Tag Info

A lot of it is just convention. Most people seem most accustomed to reading past tense, so it tends to not be noticed by the reader. There are exceptions to this, however. YA, especially, has a lot of present tense writing, and in that genre it seems to be totally unremarkable. Fans of present tense often argue that it gives a sense of immediacy to the ...

TL;DR If you're going to do present tense do it for a good reason and mitigate the downsides. Long version Present tense lends a sense of immediacy to the work and also may make it feel like you are reading a screenplay or drama as opposed to a typical past tense novel. That's the good part. If you want urgency and a sense of being close to the action, ...

Past tense is my instinct. Yet it depends on what you are writing and the writing's purpose. If it's an adventure story or something with more of a fast pace then clearly present tense might be best. "What was that? Rustling in the bushes nearby. Footsteps just beyond--sound like a person, a large person. I must move on. Now." That is more effective than: ...

If your essay is analytical (and I'm struggling to think of any other reason you'd write an essay about The Great Gatsby) then I'd put it in the present tense. Gatsby loves Daisy, but Daisy is married to Tom. Gatsby doesn't have the bloodline to impress her; all he has is money. So he throws lavish affairs at his ostentatious house in a effort to show her ...

Here's what I'm familiar with: a lot of people see present-tense as a description of something happening right now, while past-tense is a narration of events that have already concluded. So: Some readers find present-tense more immediate and, well, tense. Some readers take issue with past-tense narration, seeing it as an unjustified device: If somebody's ...

One way to look at it: how do people in real life present thoughts and emotions? Either through their actions (facial expressions, body language) or they say something. You could get across emotions by describing these things (something like the "universal expressions" in the TV show Lie to Me come to mind). I think objective third is pretty difficult to do ...

It should be pretty simple to write her decisions if they are truly brief. For example: Vala whirled to face her attacker, checking him over for potential weaknesses. She noted a gap in his armor just above his waist. Gotcha! she thought. A quick jab with her dagger tore a scream from his throat. Emotions and thinking should be just as easy: Jane ...

It's not strange at all. That's exactly how I would do it. A flashback of two paragraphs can take past perfect. A flashback of several pages can be in the simple past as long as you establish the time shift clearly at the beginning, and use the past perfect in one or two sentences at the beginning. You should also clearly indicate when the flashback ends: ...

I think you have it written correctly. "I remember Eve" means that at the moment he's speaking, he does in fact remember her. To say "I remembered Eve" means that at some point (in the past) he didn't remember Eve, and then at some point (still in the past, but more recently), he did remember her again. The same with "I don't think I'll ever recover" ...

You're making the time shift too casual, too non-committing. That's a major jump granting a new section or at the very least a new paragraph. You can't just go by with a single clause of a longer sentence. Lauren is quite right when making it stand out with italics, but if you want to avoid formatting it that way or think it disrupts the flow, you can fit ...

Try this: San Francisco is just coming to life. I can see all of downtown from my hotel room. Ten stories below, the traffic is backed up on Powell Street. ... etc. ... etc. Two weeks earlier I am sitting in a bar in New Orleans. The bartender asks me etc. etc. The italics on their own line become a timestamp rather than part of the sentence.

I think that beginning with a series of flashbacks might be difficult for the reader to follow if there was no sense of what they are moving towards. This might not be exactly what you are doing, but in any case my advice would be to consider an in medias res structure. Instead of narrating consecutive flashbacks leading up to the present, begin with a ...

That actually might be really interesting. Particularly if you label the flashbacks as "1958" or "Forty years ago," and then the present is "now" or "Present day." And if your flashbacks get closer together (one year ago, six months ago, four months ago, six weeks ago, three weeks ago, one week ago, three days ago, thirty-six hours ago...) and speed up, that ...

Personally I wouldn't change from first to third person in the middle of the story, it's always a little bit jarring for the reader. That being said, maybe being jarring is what you want in this case. It would make the flashbacks stand out. Being in first person for the flashback would also make it feel more personal, something you might want for that ...

I think you mix things up here. Present tense does not build immediacy, immediacy should be there if you use present tense. At least I expect it when present tense is used. As Kate mentions the sense of immediacy is independent of the used tense. But if you use present tense, your writing should better have this sense. Just using present tense will not add ...

I write blog posts in the present tense even if I'm writing about something which happened in the past, because it's funnier to be "present" as the gag is unfolding. I prefer novels in the past tense, but it's just a preference, and I could get used to a story told in the present tense.

I am not in academia, but I think if you would use the present tense for a book, then a letter — which presumably has to be published for you to have access to it — would fall under the same rule. Otherwise you have something like, "John Adams writes in Defence of the Constitution that England is a monarchical republic, but in his letter of 1 ...

Yes, I think it's right. It's a memory, but the character is talking about parts of it he still remembers, and how the place still is, to this day - how things stand at this point in time. If you started talking about Eve, you might then go into past tense, as he would then be talking about what she was like back when he knew her. So, he says that he still ...

Third person objective works best for screen plays. Are you writing for print or film? I've read in a number of places that experimenting with perspective, or using anything other than first person or third omniscient/limited for print, as an unpublished writer, is a quick path to an editors trash can.

I'd go with past, actually. If you use past perfect, there's no need to italicise, is there? It's effectively not a flashback, but just narration. Flashbacks are meant to take on an element of immediacy, of being dragged into a moment re-lived. (In fact I've actually switched to present tense for flashbacks with no reader confusion. Indicate that you're ...

One can debate the validity of the flashback technique, as Lauren Ipsum and Tylerharms do in the comments on another answer. Like many techniques, it can be done well and it can be done lamely. (Oh, how I hate movies that start out with a character brooding over the scene of the disaster -- whether it's the end of his marriage or the end of the world or ...

I find these answers interesting because to me, a diary is a place you confess your innermost thoughts, while a journal is something you write in every day to talk about what you did. (note the jour- root, meaning "day") That having been said, if I'm reporting on what I did today, or yesterday, I'd use past tense, because it's something I did. But if I'm ...

The best you can do, I think, is to try and pick up on the tone of the work that the original writer was trying to convey. Since your profile indicates that you're an Indonesian/English translator, I did a little research into Indonesian verb tenses, and I think I understand your problem. While this may be an oversimplification, I've found while verb forms ...

After reading your question I did a little search and discovered this: Use present tense to introduce cited or quoted material and to make personal comments on such materials. Use past tense only when directly quoting a passage that is in past tense or when reporting historical events. This answers the question of why "pass" was corrected to ...

Choose the tense that suits the story you want to tell. Like you say, if you want to create the impression that the description of the journey is from a diary, then present tense could work. However, even here you could write as past tense because perhaps you wrote in your diary at the end of the day looking back over the day's activities. Or perhaps the ...

I know lots of people say that present tense creates immediacy, but as a reader I've never noticed any difference. But if you want to give a better impression that the story is being written or told as it happens, present tense will help with that. That's not quite the same thing as the reader's sense immediacy. It's related, but not quite the same. A few ...

It really doesn't matter as long as you are consequent and do not mix the tenses up. Most books I've read are written in past tense. If you are unsure and there is no compelling reason for you using present tense, I would go with past tense. But it is up to you. There is no wrong or right here.