Poll: Do you like storytellers / narrators or not

[Guardian]

I'd like to make a short poll, which is about storytellers / narrators. My question is, do you like storyteller / narrator characters who is telling the story, but also in the same time they're sometimes pulling you out from the story to add certain elements to the story itself? Or do you prefer if the story is telling itself instead?

Just add a +1 as a response if you like storytellers / narrators and a -1 if you rather prefer the self telling.

[polymath]

I'm not an either/or reader or writer. Whichever whatever works best for the story. Countless stories rely on overt narrators' standing to the narrative to represent a subjective or objective perspective contribution. Countless stories rely on covert narrators staying out of the picture. My sense is the former prevailed in the past; the latter prevails now for mass culture niche appeal.

What I don't care for is a narrative that doesn't know what it wants to be narrator-wise. Narrator asides are okay, but not when they disrupt causality in the middle of dramatic action.

[Watcher55]

+1

Because when I was in High School our Thespian chapter went to Memphis State to watch one of Mr. C's friends thesis (?) piece which involved Mark Twain and some of his buddies swapping stories because they were forced to share a box car with the (right rank) dead guy they were escorting.

"I used ta chew and drink at the same time but it got to the point where I'd ferget when to spit an' when to swalla"

[Guardian]

Well. In my case there are two options right now. I'm using the present version, which is starting on this way...

viewtopic.php?f=15&t=3005

Or I'm cutting all this narrator thing out (With this cut I'm also killing around 2 strong sub plots). But with the very same move I can cut around 10000+ words from each volumes.

Narrator asides are okay, but not when they disrupt causality in the middle of dramatic action.

This is never happening as the narrator is appearing only at the beginning and ending of all chapters. But he is not distrupting the main story.

My sense is the former prevailed in the past; the latter prevails now for mass culture niches.

This was the reason why I asked this. The first version is an elegant lead in, while the second would be a "Harry Potter" like, into the story, opening. The first is giving a brief background, while the narrator's identity is remaining a mystery until the end, while the second... less mystery, less twist.

Both may work, but the two approach is giving two different atmosphere. As I can't decide, I rather making a poll about it.

[Fenris]

I agree with Polymath that it depends on the story, but I think I prefer a narrator character. So +1.

I like my readers to understand everything about the world they're being immersed in, but sometimes that just can't happen without an infodump, and in my opinion it's more realistic to stick with a narrator character. That way, the readers will experience the world and the events therein as the POV character does, and it becomes easier to bond with that character than if the narrator were an omnipotent overseer.

Sometimes, for the purpose of a story, the readers have to know something that the characters can't. But I think I'd rather see the world of the story on a more intimate level, viewing it through another's eyes, rather than peering down on it as a whole suspended within a snowglobe.

[Guardian]

Thanks Fenris.

I agree with Polymath that it depends on the story, but I think I prefer a narrator character. So +1.

I'm making this poll for CSA. So in your opinion I should keep the narrator character, right?

[polymath]

A narrator's standing to a narrative takes a position on an axis of possibility. From totally and completely external to totally and completely internal, participating in the action, be he or she a main character, a protagonist, a bystander, or whatever. And anywhere in between external to internal and not infrequently a position that shifts from a relative or absolute position to position.

An internal narrator reporting a story who makes an appearance at the beginning and ending of chapters, albeit in third person narration with an over-narrator totally external to the narrative reporting an internal narrator works fine as long as the transitions are well-delineated and smooth. Narrative distance might not be as close as possible, but close enough. An ancient classic tale follows that form, anoymous's The Book of One Thousand and One Nights also known as The Arabian Nights. The internal narrators, there are two, one introductory narrator, and one main narrator, plus a third person over-narrator, take the form of a frame story wrapping and with interludes spanning gaps between reporting folklore installments. I don't think your intent, as is, is far off that mark, only the main narrative is a singular plot rather than a series of related short stories connected by a frame story.

Ultimately, it's a writer's choice to decide the standing narrators have to any given narrative and compose as needs dictate. However, the single overriding concern in my estimation is how close the narrative distance needs to be with an intended reader surrogate, be the surrogate an internal narrator or another viewpoint character. The closest narrative distance closely accompanies a focal viewpoint character, for the strongest participation mystique, the most dynamically proactive viewpoint character, ideally the protagonist, who is most instrumental in effecting change and most changed by the circumstances of a narrative's main dramatic complication.

Index page to Sir Richard Burton's 1850 translation of The Book of One Thousand and One Nights;
http://xahlee.org/p/arabian_nights/index.html

[Fenris]

So in your opinion I should keep the narrator character, right?

Yes, but there are times in CSA where the narrative fixation slips away from your MC. At times you tell the reader things the MC has no way of knowing, and while occasionally such things can be necessary, it's rather disconcerting. I'd just try and keep the narration Angeni's rather than jumping back and forth between the two modes. It should be a simple fix, though; there aren't too many instances like that.

[Guardian]

Yes, but there are times in CSA where the narrative fixation slips away from your MC. At times you tell the reader things the MC has no way of knowing, and while occasionally such things can be necessary, it's rather disconcerting. I'd just try and keep the narration Angeni's rather than jumping back and forth between the two modes. It should be a simple fix, though; there aren't too many instances like that.

Okay. It's on my fix list. Thanks! ;)

[sarahdee]

+1

Like anything, done well, it can be a great way of writing. Depending on the story, who the story teller is etc.

There's something very cosy and campfireish about being told a story.

[Guardian]

Polymath. Thank you for The Book of One Thousand and One Nights. I read it a long time ago, but it's a really good example.

[Sommer Leigh]

This is personal preference only, but I'm not crazy about books being told from a storyteller or narrator's point of view. There are exceptions of course - some stories are just better told this way. But I don't like the distance between me and the story when there is a narrator involved. It is harder to become completely immersed when there's that middle man.

That's not universal of course - I'm not saying I would never read a book written that way, it is just not my preference usually.

[polymath]

Polymath. Thank you for The Book of One Thousand and One Nights. I read it a long time ago, but it's a really good example.

That novel's now traditional narrative point of view was in its forgotten original day a fresh voice not seen before. Aesop's Fables and Grimm's Fairy Tales emulate it. One unique quality I find admirable is how it indirectly addresses readers once it gets going, internally narrates to an auxiliary character instead of directly addressing readers. I sense the opening introductions start off remote and close narrative distance about as close as a viewpoint storyteller character can go and still bring together and relevantly report an otherwise disjointed collection of ancient folklore oral traditions.

[Nicole R]

Put me down for a -1. I usually don't prefer a narrator, although in rare instances it can work well. I like a story to tell itself through the characters, without outside narration.

[wordranger]

You just need to make sure that your narration doesn't cause a false beginning to your story.
As a reader, that can be annoying. Your narration needs to be quick and to the point. Characterization of your narrator can come across throughout the story in little bits at a time, but if you get into your narrator too intensely at the beginning, and then actually start your stroy, it can put your reader off.

I have not read all of CSA yet, but I am guessing that you probably don't want to cut all your narrator out, but I think it will benefit your story to tone him down a bit.