Phantasy Star: Fringes of Algo

Quick pooling, I am fishing for opinions here.

I am starting on a little multiple-chapter writing project (pure PS Fan stuff, I almost never do those so I want to make them worth it).

The story will be centered mainly around a particular character. In most regards, this story is to be told as seen through his eyes. Yet, I can't decide if I should write using the omniscient narrator's point of view, or the first person narrator.

Omniscient narrator is easier but it does not have the introspective potential of the first person writing, it is also the most widely used method of writing fanfics and can create a very amateurish ambiance unless handled correctly. The latter is a lot more challenging but if wielded masterfully, it can produce amazing results. However, it does complicate the explanation of a scene where multiple characters are involved.

I'd like to see the pros and cons you can think for both methods. I have been debating this for well over a week and I have discussed it with people whose opinion I deeply respect, but more input can't possibly hurt.

Please discuss.

I don't know, maybe both would work. For example, I usually don't write in the first person, but my writings are drenched with introspective dialogue. Of course the style I use is a bit harder than both you presented, because it is stream-of-counsciousness.

If you are not so used to writing pieces like that, I'd suggest starting with the omniscient narrator and adding his inner thoughts as introspective dialogue. I think the readers would be more bugged with poor descriptions of the scenes involving many chars than with the lack of introspective dialogue.

Interesting arguments.

I must however point out that I am very much used and experienced in writing the first person narrative. I have written lost of stuff outside of the PS/EOTA context.

Edit: Actually, one thing I'd debate.

Of course the style I use is a bit harder than both you presented, because it is stream-of-counsciousness.

I disagree, strongly. Though I am not overly familiar with your work, I would say that doing this is borrowing the advantages of both systems while leaving aside what makes them unique. In the end, you get a narrative device that is no longer pure and that loses the charm of either.

I'm a purist. Your mileage may vary.

I've started writing more using the first-person point of view and I agree that it has its pros and cons. The biggest challenge I've discovered is that it's a lot harder (for me) to strongly develop other characters when writing in the first-person, as unless your main character is a mind-reader, there's no way to truly know the other characters' thoughts and feelings. As you said that your story will focus primarily on one character, I think it could work; however, if you're concerned with the strength of other characters' portrayals, it may be better to stick with the omniscient third-person.

I'd also argue that the content of your story should affect your decision (obviously). If it's going to be action- and event-based, a traditional narrative may be the better choice to describe everything that's going on. If it's going to be more about emotional reactions and thoughts and feelings, then by all means, go for the first-person (keeping in mind, of course, that you'll only be able to accomplish that with the one character).

I don't know, I consider stream-of-counsciousness much better technically than both pure styles because its result is majestic. It is hard to write and harder to read. I'm not saying a "cheap insertion of thoughts in narrative" but something really well-blended. Of course my style pales in comparison with Joyce or Woolf, but I think I'm getting somewhat better with the time.

Yes, I'm not a purist in any way. Rules are there to be broken. Every masterpiece breaks rules.

tilinelson2 wrote:I don't know, I consider stream-of-counsciousness much better technically than both pure styles because its result is majestic.

I don't know if I can agree with you here, tili. Stream-of-consciousness is just one of many styles and while it can be particularly effective in certain circumstances, I don't think it's appropriate for every single story. And even if you do want to believe that it's the very best choice available, you know what they say about too much of a good thing...

augmentedfourth wrote:

tilinelson2 wrote:I don't know, I consider stream-of-counsciousness much better technically than both pure styles because its result is majestic.

I don't know if I can agree with you here, tili. Stream-of-consciousness is just one of many styles and while it can be particularly effective in certain circumstances, I don't think it's appropriate for every single story. And even if you do want to believe that it's the very best choice available, you know what they say about too much of a good thing...

I know. Besides that, most attempts end being crap because you have to know what you are doing.
It is just because I love psychologic dramas presented in a surreal way

The story will features it's load of action scenes but it will not be the main focus.

I do not plan to develop the psyche of characters others than the main. I want the reader to see through the character's eyes but at the same time, I'm wondering how it will affect the overall description of the world in general.

My "Tears of Mota" was successful in that, I think. But will this work on a multiple chapter story? I'm trying to remember any lengthy story I might have read that featured the first person narrator...