Referring to Mom and Dad in third person?

[taylormillgirl]

When writing in first person, the narrator can say "I looked at my mother" or "I looked at Mom." But what about third person? "She looked at her mother" sounds fine, but "She looked at Mom" sounds weird. At the same time, I don't want to refer to parents by their first names while in a child's POV, and saying "her mom" over and over gets old.

I know I've seen "Mom" and "Dad" in third person before. Things like, "Fanny-Sue pulled the kettle off the stove just in time. Good thing, because Paw hated overcooked grits."

Thoughts?

[Ishta]

I think it can be done, as in your example, but it depends on the context and how it reads on the page. In instances like your example, though, isn't "Paw" (or whomever) what that character is always called, unless one of the characters is speaking to them? For example, "The stranger stalked up behind Paw. 'Mr. Smith, I'm on to your shenanigans.'" Something like that? So the child's father becomes "Paw" throughout the novel unless someone specifically addresses him as something otherwise.

[polymath]

Third person is a dominion of Free Indirect Discourse narrator reporting viewpoint characters' perceptions and cognitions. It might feel weird at first for a narrator to refer to a child's mother as Mom, and so on; however, reader rapport can be built by such simple building block choices. They have a narrator estranging quality that gives readers closer rapport with viewpoint characters instead.

Consider taking it a step farther toward emotional familiarity from the child's meaning space perceptions and cognitions. Momma or Mommy instead of Mom or Ma, for instance. Or go the other way formality-wise. Mother, Mater, Mater Familias, Ma'am, or some other term or an eggcorn or metaphorical term the child might have picked up from an adult and is trying on in her vocabulary, like a nickname or term of endearment Uncle Dutch might use that tickles the child's fancy and hasn't a clue what it means, but readers will. Depending on the emotional raport of the child with her mother, it could even go into offensiveness, intentional or otherwise.

Another possible direction is showing a difference in her rapport with Daddy and Mother, one more formal, one more intimate; one more intimidating, one more compassionate; one more nurturing, one more emotionally indifferent.

[taylormillgirl]

Here's where it sounds squirrely to me:

Jane waved her arms in front of her father. "Dad, can you tear yourself away from World of Warcraft for a minute?"

Dad just stared at the computer screen and grunted.

***

It doesn't sound right. "Her dad just stared at the computer screen and grunted" sounds better, but it gets repetitive after awhile.

@ Polymath--I think you're right. If I change Mom and Dad to something more unique, that would help.

[polymath]

//Jane waved her arms in Daddy's face. "Da-dee, come on. Can't you tear yourself away from World of Warcraft for a minute?"

He just stared at the computer screen and grunted.//

Just suggestions for consideration. I intend no imposition on your creative vision.

The recast first sentence moves readers closer to Jane's meaning space. It's as much what she sees as the narrator sees, perceptually, though she's not cognitive of waving her arms. The phonetic spelling of Daddy shows Jane's inflected voice. The word can't instead of can recasts the sentence into a stronger ironic comment, a negated modal verb understatement, also known as a litotes. The He in the last sentence leaves no doubt it refers to Daddy.

[Margo]

Here's where it sounds squirrely to me:

Jane waved her arms in front of her father. "Dad, can you tear yourself away from World of Warcraft for a minute?"

Dad just stared at the computer screen and grunted.

As insanely nitpicky as I usually am, I am okay with it as is.

[taylormillgirl]

Thanks, Polymath, that's really helpful.

One more question: If I use a more familiar term like Daddy in the style of your example, does that mean I forfeit the ability to refer to him as "her father"? It seems logical that if I establish a more intimate tone, then I'd have to be consistent.

[polymath]

You're welcome, taylormillgirl.

No, no options are necessarily forfeited by creative choices. "Her father," for example could be a reader cue to an overt narrator's expressing commentary when a transition to outside of Jane's meaning space is needed. Like for a transition to another viewpoint character's meaning space or when the narrator needs to depict settings, ideas, characters, and/or events outside Jane's immediate ken. Depends on the target audience bracket's capacity to process viewpoint transitions. Younger readers aren't as comfortable with shifting viewpoints as older readers.

"Her father" expressed by Jane could also be a way of showing her distancing herself from him, which, if he's not paying attention to her, is a credible reaction for a child. De re personal pronouns substitute for the "I" personal pronouns in thoughts and still keep in touch with viewpoint characters' perceptions and cognitions, when combined with narrator estranging metaphors, like "Mommy's dancing job" below. Note also there's an understated exclamation in Jane's covert narrator reported Free Indirect Thought. "Her father" in the example, though, is a de re obviating (depersonalizing) pronoun-noun construction, given the context I'm suggesting.

Her father cared about her day at sea camp as much as Mommy's dancing job.

[jkmcdonnell]

I like to use the parent's first name when writing in third, if not using 'his/her mother' or 'his/her father'. It's addressing the action, and the characters involved, rather than the MC's interpretation of the person as in first person (ie. it's their mum, their dad, so "Mom said..." etc.)

Does that make sense? Probably not.

[wilderness]

Ha! I was just waiting for polymath to bring up Free Indirect Discourse. Not that I ever get tired of it; it's so USEFUL! This was something I was planning to go back and fix later in my WIP. Great to get some thoughts on it.