben or referring to Ben... well, the POV character is going to have to be very notably Fraserish, and even then, some readers are going to complain.

Which is why I think the interplay works. Figuring out why a character will switch from one name to the other - how David Newman can be peaceably reshelving books in a university library somewhere, when he feels the buzz and Methos makes a quick dash for the nearest group of students and spends the next two hours sitting in a crowded student canteen pretending to read a book and surreptitiously trying to spot the immortal who was in the library.

*and really, we should strive for this anyway.

[jacquez.livejournal.com]

how David Newman can be peaceably reshelving books in a university library somewhere, when he feels the buzz and Methos makes a quick dash for the nearest group of students

Words cannot express how much I hate it when authors do this. It feels wrong - it's a kind of epithetism masquerading as exposition, and it's something that nearly always makes me bail out of a story as soon as I encounter it.

I'm not saying that the tension shouldn't exist, but I think this particular use of the tension is abhorrent.

[therealjae.livejournal.com]

Wow, what a fascinating question. I've never written a character in the third person who wasn't normally referred to by his given name, so it's not one that's come up for me, but I'm inclined to agree that it should be the character's own name for himself.

Let me try to recast this in a context I'm more familiar with than "Due South." On the West Wing, President Josiah Bartlet (whom I've never written as a POV character) is usually referred to on the show either as "Mr. President," or "Bartlet." If I were to write something from his POV, though, I think I'd use the name that we've seen his wife call him, i.e., Jed. It might feel a little strange because we rarely see him being called that, but it would feel equally strange for him to be thinking of himself as 'Bartlet' or (ugh) 'the President'.

It's not a question with an easy answer, though, I think. And interestingly, this is one thing that writers of original fiction don't have to grapple with, for obvious reasons. It's fanfiction-specific.

-J

[oracne.livejournal.com]

providing detailed descriptions of scenes he regularly moves through and is familiar with to the point of obliviousness. You have to maintain the authenticity/integrity of the character's own awareness

True, but there's a trick one can use sometimes to show environment or similar in a tight 3rd--have something be different that day, different enough that the pov character notices.

Like, "Duncan was taken aback by the unusual messiness of Methos' apartment: his pop art posters had been torn down from the walls spilled from the dining room table, and his collection of Iron Age dildos now lay in the fruit bowl Joe had given him for Xmas."

As for the name thing, I figure which name a person calls themself is a telling fact. Benton Fraser could very well think of himself as "Fraser." Or maybe not.

[cofax7]

That's a good question. It's a tension, I guess, between what would really be in character for the character -- and thus believability/respectability for the author -- and what would be more likely to keep the reader in the story.

I think Dana Scully is a good example (although Jintian used Mulder, I think Scully works better): she is called "Scully" almost exclusively during the run of the show. But ... I think she still thinks of herself as "Dana".

So, yeah, to be perfectly in character all my intimate-third-person fic should use "Dana" and not "Scully". But then I don't do intimate third person: I always leave her some distance, and I never try first person because it just doesn't work (for me, with her). And the readers don't think of her as "Dana": she's "Scully" to all of us. So I use "Scully", and that keeps the audience with me, even if it sacrifices a tiny bit of believability in the pov, or gives the pov more distance than it would otherwise have.

Does that make any sense?

[katallison.livejournal.com]

::nodnod:: Scully actually is a very good case to use in this regard, I think; first name/last name seem for her to serve as a marker of people she knows personally (family, friends) vs. people she deals with professionally (Mulder, Skinner, Krycek). She seems comfortable with her own first name, unlike Mulder, but she uses it selectively. I certainly buy that, unlike Mulder, if she's talking to herself she'd use her first name.

And this-- I always leave her some distance, and I never try first person because it just doesn't work (for me, with her). -- I am in total agreement with.

[callmesandy.livejournal.com]

Or the perennial Sports Night question of Dan or Danny. I think I used to have Casey think of Dan as "Danny" when it was Casey POV, but Dan thought of himself as Dan. And usually referred to himself when speaking of himself in 3rd POV as Dan, as well. (And I once did a really geeky study of this, man, I'm such a loser.)

I do think in 3rd POV, depending on how very very limited it is, the character would think of him/herself by, hmm, the name they used when referring to themselves. Does Fraser ever speak himself in the third person to guide you there?

Plus, you get the thorny question of relatives in 3rd person limited. Clearly, even if we as readers know the name first and last of the main POV's character's mother, they wouldn't be thinking, "my mother, Jane Doemommy." And I always end up with these odd constructions of "his mother said," "his mom's garden," to maintain that.

The only time I ever got away with someone admiring their taut abs in 3rd person POV was in a body-switching story. Heh.

[helvirago]

Does Fraser ever speak himself in the third person to guide you there?

Actually, he does. The problem is, he generally says "Constable Benton Fraser of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police." Darn Fraser.

I have this problem too, by the way. Generally I just pick one per story and stick with it, but I think I've done third-person using both Fraser and Benton.

[thete1.livejournal.com]

I tend to be of the school where, in tight-third, the POV character should *always* refer to himself the way s/he would, well, refer to himself. It's all part of staying in character. So, if I think Snape thinks of himself as Severus, I *have* to keep typing Severus, no matter how often it makes me twitch. And so on.

Though I'll admit I *will* adjust my personal views of the characters in such a way that they *have* to refer to themselves the way I want them to. If that makes any sense.

[debchan.livejournal.com]

See, I always apply the Fletch Factor in cases like this. (Fletch being Irwin Maurice Fletcher from the Gregory MacDonald books.) Fletch hates his first name, so he is Fletch whether he's thinking of himself, or he's in bed with Moxie and she's calling his name as she orgasms.

Now, I don't think Fraser hates his first name, but I have no problem with him thinking of himself as Fraser, because that's what everyone calls him. (Even Victoria did, didn't she?) It doesn't jar for me like Snape thinking of himself as Snape would. He's just...*helpless shrug* Fraser.

[katallison.livejournal.com]

Actually, I think Victoria calls him "Ben." But then she's got an agenda. *g* And I'm right with you in the "he's just...Fraser" camp. Regardless of how he thinks of himself, *I* can't think of him any other way.

[bethbethbeth.livejournal.com]

"Hmmm," she says, commenting in LJ for the first time in a week. "This is always a tricky question, isn't it?"

If this is a story set during the Chicago years, and with Fraser on his own (i.e., not in a relationship), then I think using "Fraser" is the way to go. If he's involved with someone, however, then he *might* think of himself as Benton.

On the other hand, let's say a story is set ten years in the future and he's back in Canada? Well...if enough of the people around his posting are calling him by his first name, then Benton wouldn't sound as odd as it might during his time in Chicago.

What I'm saying is that for *me*, it depends on time and circumstances and environment. I mean, one of my little flashfiction stories was set (in part) when Fraser was a little boy. The story was tight third, and *there* he was Ben (because 'Fraser' would have sounded ridiculous).

I'm sure both Rays, however, think of themselves as Ray.

[katallison.livejournal.com]

On the other hand, let's say a story is set ten years in the future and he's back in Canada? Well...if enough of the people around his posting are calling him by his first name, then Benton wouldn't sound as odd as it might during his time in Chicago.

That's a really good point, Beth, and yeah, I can definitely see that working. And indeed, small-boy Fraser would definitely be "Ben."

[jacquez.livejournal.com]

I think this is part of why I write in first person so often: I don't think of myself as "Laura", or "Jac", or anything at ALL except for "I" or "me".

So I have trouble wrapping my head around this whole thing, because it's not something I really *do*.

When I do it--infrequently and uncomfortably--I stick with names that it would be reasonable for the character to use for him/herself. Methos, for example, probably doesn't think of himself as Adam ("I wouldn't stay in any hotel Adam Pierson could afford."), and Ray K has gone to some lengths to eliminate the use of his first name in favor of "Ray" - but some characters we don't have such a clear statement from.

So for Duncan MacLeod, "Duncan" and "MacLeod" seem fine to me, though "Mac" tends to throw me off (it feels too contemporary to be part of his permanent identity); for Fraser, I'm inclined towards "Ben" or "Benton" but don't object to "Fraser". These are personal choices, though, because I don't know how the character really feels about his name.

[jacquez.livejournal.com]

Forgot to say - this is part of why it makes me INSANE when DS writers use "Stan" for Ray K.

The man has clearly tried to get the name "Stanley" out of his life; I'm damn sure he doesn't think of himself as "Stan". No. No. Stop that. Don't make me come over there and hit you with a stick.

[zoerayne]

I think it's very much the same thing that flambeau was talking about. The name used in a 3rd-person-limited POV story should be the one that the character would use for themselves. Whether that's a first name, last name, or nickname would depend on the character, but anything else feels wrong to me. I think that's because it creates an artificial "distance" between the reader and the POV character.

As hesychasm pointed out, Mulder's written as a last-name kind of guy, and I think that works because of his own hang-ups. Canon supports it.

On the other hand, Fraser I'm ambivalent about. Based on what we've seen with his pre-Chicago friends, I'm probably most comfortable with seeing "Ben" in a tight 3rd-person story, though "Fraser" doesn't *usually* throw me out of the story. (Having RayV address him as "Ben" or "Benton," though.... That bothers me.)

On the third hand [g], it does bother me when, in an HP story, the POV character is called by their last name. If it's Dumbledore's story, he's Albus. The same for any of the characters, despite the fact that we're used to seeing them referred to by their surnames in canon. How odd would it be to see Harry referred to as "Potter" in one of Rowling's books? It's the same thing, IMO.

Obviously, all of the above examples don't count usage by other characters in dialogue. And that reminds me of a rant by...someone (and I just went through 600 recent friends entries unsuccessfully looking for it) about the use of bizarre and non-canonical nicknames in dialogue in HP stories.

[jacquez.livejournal.com]

God, now I'm going to be trying to remember where I saw that rant all evening. I read it just two days ago, too; might've gotten to it from wereadshite, somehow.

If I'm OK, the rest of you must be odd

[suzecarol.livejournal.com]

Do real people really think of themselves by name, rather than as 'me' or 'I'? Is this something I should be doing -- not as a writer, but in real life? Or at least, when I'm trying to pass as normal?

The whole thing makes me wonder if I'm stranger than I thought. And, BTW, that thought was not "Suze, maybe you're really strange," but "Maybe I'm really strange." *weg*

Re: If I'm OK, the rest of you must be odd

[septembergrrl.livejournal.com]

I think of myself as Beth, which is what I was called as a child.

I don't have an opinion about due south (I got to this post from my friend's list), but I agree that Scully thinks of herself as Dana, and Mulder thinks of himself as Mulder. He just made it too clear he did not like the name Fox (well, who would?), whereas Scully seemed to only go by her last name in the professional context.

I'm mostly from Buffy fandom. I think Giles *probably* thinks of himself as Rupert or Ripper most of the time, but I wouldn't put money on it or anything. I can't remember -- what did Olivia and Jenny call him?

[gwyn-r.livejournal.com]

I'm constantly surprised by the "rules" that fanfic readers believe exist, and some of the answers here in your LJ perplex me greatly. I just never see these things come up in my RL fiction circles, and I'm always curious where these "rules" come from and why they're widely understood to be the correct way to write.

I think you can have him calling himself anything you want and that makes the story work for you. I can't count how many people battered me for using Walter and Skinner interchangeably, and I shared it with some of my writer friends and they all laughed as hard as I did. Most people simply don't think of themselves by name -- I could be unusual in this respect, but I don't think of myself by name ever. So it's a device that in no way mirrors our real lives, it exists soley to help move the reader through the narrative and give a foundation for the viewpoint. If it's not a first-person narrative, the way the character would think of themselves is... basically, not at all, so anything is relevant.

If using Fraser makes you more comfortable, that's what you should do. And if Ben fits in that particular passage, then use it -- sometimes for intimate moments between characters, when you've used he too much, that's the right time for a more intimate name. There is no law or device for this; those fans who tell you different are just perpetuating more of those writing rule myths that I often find so destructive to good writing. You're an *exceptional* writer, and there's nothing you can do that won't work well, in my not even remotely humble opinion. ;-)

[zvi-likes-tv.livejournal.com]

I'm constantly surprised by the "rules" that fanfic readers believe exist

All genre writing has rules that do not apply to non-genre/different genre writing.

The best example I can think of this is one that I think comes from Orson Scott Card's How to Write Science Fiction and Fantasy. He gave two groups of students a passage in a story that mentioned a 'snake bus'. The 'mundane' class all assumed that an unusually long, mechanical bus was being described. The science-fiction group assumed there was a snake. That's because the exposition in SF tends towards more literalism in early parts of a story, before the rules of the world are built.

I suppose the particular question Kat raises arises in fanfiction because good fanfiction is a) trying to match characterization with an outside source in a medium with almost no interior monologue and b) trying not to describe things with which the reader is intimately familiar from the original source.

[theodosia.livejournal.com]

Thought of two good examples that illustrate inner and outer names -- the classic comic book Superman probably thinks of himself as "Clark" most of the time. (And of course the SV Clark doesn't have that issue yet.) But Batman/Bruce Wayne -- yeah, if he's in the right mood, he'll think of himself as Batman.

[chicating.livejournal.com]

I think so, probably. And I think Giles thinks of himself as Giles sometimes. He uses it more than the name he was born to, certainly. And I get to cheat a lot on this issue because I've written about cops who are all last name, a lot. But still Bayliss is "Tim" a lot more than Munch is "John"

[chicating.livejournal.com]

mmm. I got the feeling he was none too fond of it, but maybe that's just me. Sorry to get all hyperbolic, though.

[umbo.livejournal.com]

What jacquez said. I guess I've never really thought about it much, to tell you the truth, because I *do* write almost exclusively in first person present. And I agree with what some other folks have said, too--that it's not that important if it's Fraser or Ben, but that it *is* important for Ray to never *ever* be Stan or Stanley.

I was actually thinking of something sort of related with the dS/Homicide crossover I appear to be writing (I really wasn't intending to, and I'm not sure it'll be a whole story, but I'm having fun), in that I have Tim (it's written first person from his POV) first thinking of Ray as Kowalski, and then, as he gets to know him a little better, as Ray. But I don't intend for him to ever see Fraser as anything but Fraser--Benton is reserved for Ray, if that makes any sense.

Anyway, cool reading all the comments!

Here we go round the mulberry bush... again

[suzecarol.livejournal.com]

Why don't we ever settle these questions by voting? Then we could just issue a fandom wide proclamation: From this moment hence, in all 3rd person stories where Fraser is the POV character, he shall refer to himself as_____.

I'd like to nominate "Lord Protector of Pigeons."

Re: Here we go round the mulberry bush... again

[merryish.livejournal.com]

I'm not really getting a sense that anyone's asking for (or demanding) a hard and fast rule.

I thought we were just kind of discussing the possible impact of choices, as writers.

We can still do that without chisels and stone tablets, can't we?

[rhi]

My inner nag (who, not surprisingly, sounds like my mother's voice) uses my name, but that's a pure guilt technique, what can I say. Otherwise, it's 'I' or 'me'. For a 3rd person writing style, though, I think it does work to use whatever the character is most accustomed to hearing himself called at that time or in that mood. For example, at work, he probably thinks of himself as Fraser, or maybe Constable. At home, he's Fraser or maybe Benton or Ben. Around Ray Vecchio, I doubt he's Benny, but I could be wrong, too. ::g:: Now, around Ma Vecchio, he may well end up thinking of himself as Benton.

Particularly for the characters who try to blend in with whatever group they're in, I can see the names shifting, and it could well be an indicator of mood, too. Letting people in or shutting them out, say. Overall, however, I'd say write what feels correct to you and makes the story run most smoothly. Which I guess goes back to the 'transparent writing' thread I think Cesperanza started a while back.

Sorry to blither, Kat. It made more sense when I started typing. I'll go away again now.

[katallison.livejournal.com]

Nope, makes perfect sense to me, and your point about shifting names for different situations is an excellent one. And, yeah, transparency; to me, using a first name that we seldom-if-ever hear in canon really stands out, draws attention, so a writer needs to deploy it very strategically, for a clear purpose organic to the story, or otherwise it's just going to niggle at me.

(Plus, also, I'm in agreement that Fraser does *not* think of himself as Benny. Ever. *g*)

[j-bluestocking.livejournal.com]

It can be misleading to talk about "what a character calls himself." It's true, as others have pointed out, that most people rarely address themselves. At the same time, I think the question of how that character "identifies" (for lack of a better term) does affect what name works. That example of calling Mulder "Mulder" in a story set when he's a six-year-old child pretty much lays that out. He'll always be Mulder to me, him, and everyone he knows as an adult, but as a six-year-old kid? If he thinks of himself as "Mulder," I’d want to know where the hell this is taking place -- did he grow up in some kind of communal dorm where everyone was known by their last names? Because six-year-olds just don't identify that way. They differentiate from other members of their family; they’re David, not Lisa or Joey or Daddy or Mommy. It's not a matter of "how I address myself in my thoughts" -- I think that just confuses the issue.

And why shouldn't how a person identifies affect what name seems proper to a reader? It's been long understood that when you're writing in tight POV, even when you're not specifically relaying thoughts, you're better off using terminology and metaphors that would be natural to that character. (In porn circles, for example, there's the old call-it-what-the-character-would-call-it method of dealing with body parts. It doesn't matter if the character has never spoken the word aloud in their life; what would they call it?)

A story written from the POV of a sheltered genius will have a different style and use different metaphors than a story written from the POV of Joe in the trailer park. We understand and accept this, and the reader understands it on an unconscious level. They won't mark you off points; in fact, I rather suspect most readers outside the overly informed world of fandom wouldn't even be able to tell you what was bothering them -- but they may well read, frown, and think that something's wrong.

Is this a "rule"? I think the only "rule" you can safely follow in fiction is the rule of "try not to bore the audience." To the experienced, however, there are guidelines (often discovered the hard way). The truth is, if you write something the reader accepts, then it worked -- that's the bottom line. If they feel weird about what you're doing, if it tosses them out of the story and they stop reading? Then it didn't. I've written stories where I could easily slip back and forth between last name and given name. And I've written stories where that wouldn't work at all.

Having said all this, I'll point back up at the word "affect." It affects how well the POV works, it doesn't necessarily define it. For example: suppose you wrote a story about a team of Homicide detectives. Each man or woman in the team is known by their last name only. You devote a chapter to each POV. You could probably write a damned tight POV there using this guy's last name, even if you told yourself that theoretically, in another sort of book and another very different plot line (say, when "Zito" was visiting his dysfunctional family for a reunion, and his detective life never entered the picture) he might better identify with his first name.

Really, it all comes down to what works. I've had this discussion about POV shifts. There are guidelines you learn about them as you grow experienced, but I read one book written almost entirely in a woman's POV -- except for two pages, where, in the middle of a freaking scene, the author shifts to the man she's involved with. The first time I read it, I didn't notice. That's how smoothly it was done! Later, I couldn't believe I'd missed it, and mentioned it to a friend who'd also read the book -- and she hadn't noticed either!

I don’t have a last name in Live Journal, but if I picked up a story about me and instead of Koi, it referred to me as “Live Journal User #8245,” I’d assume the story was written from the POV of a technician, or maybe an artificial intelligence. If it were supposed to be written from my POV, I’d wonder what the hell was wrong with me that I was going around thinking of myself as Live Journal User #8245. Because it is going to affect how the reader sees the character.

[j-bluestocking.livejournal.com]

Also -- yeah, yeah, because I didn't babble on long enough, I know -- fan fiction is a different world from pro, because fan readers have expectations pro readers don't, and this dovetails with the issue of how the character identifies.

For instance, I wrote a story where some people had issues with the characterization of Lex Luthor. While Skinner is often simply called "Skinner" on XF, Lex is nearly always "Lex," not "Luthor," unless he's with an enemy. This could partly reflect their different situations -- we meet Skinner at work, and Lex at his home; Skinner is Skinner to Mulder, and Lex is Lex to Clark; etc. But it can also reflect their internal lives. Lex, who goes out of his way to differentiate himself from his father, may not be in the part of his life where he prefers to be called "Luthor."

If I'd used his last name, there'd be the danger that readers would think I was trying to distance the character from his own emotions -- and since he was already pretty distant, it could have come across rather like psychosis.

So if you've borne with me this far (sorry about the long-windedness), I'm just saying that there is no one simple factor that determines everything. How the character identifies; what reader expectation is; what kind of story it is; when it takes place; and probably a host of other things I'm not coming up with right now.

As writers, we balance a thousand factors with every sentence, and we do it unconsciously. We hack through the forest of choices. Different stories are going to have subtly different requirements, and I can imagine that one might exist where "Fraser" wouldn't be the best option.

However, Kat, I remain pretty confident that any story in which bad choices were made would not be written by you.

foot-->mouth

[amand-r.livejournal.com]

Okay. Was reading a few comments about this that said that fiction writers (as in not FF) look at this differently, and I suppose they do. But as I am not one of them, I can give two POVs that come to mind:

Fanfic is a bizarre experimental art form, in a way. We don't have to cater to an editor, or worry about being paid for our work, so sometimes we can afford to ponder technicalities to the point of wank. Case in point, there.

1. Because I treat fanfic as experimentation, I have tried all the viewpoints I can get. What I think I have to be conscious of is when I am writing in third person limited and when I'm writing in omniscient and simply focusing on one character. When the story is about Methos and the POV is limited, he's Methos, and he never bothers to note everyday stuff like the way that Duncan's hair falls. But he does tend to notice movement a great deal, because I imagine that's what he'd be attuned to.

2. When I slip to the omniscient, I like to document everything, mostly because there's probably more than three people in on the plot at the moment. I try not to get too introspective to people's feelings, et all. But do a lot of outward observances of all the characters. To get into individual thoughts and feelings of each character all in one scene is, for me, a great way to muck up the flow of the story. If the main character I am choosing to focus on at this point in time is, oh say Joe, he's going to be calling Methos as such, even if it's not aloud to the room. Likewise, to augment the fact that I'm choosing to loosely filter everything through Joe's eyes, I'll call him Joe, though many people would call him Dawson.

What the heck was I saying? Awwww...shoot me.

Is it bad to say that I think of myself as nothing? I never say "I " in my thoughts, nor do I talk to myself as in "amanda, you're psycho." I simply act. The only time I think "I" is when I'm writing. Ow. The meta made my head hurt.

[katallison.livejournal.com]

I'm still embarrassingly vague on distinguishing 3rd person from omniscient; I mean, yeah, in theory I know the difference, but it's sure not one of those things I consciously attend to when I'm reading or writing. Your two examples really help clarify this for me, and I'll hold them in mind for future reference (if I ever again in my life manage to write something that's not freakin' *first person yet again* aarrrggghhh).

And totally OT, but I was so revved to find you on LJ! We've gone in different directions fannishly, but I still love your HL stories, and every time someone starts ranting about second person and how they hate it and it doesn't work for long stories and blahdity blah, I just point them to "Heat Goes to Cold." And then I sneer at them.

[elynross.livejournal.com]

When I edit for people, I always talk to them about using a character-appropriate name for internal/first person/etc. stuff. I guess it just makes sense to me that Duncan wouldn't think of himself as "MacLeod," so it's jarring to me when I'm in his head to have him using "MacLeod," even in narrative bits. There, I think Duncan works better for me because in his most intimate relationships, they do call him Duncan most of the time, so it seems to me that's how he thinks of himself, albeit unconsciously. It's also a good indicator for me that a writer is consciously making those choices. And come to think of it, that's how I came to this preference, to start with: examining indiscriminate name-changing in stories, and coaxing people to make conscious choices about why they used what name where.

I wouldn't say it ruins a story for me if Mulder is referred to as Mulder, or Fraser as Fraser, even in the confines of their own minds, and I don't think most people actually articulate their own names in the privacy of their heads, but it's like a bridge to me, a more intimate feeling of being in their heads. And it then has the added bonus of allowing me to use a variation with intent, so that if a character "thinks" of themself as MacLeod, or Mulder, or Fraser, it indicates a change of mood or thought, conscious or unconscious.

Although I don't think reading books about writing are required, the books I've liked best about the writing process have usually mentioned name usage of this sort as a way of indicating tightness of PoV and character intimacy.

[butterfly.livejournal.com]

Hey, coming across this from a long way into the future. Well, not coming across so much as pearl_o and I were talking about the issue and she was all, "Someone had a cool post about this a while back," and Lo, she soon found it.

Personally, I've used "Benton" the one time so far that I've written in third-person Fraser-pov. I was writing a Benton. I think it depends partly on how you view how he views himself. If I think that he thinks of himself as 'Benton', I'll write a different story than one where he thinks of himself as 'Ben' and a vastly different one where he thinks of himself as 'Fraser'. But as long as the name choice is used as part of the characterization, I'd be fine with any of them.

The name that you choose to write with says something about how the character views himself in the story -- because if it is in their point of view, then it's their perspective, whether first, second, or third.

Many of the people from his past call him 'Benton'. Victoria called him 'Ben', as did Quinn in Easy Money and his dad when emotional (the rest of the time, he used 'Benton' -- and I love the way they tend to say it, very weighted on the 'Ben' part. Bennn'tin.). But he introduces himself as 'Benton Fraser' to Quinn in the Easy Money flashback. He always introduces himself by his full name, and he never asks anyone to call him 'Ben' that I can recall (in Pizza and Promises, he does ask the criminal to call him 'Fraser' but he was working undercover and probably wanted a little distance in any case).