case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2013-02-02 03:08 pm

[ SECRET POST #2223 ]


⌈ Secret Post #2223 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________



16.


__________________________________________________



17.


__________________________________________________



18.


__________________________________________________



19.


__________________________________________________



20.


__________________________________________________



21.


__________________________________________________



22.


__________________________________________________














Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 06 pages, 127 secrets from Secret Submission Post #318.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.
dreemyweird: (Default)

[personal profile] dreemyweird 2013-02-02 08:49 pm (UTC)(link)
?? IDK, I've never noticed that there was a correlation. Then again, it may be because I'm into canonical POV first person (Sherlock Holmes books consist of it almost entirely, including, btw, Holmes' POV, and that's one of my main fandoms. Naturally one hell of works here is written this way)
visp: (Default)

[personal profile] visp 2013-02-02 08:51 pm (UTC)(link)
Yes, Doyle does 1st person well. Although, since Watson writes from the point of a sideline observer, it's almost only half-first person.

(Anonymous) 2013-02-03 12:10 am (UTC)(link)
Lolwut? It has to be from the mainest main character or it doesn't totally count? 1st person means nothing other than from the point of view of a character in the sork. It doesn't have to be the central character to count.

TBH this smells a lot like an excuse to discount an example that doesn't fit the stereotype. :/
dreemyweird: (Default)

[personal profile] dreemyweird 2013-02-03 12:27 am (UTC)(link)
Uh... that was not what they meant. It was just that they think that Watson almost blends with Conan Doyle as the narrator, which would mean third person. [I do not agree, frankly, but that's another matter]
visp: (Default)

[personal profile] visp 2013-02-03 01:07 am (UTC)(link)
1. I never said anything like what you were saying.
2. There are good examples of every kind of work ('Lolita,' for instance, if you want a straight example of 1st person.) However, 1st person is a little trickier to get right, or rather, there usually should be a good reason why you're using it (Watson's not getting the mystery makes the reader wonder, Humbert's personal thoughts and rationalizations are a huge part of 'Lolita.') Fandom, having more novice writers, tends to bork it up more, and mainly use it when someone's just stream-of-consciousness writing out their fantasies. That's probably why it's hated more in Fandom.
tweedisgood: (Default)

[personal profile] tweedisgood 2013-02-03 08:29 am (UTC)(link)
So first person written well gets reinterpreted to be not "really" first person so you can hold your irrational and inaccurate prejudice against the voice...

Okay then.
visp: (Default)

[personal profile] visp 2013-02-03 07:34 pm (UTC)(link)
So... you didn't read the conversations directly above this, or you're just really obtuse?
Edited 2013-02-03 19:36 (UTC)