It’s an abdication of narrative responsibility, in my view. The storyteller, in film or novel, should take charge of the story and not feel shifty about it. Put the camera in the place from which it can see the action most clearly. Make a decision about where that place is. Put it on something steady to stop that incessant jiggling about. Say what happened, and let the reader know when it happened and what caused it and what the consequences were, and tell me where the characters were and who else was present – and while you’re at it, I’d like to know what they looked like and whether it was raining.
-

Philip Pullman calls time on the present tense | Books | The Guardian (via robotnic)

Present-tense on its own doesn’t bother me so much…but first-person present-tense is just anathema to me. It tastes wrong in my head and I am not in favor of it.

(via linguaphile)

Still unsure on how I feel about the increasing use of present tense. What do you think, Tumblr friends?

(via idratherbereading)

I used to only use the past tense third person in my writing, and now nearly all my works are present tense (still third person). Personally, I think anyone telling anyone that any part of their writing is “not good form” is only going to lead to terrible things in the end. For instance, the passive voice. Some of the most important things that will happen in our lives are things that are done to us - and yet, due in large part to Orwell’s influence (a very high literary authority during his time and even today), English teachers are often taught to discourage its use. But in reality, should any figure’s mere pretense of authority and knowledge be cause enough to ban words and bind the tongue of the one who writes them? They can give advice, surely, but when we step into commands that could be enough to extinguish the voice of someone whose words might simply be better expressed in one form than another; someone who is to meek to disregard the rules and simply run where their pen takes them, then we run into problems instead. When you bar any element of writing that by all rights should be allowed, you begin to see a drop in the quality, because instead of that flowing, brilliant free form that comes when there are no limits, self-imposed or otherwise, then timidity takes its place, and our wings do not have room to stretch to their fullest potential. Writing is freedom of expression, and if my expression flows more naturally in the present tense, or in the passive voice, or in the second person, then it should be allowed to do so. With the laws of grammar and general format in place, the rest is an empty slate in which creativity must be allowed to bloom. You’re allowed to not enjoy someone’s style, most certainly. But from the author’s standpoint, the page is a wide and vast world to fill with many more universes, and any restrictions that would bring a writer back down to earth might prevent the discovery of distant, spinning, thrilling galaxies that we otherwise would never have known.

reblogged dederants originally robotnic
251 notes
  1. benfoldslaundry reblogged this from brittadictarnold
  2. ladywiththehair reblogged this from squintyoureyes
  3. supernaturalwordsofpossibility reblogged this from magalimoon
  4. dragonsinparis reblogged this from ruthseriouslydothis
  5. ruthseriouslydothis reblogged this from magalimoon
  6. teamhayffie reblogged this from 113years
  7. persephonespen reblogged this from squintyoureyes
  8. phanapoeia reblogged this from five-items
  9. gookybygooky reblogged this from unflinchingly
  10. 113years reblogged this from ahkna
  11. five-items reblogged this from ahkna and added:
    how about we just acknowledge that it doesn’t really matter what tense or point of view a book is written in that...
  12. weepingrockrock reblogged this from brittadictarnold
  13. ahkna reblogged this from squintyoureyes
  14. brittadictarnold reblogged this from squintyoureyes