Past or present text, which do you prefer and why?

If I need something screwed that's a legitimate criticism though.

But that doesn't make it a crime against tools.

True. I'm not the user that thinks it's a crime against literature but I do dislike first person present.

Present Tense is for Screenplays

In theory I don't care either way, but present tense tends to exacerbate annoyances.

2nd person present tense in the only acceptable way to write

First person is good for identifying with one character, which can be good at times.

Present tense is never good unless you're analyzing text. I only ever use present tense in fiction when a character is recounting events, which is often done in present tense.

It's infantile. It uses an expectation of increased empathy from the "intimacy" of the pov as a crutch to support its failings.

are there any decent works that were written in second person? it's an interesting style but I've only ever seen it employed in choose your own adventure type books.

That's not necessarily true. It's great for expressing sensationalism and for singling in on delusion without consideration having come into play.

I've noticed a lot of YA uses first person present tense

Perec's A Man Asleep is second person.
So is The Fall.

OK, there are rare exceptions that justify 1st person. But third person should be the default choice.

Bright Lights, Big City by Jay McInerney
If on a Winter's Night a Traveller by Italo Calvino (a lot of it)

The odd-numbered chapters of If on a winter's night a traveler are written in the second person.

>no 2nd person future tense

Part of A Visit from the Goon Squad by Jennifer Egan is in the second person, and to great effect.

I mostly associate first person present tense with young adult novels. IIRC The Fault in Our Stars and the Hunger Games both used it. I can't think of one good literary example that used it.

I don't care. Don't care about which perspective it's in either. It's a really autistic thing to even have an opinion on.

Gravity's Rainbow had a few second person passages including the (in)famous "Your task in these dreams...etc." one.

Google says The Fault In Our Stars is past tense. Regardless though, I think that it's ripe for a literary work. It's unfashionable but plenty of great works have turned tradition completely on their head. I find it especially interesting because I think that it is useful in showing consciousness in a medium that's chief merit is its ability to place us inside the minds of others in a seamless way.

But none in first person present tense, so I'm not sure why you mention it...

Reminder that use of tense and perspective should be based on whether or not you think it's appropriate for the theme/plot/style of the book - it shouldn't be a preference, it should be something that comes naturally as a result of the work of art.

I'm not sure either, t b h. I know Hawkes uses first person present in a couple of his books, but he's controversial here and he played around with a lot of weird shit.

Present tense lends itself more readily to plot-driven stories: "I do this, she does that, I'm not sure what's going on but I push forward anyway." Past tense is inherently more reflective, and therefore more concerned with development (hopefully character development). Present tense almost always fall back on some moment where the main character says, "And that's when I realize..." betraying the Show Don't Tell rule.

So while what you're saying is true and we should all go into a book with an open mind, tense can be a pretty strong indicator of what the book is trying to do.

People who are interested in literature should be playing with everything at their disposal, which includes lesser used modes of narration. Everyone complains about the good shit already being done but doesn't want to work with things that defy tradition. You're all a bunch of pseuds. Language is beautiful and flexible and should evoke joy and interest in its entirety. Everything can have value and perceiving a lack of it should encourage you to explore it even more not disregard it.

Yeah, you're right. I just have a very open mind when I try to make art, but it's also pretty important to notice the limitations of what you're trying to do. What do you think of a novel that combines both? In other words, the narrator is telling the story in the "now" and events may occur while the story is being told, but everything else is told through reflection (past-tense).

>Present tense almost always fall back on some moment where the main character says, "And that's when I realize..." betraying the Show Don't Tell rule.
I think that the mode of narration needs to much more heavily rely on implication. Things must be left largely unsaid.

Fourth person future tense is the test of any great writer but none have dared attempt it.

I know you're joking, but future tense sounds like it'd be really gimmicky and tryhard experimental. It's fun to try to think about what fourth person would be like, though.

Present tense makes me angry. I'm not sure why, but I think it's because it reminds me of YA bullshit.

>Present tense made me angry. I'm not sure why, but I thought it's because it reminded me of YA bullshit.
Fixed.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_person#Additional_persons

The closest thing you could get is to use "one".

That's what a fortune teller uses.

Actually a novel written in the form of a fortune teller talking to you might be fun

>Present tense made me angry because it reminded me of YA bullshit.
fixed

Past tense should be your default tense in fiction and you should only use present tense when you have some justification for doing so.

I suspect if you did use present tense without a reason for doing so you'd be a fairly shitty writer. It's a technique and not just a different kind of font to use.

Second person is mainly for interactive fiction, and in that case it should always be in present tense

>might be fun
>fun
Go ahead and write your YA novel

Those are only bad because of low quality writing

I only read non-fiction