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

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?

[suzecarol.livejournal.com]

But that doesn't necessarily follow. You're taking your personal preferences and saying that since that's what you do, that's what *everyone* does.

I prefer to be called Susan or Suze, and I make sure the people around me know that. I can get quite huffy with people who call me Sue -- more than once anyway -- and Suzie positively makes me cringe. But I *think* of myself, in my interior monologue (which is, ultimately, what we're talking about isn't it?) as 'me' or 'I', not Susan or Suze.

Just because someone expresses a preference as to what they want other people to call them, doesn't mean that's how they refer to themselves in their *thoughts.* Yes, for some people, as your case points out, it does; but you can't assume it works that way for for everyone. As obviously, my case being the example, it doesn't. And unless they tell you, or you can read their thoughts, you don't know how another person -- including Mulder, Scully, and Giles -- thinks of themself.

[septembergrrl.livejournal.com]

But that doesn't necessarily follow. You're taking your personal preferences and saying that since that's what you do, that's what *everyone* does.

I didn't mean to say that -- I was just commenting. Sorry if I came off as freakishly strident.

And no, I can't read thoughts, but isn't this whole discussion about assumptions?

FMC

[suzecarol.livejournal.com]

No, it's not. As Merry pointed out, it's about "the possible impact of choices."

But our assumptions alwys seem to sneak into these discussions, don't they? *g*

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

[jacquez.livejournal.com]

I'm with you. :)

[suzecarol.livejournal.com]

So far it's you, me, and gwen_r against the world. *g*

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

[merryish.livejournal.com]

Usually I think of myself in first person, yes. =) But then, there's always the rare moment of "Oh, great, Merry, that was brilliant, congratulations..." in my own head, which is always Merry, and never "Meredith" or "Lynne" or my real last name, or my real name before I changed it legally 12 years ago (Sandra).

Merry is me and I am Merry - it's an identity thing. It's all tied up with my self image, mostly subconscious, but partly right there above the waterline. That's why I see the name as so important to characterization -- a me who identified as "Meredith" instead would be a different person altogether than the me that I am.

That's what I mean by the name he'd use in his own head, if that helps any. Probably it doesn't. =)

Seeing Fraser think of himself as Fraser in a story never throws me out, because I can really see it either way. And I also think it may be slightly different for guys, who grow up getting called by their last names more than girls do (in my experience) and so may relate more to the last name than girls do.

So for my money, with Fraser in particular, what you're trying to do makes a difference. For a tight 3rd-person in which I'm trying to sell a warm, comfortable-in-his-skin Fraser, "Ben" is the way it has to be. In cases where that doesn't matter so much, or where you're trying to sell a different, harder-edged Fraser, "Fraser" could be the best choice.

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

[jacquez.livejournal.com]

And I also think it may be slightly different for guys, who grow up getting called by their last names more than girls do (in my experience) and so may relate more to the last name than girls do.

I think there's also some socialization for girls to think of their last name not as theirs, but as something temporary and belonging to someone else. I still think of my last name as belonging to my father, although in the past few years I've taken a lot of steps to claim it for myself in my own mind. (Part of that was not changing it when I got married - I was trying, partially, to say "No, I'm not changing my father's name for my husband's; I'm keeping something of my *own*.")

Whereas my husband, who hates his father, has never conceptualized his last name as "belonging" to his father in the same way. It was *his*, it was always his; there was never any cultural suggestion otherwise.

If more and more women don't change their names at marriage, I think you'll see more girls identifying with their last names in the next generation or so.

[elynross.livejournal.com]

I agree about those rare "talking to myself" occasions, although I don't have the variable names thing going on. *g* I also think that the discussion isn't just about internal monologues and how anyone thinks of themself, but of the narrative parts that connect internal thoughts, and how close/intimate you want those parts to feel -- or how they feel to you. I'm tend not to use "MacLeod" when I'm writing Duncan's PoV, unless I want that bit of emotional distance to come across, but I will rarely use "Duncan" when I'm in someone else's head. I acknowledge that for some, the assumption would be that he identifies more with MacLeod than Duncan, but since most of his canonically intimate relationships have people using Duncan, primarily, then I tend to think that's indicative of a level of intimacy showing me how he self-identifies.

I guess, for me, it's that these kinds of distinctions give me a greater emotional palette to choose from, allowing me to display varying degrees of intimacy/distance, at the risk of throwing particular readers out of the mix, of course.