I have been thinking about the use of tenses in writing.

I was taught (and yes, I’m a dinosaur) to use the past simple tense for telling stories. All the books I read were this tense, sometimes known as narrative tense, and I got used to both reading and writing in it. But how far should we go in sticking with one tense?  I thought I’d look at a few tenses and my feelings about them.

The past perfect tense.

I have always appreciated the advice that the use of the past perfect (‘he had begun’, rather than ‘he began’) should be avoided whenever possible, and left for occasions when it was essential to differentiate the times involved. Whole passages written in the past perfect are hard to read and usually unnecessary; the time can often be suggested by other phrases at the beginning. Consider the following examples:

a)He had always liked the quietness of the early mornings. He had risen, dressed, and breakfasted before most people were awake. He had enjoyed the stillness, the birdsong uninterrupted by cars or conversation. He had luxuriated in the knowledge that this was his time. Since the accident that damaged his hearing, he no longer appreciated these things.

b)Before the accident that damaged his hearing, he liked the quietness of the early mornings. He rose, dressed, and breakfasted before most people were awake. He enjoyed the stillness, the birdsong uninterrupted by cars or conversation. He luxuriated in the knowledge that this was his time. Now, he no longer appreciated these things.

The second version is, in my opinion, easier to read and gives exactly the same information. But of course there are occasions when the use of the past perfect is mandatory, if the author is not to employ a great deal of circumlocution. Consider:

 He knew he had seen her before somewhere but was unsure when or where.

I have tried, unsuccessfully, to replace the past perfect in this sentence. ‘Had seen’ can be erased but then you need ‘had been’, ‘had appeared’ or something similar to make sense.

The past imperfect tense.

I have always looked askance at American editors (to my knowledge this is something totally confined to the USA) who suggest that the use of ‘was’ is unacceptable. Sometimes, the imperfect tense is the only one that will do. Consider the following:

a) He was crossing the road when a car almost knocked him down.

b) He crossed the road. A car almost knocked him down.

Note that in the second version, the act of crossing the road is finished. We have no idea when the car almost knocked the character down. Did it mount the pavement? Of course we could alter the information to read:

c) A car almost knocked him down as he crossed the road.

d) As he crossed the road a car almost knocked him down.

But quite often the writer wants to establish an impression of movement before introducing something that might curtail that movement. The contrast is important. Hence the first version.

A whole passage written in the imperfect is unlikely to be either necessary or easy to read, although to show movement, it might be necessary to use more than one imperfect verb in a sentence e.g.

He was flying, soaring, winging his way through the clouds. (Note that ‘was’ is not repeated and is assumed to apply to all the actions.)

‘He flew, soared, winged his way through the clouds’ does not, I submit, have the same effect and the ‘music’ of the sentence, read aloud, is drastically altered.

 There may be cases of too much use of the tense, but to cut it out altogether seems arbitrary and strange. Admonitions about its use seem to go hand in hand with a misunderstanding of verbs and a fear of using the passive voice, which is certainly something to be avoided wherever possible in a story because it makes the account seem impersonal. That’s one reason for its use in reports or other non-fiction documents although even there it is less than ideal. But the difference between ‘he was running to catch the train when the rain started’ (imperfect) and ‘this effect was observed by several scientists’ (passive) is surely one all editors should understand.

The present tense.

There is a fashion, one that has become more and more pronounced in the last few years, for stories to be written in the present tense. I remember a time when the only use of the present would be for a section where the author needed to engender a sense of immediacy or urgency in contrast with the rest of the writing. I have a feeling the current use of the present is intended to convey a sense that the reader is watching a film, that events are happening as the reader reads, and that everything is both current and exciting. I can understand this motive, but I do wonder how the writer can then impose an even greater sense of urgency when required.

I personally find long pieces of writing in present tense quite hard to read. I am getting more used to it, but it is not my favourite way to take in information and I have been known to put down a book after the first page having realised that the present tense is to be used throughout. I think when I read I want to know what happened, not what is happening. I need to have some certainty in the back of my mind that for the author at least, the story is finished, and I can rely on it reaching a conclusion. I lose this if the present tense is the chosen one.

This is obviously to some extent due to my own upbringing and habits, but it is also a reaction to everything seeming to be too immediate and less of a story. Stories, for me, take place outside my own time and place, and need to be told in a form that suits that slight distance. I have come across thrillers and detective stories that use the present tense technique and I find them irritating; when everything is present and immediate there is less room for surprise or shock.  I have accepted some present tense fanfiction with a sigh, if the plot is appealing, especially fantasy or sci fi tales set around familiar characters transported in time and space. I have got used to the tense in short stories or even shorter pieces of fiction (e.g. flash fiction) but I have to say that in novels I dislike it intensely.

I would never, ever write in the present tense. I would find it extremely awkward to do so. The present appears quite often enough in dialogue and the narrative in between stays, for me, firmly in the past.

How do other people react to the different tenses? Does it depend on the reader’s age, native language, familiarity with particular types of documentation, or any other factors? What do you think? And which tense do you automatically start to use when you begin to write?

Should a writer switch the point of view of narrative, and if so when and how?

Of course, any story can be written from one point of view, maybe that of one character and maybe that of the author/narrator. If the character p.o.v. is used, the writing can be in first or second person though it is, for most readers, truly difficult to follow second person writing for any length of time and the technique is not often used. A narrator can use first person to tell a story in which they are an observer and not personally involved, and this type of narrator is not always the author. When the author uses an omnipotent authorial voice and tells the story in third person it can be easier to involve the reader in a number of different threads and the actions of a large cast, but the technique can also be distancing, and can lead the author into commentary on the storyline that does not stem from within the plot.

To avoid distancing and such problems many writers choose to write in third person but make it clear that the narrative is proceeding from the tight point of view of one of the characters. This works well until there is a necessity to show some part of the story that could not be witnessed by the character concerned. Methods of dealing with this include other characters recounting the events concerned either in person or by letter, but this can be irritating for the reader who wants to follow the story as it happens and not ‘after the event’ wherever possible.

And so we come to multiple points of view. Some readers don’t mind switches of p.o.v. and others find them hard to handle. My own view on this is that such a switch should always come at a natural break in the text, and should probably be shown in some way such as by a new chapter or part of a chapter and that there should be some kind of introduction of the new p.o.v. usually by the use of the character’s name in the first few sentences.

I was led to think more about this by my current project, the third volume of my fantasy detective series. Where crime and detection are concerned it can be important to allow a plot to develop in a linear fashion. My detective has assistants and at various points of the plot they are separated, sometimes for quite some time. At one point, they are completely out of touch. It would be clumsy to have them constantly reporting to each other and could make the flow of the story jerky, so I have chosen to use a different p.o.v. in different chapters, bearing in mind the warnings I gave in the last paragraph. Obviously when they meet again they can report but it doesn’t have to interrupt the narrative for long.

I now find myself progressing very slowly. I am constantly having to check who has done what, and also who knows, when they found out, and so on. Otherwise, subsequent actions and conversations wouldn’t make sense. I need to have multiple tabs open and move between them. This slows me down physically, of course, but even more so, it slows me down mentally and throws me out of my own story for a while each time I have to check. And of course, as the author, I know what happens but my characters don’t and I mustn’t let them see too much too soon.

I don’t think there’s an answer, though I admit to feeling, at the moment, as if I will never use multiple viewpoints again. (I’m only using two but it’s driving me mad.)

I know I’ve been ‘absent’ this month – I’ve been struggling with my novel! I’d be interested to hear whether other people have the same issues when they are writing, and also how switching viewpoint affects you as readers.

No apologies for iris two posts running. This group are comparatively privileged creatures; no snow to contend with! They’re by our water butt opposite the kitchen door of our Portuguese house.

We came out to Portugal at the beginning of the month and I knew that internet might be a problem. We have had huge rows with Portuguese Telecom, who have kept replacing our broadband with dial-up, failed (five times now) to replace faulty routers, taken money via direct debit when they know quite well we are not getting any service, then lied, lied, and lied about all of this. So I was prepared to be out of touch, and thought I’d get lots of writing done instead.

The plan didn’t work.

We had the biggest row yet with PT and cancelled the service altogether. Then we chose a mobile internet option but because we are here only intermittently we decided to have the pay-as-you-go version, reasoning that it would be cheaper over the whole year. It probably will, but only because I am being very strict with myself and allowing a maximum of an hour a day online. I log on, deal with email, download things to answer, bookmark things that look interesting for investigation back in UK, skim the main blogging sites I use and log off. Later, I log on to send emails I have composed offline, but so far I haven’t managed to spare the time to make blog posts. This is the first! It’s quite remarkable how much you can refrain from reading or exploring when there’s a clock ticking. But I admit to feeling partially disabled!

So why am I not writing? Well, I am, but it’s all going very slowly. It turns out that I am not a solitary writer. I need my online social life to galvanise me into thinking, let alone writing. I need to watch clips, look at art, listen to new music. I need to chat to people via GoogleTalk. These things, while they appear to take up time that should be spent writing, in fact seem to be necessary to my creative processes. I am not a particularly active social networker, or I didn’t think I was. I don’t use either Twitter or Facebook and have no intention of starting either; I prefer longer, more leisurely means of communication. I use WordPress, Dreamwidth and Livejournal. I read other people’s posts on Blogger, watch recommended things on YouTube and browse DeviantArt. I also discuss my writing with my betas and this takes some online time though if I use email it shouldn’t matter that I read and reply to their comments offline.

I am intrigued by the way that all these activities seem to spur me on to writing more. A lot of people advise writers to switch off entertainment and communication and bury themselves in peace. It doesn’t seem very productive for me. I know that in terms of reading or viewing I need to turn from one genre to another and can’t, for example, read two or three thrillers in a row, or watch a couple of documentaries back to back with any enjoyment. It would appear that my writing needs frequent periods of ‘not writing’ to happen in an orderly fashion so perhaps the same psychological needs for variety are at work.

Then, of course, there is the fact that I can’t use online sites for research the moment a query occurs to me. As I think I’ve said before, fantasy is not exempt from the need for research and I find myself leaving blanks for later infilling more and more often with notes like ‘insert information or description here’ or ‘look up possibilities for names’ and so on. This makes my writing feel jerky and less under my control.

Also, it is cold here. Not nearly as cold as UK and I feel faintly guilty grumbling, but although the temperatures are higher and there is no snow except on the high mountains we can see from our balcony, the outside temperature is closely matched by the inside one, other than in the main living room which usually has blaring TV. Conditions for writing are not adequately met. I can be quiet, warm or comfortable but not often all three at once and I find cold, noise and discomfort all distract me. So do the possibilities of going outside to photograph spring flowers including the iris that head this post.

I hadn’t realised just how many factors influence my writing. I don’t have a favourite chair or view, or any kind of mascot or special drink, clothes or snack. I don’t listen to music all the time. I can tune out some TV and some conversation. I thought I was fairly relaxed about where and when I wrote. Obviously not! In three weeks I have only managed about 3000 words. I can usually manage that in three days when I am ‘into’ a new story.

How do the other writers among my readers manage? Do you have to have every condition perfect? Are there absolutes without which you can’t write? It would be interesting to hear from you!

The photographs I choose to illustrate my posts are usually vaguely linked to the topic, even if only in my mind. This isn’t. It’s just the tree at the end of our garden in the current weather.

I have been musing about various pieces of advice I have seen, from authors who feel sufficiently confident about their own status to tell other writers what to do. I am quite sure they mean well and equally sure that the advice works for them. However, everybody writes differently, not only in terms of their style etc. but also in respect of the entire process of writing.

One frequent admonition is to cut your first draft drastically. One author went so far as to say to a friend of mine that if you didn’t cut a third of your first draft you couldn’t be editing properly.

I know at least two writers (one of them with many publications to his name, and very popular) who write first drafts that have gaping holes in them. There are fragile links that have scribbled notes such as ‘insert dialogue here’ or ‘maybe a sex scene’ or even ‘do some research’.  I can totally understand how this comes about. The writer wants, indeed needs, to get to the end of the basic story, and doesn’t want to stop to flesh out some scenes until that end has at least been reached a first time. It is then possible to go back and fill in the gaps, calmly, and bearing the ultimate ending in mind. But what would happen if these writers cut their first drafts by a third? Chaos, I should think.

I don’t leave gaps in my first draft, or only the occasional one where I need to research something like the correct spelling of a foreign place name. The story, which has usually been simmering in my head for some time, simply flows out onto the page or screen until I reach the ending, or an ending. (The ending might change.) On the way, I edit details. When starting a new chapter I always re-read the previous chapter; that puts my mind back into the flow of the story, and usually prevents plot or name errors. It also gives me the chance to spot minor problems such as overuse of a particular word, or some clumsy dialogue. So those get corrected at that stage. Then I hand everything over to a beta reader.

My beta readers (and I have used several) have one thing in common. They all, without fail, ask me to expand what I have written. They used to tell me to add more dialogue but I’ve got into better habits recently, and now the main complaint is that I need to include more explanation because readers aren’t psychic. If I cut that first draft by a third my betas would presumably be incoherent with rage!

I’m sure there are writers who ‘overwrite’ at first; they put in anything and everything that occurs to them and are particularly prone to inserting purple prose that pleases them but no-one else. Certainly for them the advice is good. But there are many of us who ‘underwrite’ and the advice is bewildering. I can almost guarantee that my initial draft will eventually be expanded by about a third…

Another piece of advice is to write what you know. This is so widespread as to be almost trite. It also bears some closer investigation. Obviously it can’t mean that you should always stick with your own surroundings, gender, experiences. If it did, we would have no genre fiction whatsoever. And yet one of my friends was told, on a writing course, that she should not attempt to write outside her own experience – as she was at the time writing a murder mystery, both she and I were somewhat shocked by the advice.

Surely the advice simply means that you should do adequate research and that you should try to build on your own experienced emotions when developing your characters. We can all write villains, and can ‘know’ them, too, by extrapolating from the fleeting thoughts we have had and taking them to extremes. I am, of course, talking about villains with some semblance of reality and not melodramatic stereotypes. And of course we should always make sure that we know what we are writing about, which is not the same as only writing what we know from our own experience.

Perhaps it’s because much of my writing is fantasy that I distrust the ‘write what you know’ adage. And perhaps those who give the advice confine their reading to modern novels set in modern surroundings?

Some of you are writers. How do you approach your first draft? What do you think of the advice I have treated with such contempt?  What advice have you come across that is truly worth following? Let me know!

I’ve been musing about the differences between novels and shorter fiction – novellas, short stories, ficlets, flashfic and drabbles (and all variations on these). I’ve played with all these kinds of writing and I’ve chosen to read all of them, too. But I think I have to say my real preference is for the novel, whether to read or to write. Taking Nanowrimo’s definition as a yardstick I’m talking about fiction that is over fifty thousand words long. This is an arbitrary measurement, dictated by print publishing, but it allows us to use a common description.

Characters can be allowed to develop at their own pace in a novel. This is satisfying for a reader who learns about a character slowly, with lots of twists and turns of plot and personality. It is also satisfying for the writer who can hold back secrets, allow for events to influence development and look at the reactions of a character to all kinds of happenings. The plot, too, can take time to unfold, and can contain sub-plots and underlying themes that could never be fully explored in a shorter work. This is even more true of a linked series of novels, where there is the pleasure of remembering past incidents and building up a whole detailed history.

As a writer I like to immerse myself in whatever I am writing. I emerge later – sometimes hours later – knowing I have been living in a different world which is every bit as real to me as the one where I need to shop or prepare a meal. My favourite books are the ones where I have been able to lose myself in the world the author has created and I would seriously like to provide that kind of alternate universe for my readers. For me, it never seems possible in a shorter story. It takes me time to enter wholly into a fictional universe and until that entry is complete the demands of everyday life tend to summon me back again. So usually, with someone else’s short fiction I can admire, but not love, and in my own, I am always to some extent an outsider telling a story, not submerged in the ‘dream’.

I read very quickly, which is probably a factor in my preferences. A short story is over almost before it has begun and certainly before I have had a chance to fall under its spell. As I always write what I want to read this means my own short works are over too quickly, as well. Of course, stories dictate their own length and some have only one strand, which will last for ten or twenty thousand words and no more. Any attempt to expand the idea will produce repetitious and turgid prose that an editor would rightly cut. This is, incidentally, just as true of longer stories and some huge novels could benefit by being pared down to a slimmer size.

I notice that Writing Magazine lays great emphasis on the short story. Maybe it’s because there are more possible outlets for the beginner to try with submissions; there are magazines galore and calls for entries for competitions and anthologies.  Maybe people feel they can write something short because it will, they think, take less time out of their busy lives. There is also a mistaken perception that short stories are somehow easier than the novel; their lack of length makes them less daunting and more likely to be achieved. One only has to look at ‘classical’ short stories to know this isn’t true, but the idea persists.

I have been made more than normally aware of all this by the amount of ‘advent’ fiction that has come my way this month. Various writers, some I call friends and some I know of and ‘follow’ have been treating their readers to short fiction, sometimes a piece a day, in the run up to Christmas. This is happening in the worlds of original fiction and fan fiction alike. Some of the offerings are very good indeed and it is lovely to have such ‘gifts’ online to open each day. But there is something unsatisfying about a diet of brief glimpses. I was looking at some of my own flashfics, wondering whether to work on one or two to offer here. But I couldn’t really get into any of them again, whereas I was doing a final proof reading of one of my novels and had to be very strict with myself to concentrate on punctuation and spelling and not get carried away by my own story!

I know I feel happy that my own work next year will focus on novel length works. Two (at least) for final editing and formatting, and one (at least) to write. I shall no doubt get happily lost in them, and it seems likely that things like mealtimes and necessary household tasks will suffer!

Some of you, I know, enjoy shorter fiction, and some of you write it for various reasons, including the perfectly good one that it can be an excellent way of breaking the dreaded writer’s block. I’d love to hear your thoughts on the subject.