The First Person Narrator in the Novel

The decision for a first-person narrator offers you special opportunities and at the same time presents you with challenges. Above all, it is important that there is not just one way of writing from the perspective of an ego.

Special features of the first-person narrator

According to Franz K. Stanzel’s tried and tested approach , it is not just the perspective that defines a narrator. Rather, it distinguishes between three dimensions, through which this can mainly be determined. In addition to the perspective, these are the consistency of the areas of being (the narrator as part of the narrated world or not) and the mode (reflector figure or narrator figure).

So it makes sense not to speak of the first-person perspective, but of the first-person narrative situation. The particularities of the first-person narrator can be derived from their closer definition.

The narrator as part of the narrated world

In most cases, the narrator is more or less even a fictional character . He can be at the center of the story with the main character telling his own story. As a secondary or even marginal figure, he has more distance from the action. In such a position he can ironically distance himself from the hero.

Telling and experiencing self

As a first-person narrator, the character doubles as it were – she is on the one hand the narrator and on the other hand the actor. The distance between the two can be minimal, in that the ego reports on what it has just experienced, or maximally, in that at the end of its life it tells of its beginning.

This opens up numerous opportunities to play with the reader and create tension. After all, the telling self is usually smarter than the experiencing self, because it already knows what is coming. It takes a certain attitude to the narrated plot, which is expressed in the narrative style and in comments. He can confirm, contradict and correct himself – every word is conveyed to the reader only through this very self.

Limited perspective and unreliable storytelling

In the first-person narration, the assertion always resonates that what is being told is true. After all, it is an I who stands up for its words.

But who guarantees that the narrator is telling the truth?

None other than himself.

This narrative situation thus offers an excellent opportunity to make the narration unreliable.

The first-person narrator can make hints, lure the reader on the wrong track or simply tell versions of his own story that later turn out to be wrong. The perfidious thing about it: even if what was previously claimed is corrected, the reader can never be sure what ultimately corresponds to the truth.

As an author, would you like to take advantage of this opportunity?

Then you should find a balance between confusion and resolution. Because if you are too unreliable, you will end up losing even the most good-natured reader.

First-person narration as role prose

The narrator stands between author and reader – this becomes particularly clear when choosing a first-person narrator. He is the medium that tells us the story. The words we read are his – and that should be reflected in the choice of words, the mindset and the narrative style.

A first-person narration is accordingly role prose. When we write, we put ourselves in the situation of a certain figure and tell from their perspective, from their point of view, with their language.

Flexible distance between experience and narration

It is worth taking a closer look at the distinction between experiencing and narrating self. The narrator can talk about his own experiences as if they were someone else’s. This also creates a certain distance to the figure for the reader. However, he can also put himself in the shoes of the experiencing self and even merge with it.

The inner monologue is a powerful way of removing the distance between the narrative and the experiencing self. In its most extreme form – the flow of thoughts – we as readers find ourselves directly in the narrator’s head and participate in his feelings, ideas, considerations and also actions by witnessing the activity of his consciousness.

In addition to the first-person narrative situation, two other forms can be determined: the authorial and the personal narrator. These are ideal types – of course all possible mixed forms and transitions are conceivable. In his group of types, Stanzel tries to grasp this variety of possibilities.

Compared to other narrative situations

The first-person narrator can be contrasted with these two narrative situations and the multi-perspective narration. In this way, we get an even better view of its multifaceted possibilities.

First-person narrator and personal narrator

At first glance, the first-person narrator and the personal narrator seem to differ solely in the choice of grammatical person. But this is deceptive.

A typical personal narrative situation is not role prose. We are not dealing with a specific figure who is part of the narrated world and who conveys the story in their language. The narrator himself steps back, the figure becomes a kind of camera lens.

Important: This contrast only exists if we compare the typical forms of both narrative situations. Of course there are transitions, for example when a story is written in the first person, but a narrative self is as good as not recognizable. Or by talking about “he”, but suggesting in the explanations that the character tells his story himself, that is, actually an I conveys his own experiences.

First-person narrator and authoritative narrator

Choosing a first-person narrator limits the author in several ways:

• He can only tell what the first-person narrator knows.
• The choice of words and the narrative style should suit the narrator.
• The perspectives of other characters can only be interspersed indirectly.
• While writing, he must constantly be careful not to violate the self-imposed perspective.

The choice of an authoritative narrator, on the other hand, opens up endless possibilities:

• The authorial narrator can be omniscient – in the most extreme case it is possible for him to tell everything he likes, from the deliberations of a slug in the Stone Age to the final battle for the red planet in 4399.
• He can put himself in the shoes of other characters and take their perspective.
• There are also no limits to the variation in the narrative style – the author can draw on a wide range here.

In this variety of possibilities there are both opportunities and dangers.

The choice of a first-person narrator defines a clear, usually relatively narrow framework and thus limits us in content and form. At first glance, it seems attractive to get rid of it by choosing an authoritative narrator. But this can easily lead to arbitrariness. Most of the time, this happens when you are unaware of the point of view and perspective from which you are telling the story. Stylistic and compositional decisions then quickly appear arbitrary and the quality of your novel suffers.

Possible transitional forms:

• A first-person narrator who acts like an author. Although a narrator figure is established, he tells things that he really cannot really know. She fables. (see Mariana Leky: What can be seen from here)
• An authorial narrator who suddenly appears as a character, after having previously been in the background and having organized the narrated material authorially. (see July Zeh: Play instinct)

First-person narrator and multi-perspective narration

The narration from several perspectives within a novel is no longer a specialty. It is possible in a number of different ways, for example

• by taking different perspectives within a fundamentally authorial narrative and changing them, for example, in paragraphs
• by comparing several personal narrators, for example, chapter by chapter
• by alternating several first-person narrators, for example by including letters or diary entries.

This is only an exemplary selection. There are basically no limits to the precise design of multi-perspective narration.

Multi-perspective narrative styles promise variety and diverse design options. In this sense they are superior to a pure first-person narrator.

If the combinations are too daring, however, the overview can quickly be lost and the author faces particular stylistic challenges.

So is it better or worse to choose a more one-sided perspective like the first-person narrator or the personal narrator?

That can only be decided on a case-by-case basis. Ultimately, this results from the material as well as the aesthetic preferences and decisions of the author.