Thank you.
I have seen no names use to great effect for quite some time. But more often than not I'm left wondering, okay, who the heck is this person? Why isn't their name being revealed? I expect a name right away, I've noticed in my own reading. It doesn't feel forced to me, unless there's a title associated with it. It feels natural--of course the person would be identified. And when we're immersed in POV, it seems more natural to me to have a name than just "he" or "she". One step closer to specificity.
There's a rule in journalism: If the story in any way involves a dog, get that dog into the article. And if you use the dog, you'd better get the dog's name. The idea being, of course, that having the name is essential for readers to make that leap from just an anonymous, random dog, to Benji, or Lassie, or what have you.
[This message has been edited by annepin (edited July 11, 2008).]
quote:
The advice I've encountered most often is to use a name as soon as possible (OSC, James Scott Bell, among others).
One of my favorite Science Fiction novels, Starship Troopers, it's quite a while before you learn the protagonist's nickname (Johnny), later to learn his first name (Juan), and even later to learn his last name (Rico). I found this effective, because it showed the lack of need.
For a story told in the second person, the name of the protagonist is more important, if only because you are being asked to step into the personage of the narrator.
Third person is really where it's most useful to know the name of the protagonist, because he or she is external to your point of view. In these cases, knowing the name earlier might be better, especially with an omniscient third person narrator.
Tom
In first person, you're introduced to the character since it's in their PoV even if you don't know their name. In the more common third person, if they're not given a name it's very hard for the reader to feel like they know them. I think he is referred to by rank in Starship Troopers when anyone speaks to him. I'd have to be able to actually find my copy to check that though--and forget that being possible. LOL
[This message has been edited by JeanneT (edited July 11, 2008).]
My feeling is that it needs to be revealed at the last moment and it always feels awkward before.
Yet, that is not an excuse or an argument.
Thank you all for the input.
quote:
In first person, you're introduced to the character since it's in their PoV even if you don't know their name.
Right. Besides--as was discussed in some length on the Flash Fiction Online forum--"I" is a name (as far as making a connection to the character goes. Every time "I" is used in a first-person narrative, you know exactly who to reference. The thing to clear up quickly is gender, because people tend to associate first-person with male and it is a jarring surprise if you find out after you're invested in the story to suddenly discover the protagonist is a woman. Subtle clues, such as males tend to stare at breasts and rear-ends inadvertantly, would enough of a hint to set the gender tone.
Another reason for giving names early in the story--which hasn't been mentioned--is that names clue you toward an image, too. Jack has different connotations than Juan, Dmitri, Pierre, Culwch (pronounced Cull-hooch) or Patrick. That's part of what OSC meant when he referred to using stereotypes as a tool (as opposed to as acliche).
[This message has been edited by InarticulateBabbler (edited July 11, 2008).]
There can be good reasons, good answers to these questions. And then there can be clever writers who just want to show how clever they are.
Readers will get a much better idea of how clever a writer is by what he or she says, rather than by what he or she witholds.
Grant
quote:
The thing to clear up quickly is gender, because people tend to associate first-person with male
Not everyone, IB. I tend to assume that characters are female. Whichever assumption the reader makes, it's jarring if they're wrong though so it should be cleared up.
I think the problem very often isn't that the author withholds the name but the author decides to do some "scene setting" or something like that instead of immediately introducing the character. Where I think that goes wrong is that we tend not to care much about a scene unless there's a character we can visualize there.
quote:
What benefit is gained by witholding the name? Is there an opportunity to present the name and the writer waits, using an anonymous pronoun or other dodge to avoid naming the character? Why?
One benefit I can see to withholding the name is to allow the reader to preconceptualize the character, and then slowly tear down these preconceptions.
When I first read Starship Troopers, I first identified with the protagonist and figured him to be like myself, an anglo. When I first read his name, Johnny, that reinforced the image.
Later, I learned that his last name is Rico, and then that his first name is Juan, and finally, that he's Filipino.
If I had been told, in the hook, that the Filipino trooper Juan Rico was the protagonist, I might have put the book up. I know some would have. I believe that the point that Heinlein was trying to make through this was that it really doesn't matter, the race of a person, when it comes to bigger issues. When it comes to smaller issues, like the opening of a book, it does.
By contrast, the first line of Stranger in a Strange Land is "Once upon a time there was a martian named Valentine Michael Smith." In this book, the need to distinguish that Valentine is a martian who is human. This book is told in the third person.
So, what benefit? The name of your protagonist is a literary tool, like any other. The reveal of this fact should be handled as artfully as the identity of the killer in a whodunit. It can have great impact when revealed, or none at all.
My 2 cents.
Tom
Personally, I like to know who I'm reading about, but not necessarily the character's full name and title. First or surname is enough to begin with, the rest can be fed to the reader as the story progresses.
In third person, I think a name should be thrown in fairly early, if only to avoid using "he" or "she" so often. If you're writing a third person story and not using the MC's name or "he/she" very often, you may need to take a look at the use of passives/and or if you're character is merely an observer in the story. I guess what I'm trying to say is that a third person story with an active character will have so many "He/she" as subject in the first thirteen that you'll want to throw in a name, just to break things up a bit.
(Was that the first sentence of A Christmas Carol? I think so, but my memory may be playing tricks on me.)
Opening with the character is far more mundane. You just have to make sure whatever said individual is about is really, really interesting.
That's true no matter how you open a story. Make it enthralling. Interesting. Unique somehow.
All the guidelines and rules fail if you haven't made the opening sentence/paragraph/page interesting.
I think thanks to you good folks my curiosity has been satisfied.
quote:
You just have to make sure whatever said individual is about is really, really interesting.
If whatever siad individual is about isn't interesting--I would seriously consider that I was starting at the wrong place.