# Tutorial and Discussion: The Fourth Person



## RedSavage (Jun 21, 2011)

Here's a little tip I figured I'd drop for a lot of you writers out there for giving your Third person writing a bit of flair. I've mentioned it to a lot of people, and it really seems to help them. So, basically you have your three basic forms of writing. First, Second, and Third. I did this, YOU did that, HE/SHE did this and that. 

This idea of the Fourth Person in not be seen as another point of view, rather, but more as a technique or exercise that will help you specifically with your Third person writing. In short, the Fourth Person is treating the unspoken Narrator of the Third person writing as an actual character with personality and feelings. So, technically there is a 'Fourth' person in your writing. 

How does this work? Well, a lot of it can be taken from the techniques of the First Person technique. In First person, the narrator is a defined character with a way of speaking, describing, and noticing things within a scene. If you think, why can't the narrator (aka the Fourth person) of a Third Person story be just as defined? 

Merely two things separate the First and Third person, in the most literal technicalities of writing. One: The Third person can be omniscient, and knows ALL that goes on. And Two: The third person does not recognize his/her own existence (most of the time). 

So, I'm not sure if I'm making myself clear, so I'll put it into practice. I'm going to write a small scene in two different styles. In other words, I'm going to give each Narrator a different personality and way of telling the story. 

1: _Never had Lance felt so retched as he jammed his shovel into the ground. Disgusting, he figured. Everything had done, thought about doing, and was about to do was something to be deplored. He felt as if he was going to throw up. As long as he didn't look back, maybe. Just maybe if he didn't look back and see the body wrapped up in the tarp, then he'd be able to hold the contents of his stomach for another second._

2:_Lance had to think hard to bring up the last time he felt this sick at his stomach, and even then it wasn't enough. He hands shook as they tried to grip the cracked, oak handle of the shovel. Then he'd lift his boot and try to jam it into the ground, again and again, all for the sake of making that hole a bit deeper. He was pale, sweaty, and unwell. But he kept his eyes on the task and never once looked back at that body wrapped tightly inside a blue, tarp cocoon._

Same scene, same theme, yet two different voices. The first voice seems more oriented on Lance himself and the extreme emotions he's feeling, while the second seems more interested in describing what he's doing with a bit more detail. (You could, of course, try combining these two voices, but for the sake of example...)

So I could imagine character one being a more passionate person, all things considered. Maybe a half-bit poet describing something in the corner of a nearly closed cafe. 

And... I don't know why, but Sam Elliot was narrating the 2nd bit. 

Anyhow, discuss and ask questions and feel free to rebut or give better examples. I'm not shy of the EDIT button. But that's all I've got to say about The Fourth Person. Basically it's just a tool to give your narrative a bit of style, instead of the flat, dead-pan descriptive ways of writing I see often. 

I hope it helps!

~cc


----------



## Reiter (Jun 21, 2011)

Hmm. I'm not so sure this is a different Person so much as tweaking the characters themselves. The narration in the second example may seem more emotionally detached than the first, but on closer inspection, it's because Lance himself is more level-headed and unemotional. I see the first Lance as being a nervous, weak-willed guy, and the second as a determined, get-the-job-done person with firm but bendable morals. Nothing so much in the voice of the narrator, unless he's subconsciously colouring the characters according to his biases/expectations. In that case, it's still the characters themselves that change, not the voice of the narrator.


----------



## RedSavage (Jun 21, 2011)

Reiter said:


> Hmm. I'm not so sure this is a different Person so much as tweaking the characters themselves. The narration in the second example may seem more emotionally detached than the first, but on closer inspection, it's because Lance himself is more level-headed and unemotional. I see the first Lance as being a nervous, weak-willed guy, and the second as a determined, get-the-job-done person with firm but bendable morals. Nothing so much in the voice of the narrator, unless he's subconsciously colouring the characters according to his biases/expectations. In that case, it's still the characters themselves that change, not the voice of the narrator.


 
Fourth person is to be used loosely, I admit. 

But in all fairness, 'Lance' didn't change at all in the two pieces, only our perception of him, read: the narrator's perception. Lance does ONE thing, he digs a hole and ignores the body behind him. Through the use of different narration voices, we are given a different picture of him. One describes how he's feeling, the other describes his otwardly appearance. We're thus given different tones and feelings for the character.  

Or that's the point I was trying to get across. Do you know what I'm saying? If you do, then how would you put it?


----------



## SlushPuppy (Jun 21, 2011)

I see what you're saying- and not being an english major I can't take this conversation to a much deeper level- but, isn't this just considered different depths or focus in writing? Why would it be labeled as 'fourth person' instead of writer focusing on physical world vs writer focusing on psychological world. Why force a clear separation and never the two shall meet?


----------



## RedSavage (Jun 21, 2011)

SlushPuppy said:


> I see what you're saying- and not being an english major I can't take this conversation to a much deeper level- but, isn't this just considered different depths or focus in writing? Why would it be labeled as 'fourth person' instead of writer focusing on physical world vs writer focusing on psychological world. Why force a clear separation and never the two shall meet?


 
Well, it doesn't have to be this concrete divide. Make the narrator more conversational, and the wordage and tone of a piece becomes casual. Make the narrator formal, proper, and straight-forward, and you're likely to have a lot of big words and eloquent writing. Make your narrator vulgar and blunt, the writing will become more harsh and raw. 

It's all about how you're willing to change the narrator as a speaking person.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Jun 21, 2011)

The term for both of those examples is actually 'limited third person'.  In other words, third person (he said she said) but from only one perspective (in your example, Lance's perspective).  The other form is 'omniscient third person', as you described, in which the narrator explains everybody's point of view.
And honestly, this seems more like an exercise in 'show, don't tell'.  The first example you're just bluntly laying out Lance's emotional state, and in the second example, by not explicitly 'telling' us what he's feeling, we're left to infer.  So it's just different styles of narration, and not another point of view.  There's still a nameless narrator explaining things.  If Lance was the narrator, you'd use first person.  Aye?
Just nitpicking your terminology a little bit.


----------



## SlushPuppy (Jun 21, 2011)

M. Le Renard said:


> So it's just different styles of narration, and not another point of view.  There's still a nameless narrator explaining things.  If Lance was the narrator, you'd use first person.  Aye?
> Just nitpicking your terminology a little bit.



Yes, this is what I was trying- unsuccessfully- to infer.


----------



## Conker (Jun 21, 2011)

I've read some older novels (written in the 1700's) which used the method you're talking about. _Tom Jones_ comes to mind, actually. The narrator acts as his own character, sometimes breaking away from the plot to give his opinions on what is happening. I believe at one point, where Tom is about to be hanged, the narrator quips in "But I like Tom too much to kill him" and then Tom comes away alive. 

It's rather interesting.


----------



## SlushPuppy (Jun 21, 2011)

Conker said:


> The narrator acts as his own character, sometimes breaking away from the plot to give his opinions on what is happening. I believe at one point, where Tom is about to be hanged, the narrator quips in "But I like Tom too much to kill him" and then Tom comes away alive.
> 
> It's rather interesting.



William Goldman does the same in Princess Bride.


----------



## RedSavage (Jun 21, 2011)

M. Le Renard said:


> The term for both of those examples is actually 'limited third person'.  In other words, third person (he said she said) but from only one perspective (in your example, Lance's perspective).  The other form is 'omniscient third person', as you described, in which the narrator explains everybody's point of view.
> And honestly, this seems more like an exercise in 'show, don't tell'.  The first example you're just bluntly laying out Lance's emotional state, and in the second example, by not explicitly 'telling' us what he's feeling, we're left to infer.  So it's just different styles of narration, and not another point of view.  There's still a nameless narrator explaining things.  If Lance was the narrator, you'd use first person.  Aye?
> Just nitpicking your terminology a little bit.


 
Heheh, well, successfully nit-picked, I should say. I'll clarify the 'Fourth Person' terminology.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Jun 21, 2011)

I think I see what you're getting at, because I do it a lot in my novel.  Here's a sample paragraph, and note the ending:


> After that trial period of a few days, Kitsune decided to stay off the horse for some time.  The animal still didn't like him, he could tell, and he was beginning to dislike the animal, and the way it forced his thighs into an uncomfortable U-shape.  It was better the old way, after all.  Patrice frowned at his decision, but it wasn't an easily decipherable expression.  Kitsune shrugged it off.  Gotta' pick your battles.


Basically, I write as a normal narration most of the time, but every now and then I stick in a personal thought so you know it's the main character who's narrating.  And I never give any indication that it's a thought by putting it in italics or anything like that, because that would change the overall feel of the passage (i.e. "_Gotta' pick your battles,_ he thought.")


----------



## Poetigress (Jun 21, 2011)

I think what you might be talking about is something often called narrative distance:

http://www.davekingedits.com/pov.htm


----------



## RedSavage (Jun 21, 2011)

M. Le Renard said:


> I think I see what you're getting at, because I do it a lot in my novel.  Here's a sample paragraph, and note the ending:
> 
> Basically, I write as a normal narration most of the time, but every now and then I stick in a personal thought so you know it's the main character who's narrating.  And I never give any indication that it's a thought by putting it in italics or anything like that, because that would change the overall feel of the passage (i.e. "_Gotta' pick your battles,_ he thought.")


 
This is precisely what I mean. Good example too.



Poetigress said:


> I think what you might be talking about is something often called narrative distance:
> 
> http://www.davekingedits.com/pov.htm


 
Yeah, this is what I'm talking about to an extent. Giving the narration a personality, bringing it closer to the feel of the story and characters.


----------



## ScottyDM (Jun 22, 2011)

Coyote;

Why do you feel compelled to invent a new term for an already existing concept? It's third person.

The beauty of third person is that it's so dang flexible. In your initial example you vary the narrative distance and you change the focus--but it's still third person.

By inventing a new term all you'll do is confuse the newbie writers.


Conker & Slush Puppy;

An interesting technique, but seldom used. A variant is to introduce the narrator at some point, in a first-person scene, as a regular character.

S~


----------

