Reading Neil Gaiman's Fragile Things reminded me most of the published urban fantasy stories (short and long) I've read are in first-person POV. As far as I know, this POV is rarely used in long-form science fiction and other types of fantasy.
So, why is first-person POV effective in both forms of urban fantasy?
Note: Let's use one definition of "urban fantasy", also known as “contemporary fantasy”, in this thread to minimize confusion. According to Writer’s Digest, urban fantasy is “a fantasy tale in which magical powers and characters appear in an otherwise normal modern context".
Posted by BenM (Member # 8329) on :
I'd hazard a guess that first person works well in contemporary settings because the narrator exists in the contemporary world of the reader. In contrast I imagine a first person account from the future is a larger hurdle to overcome towards suspension of disbelief.
Just a guess.
Posted by Troy (Member # 2640) on :
Neil Gaiman learned to write by reading Zelazny and Wolfe -- who carried over the influence of writers who came before them. Newer writers are learning to write by reading people like reading Neil Gaiman and Steven Brust. The cycle goes on....
I think it has less to do, specifically, with the genre, and more to do with the writers and influences that have shaped that genre.
Posted by MAP (Member # 8631) on :
I agree with Troy. I wonder if first person POV is becoming popular in general. I have been reading a lot of YA fiction lately, and all of it seems to be in first person not just the urban fantasy. The fantasy novel POISON STUDY was first person and so was HUNGER GAMES (Scifi). There are more but those were just the two off the top of my head.
Posted by aspirit (Member # 7974) on :
Troy, the influence of older writers must be a factor, one I hadn’t thought of before. However, I don't think influence explains everything.
Older writers prefer (or preferred) first-person for a reason. They sold stories with it. So, why does it work?
I'm thinking it has something to with what BenM wrote. Readers can identify with some of the settings and situations. Even the monsters are somewhat familiar, because we all grew up hearing of vampires, fairies, and the like. There's also a strong human element; we can sympathize with the POV characters. They often struggle to reconcile what’s familiar to us and them (e.g., living in the mortal world or going to work) with the unfamiliar. The focus isn’t on technology or the culture of people we’ve never heard of before.
MAP, I thought of two examples to add to yours: Warren Hammond's Kop and Ex-Kop. They are mystery sci-fi, recently-published, and told in first-person.
Whatever elements accommodated first-person in urban fantasy must be occurring in other types of stories, as well. Is it a strong focus on one character’s development?
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
Grammatical person, number, tone, tense, and psychic access comprise a narrative point of view. Third person singular, objective, past present, psychic access limited to one character predominates. Second in frequency, historically or in present-day, comes first person singular, subjective, variable past or present tenses, psychic access limited to the narrator's thoughts.
Tone's attribute of attitude toward a theme often distinguishes first person from third person. A subjective narrator evaluates, ponders, judges, approves, or condemns a story's motifs, theme, and/or circumstances. A theme unifies a subjective tone with an at times objective portrayal of other circumstances. How and why first-person narrators function in Urban Fantasy has much to do with tone.
Posted by BenM (Member # 8329) on :
I would agree, going on to suggest first person is also very common in YA literature for much the same reason. I believe its subjective tone allows young readers with limited comprehension skills to more easily interpret and understand content as the narrator can explain events. In contrast a purely objective, transparent third person narrator leaves all interpretation up to the reader and so requires a far better grasp of reading comprehension.
Posted by BoredCrow (Member # 5675) on :
For the portion of urban fantasy that deals with the multitude of vampire/werewolf/demon slayers, and vampire/werewolf/demon/witch heroines, there is a whole section of these Heroines With An Attitude. In such cases, snarky inner references work quite well in first person.
So, for the type of books I describe, it makes sense to be first-person. Think Laurell K. Hamilton, and several others whose names I can never remember.
(full disclosure: I have an urban fantasy snarky heroine. But she lives in the future!)
[This message has been edited by BoredCrow (edited July 20, 2009).]
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
A narrative point of view and a character point of view are sometimes indistinguishably the same thing, sometimes discernibly different things. That's where psychic access comes into play, which character(s) thoughts are accessible to a narrator.
Posted by aspirit (Member # 7974) on :
Okay, I'm going to paraphrase. First-person combines the POV character and narrator. This results in greater psychic access to that character. Psychic access allows the POV character / narrator to (1) interpret events so readers don't need to interpret actions themselves and (2) express a strong personality through thought as well as dialogue and action.
Therefore, a writer skilled in first-person can simplify the reading and characterization processes. Writers in urban fantasy develop the skill because they were influenced by their predecessors.
Urban fantasy writers may also use first-person to make fantasy elements fit more believably in the real world. As extrinsic wrote last Autumn in another thread on first-person, a firsthand account "possesses more authenticity for it than a remoter third-person's account might."
Thank you. I kept asking myself the original question and couldn't find an answer on my own. This discussion helped.
[This message has been edited by aspirit (edited July 22, 2009).]