What's so wrong with writing in the third person?

[SmthngOfADreamr]

Personally I have never really been a fan of Stevie's songs written entirely in the third person. If you take a look at what most people, even casual fans, would consider her best work, songs such as Dreams, Sara, Storms, Beautiful Child, Gypsy, Edge of 17, Stand Back, and even songs from TISL such as Sorcerer, TISL, Planets... NONE of it is written in the third person. The obvious exception to me is Rhiannon, but even that is written in a different perspective that Thrown Down. Rhiannon does not rely on the "he said, she said" or "he did this, she did this" forumla that Thrown Down is based upon. Rhiannon is a simple narritive, and the "she" and "her" in the song are defined. There is not this anonomous "She" and "He."

I think the reason that some people, including myself, dislike the "he said she said" third person in Stevie's writing is simply because it can be cumbersome to listen to and I think it is easier to convey feelings and emotions, which are primary elements in most of Stevie's work, if you write from the first person. Imagine Storms written in this third person, or Beautiful Child, or anything really that she wrote in the first person. It awful! "She had always been a storm?" "He said it will be harder in the morning. She waits for him to say just go. His hand held hers..." I mean I could go on and on. When you write about the things that Stevie writes about, I think it's obvious that first person is just better (at least to my ears!)

[seteca]

Originally posted by Brad
Seteca,

Just out of curiosity, could you name a few of the Floyd songs you're talking about? I'm a huge fan, but I'm unfamiliar with what "first person plural" is, so I'm not sure which ones to think of!

Thanks,

Brad

Hi Brad, nice to meet a fellow Floydian on The Ledge!

First person plural is basically using "we". As many of their songs have some sort of social and/or political meaning, or at least innuendo, it allows them to sound like "the voice of a whole generation". Unsurprisingly, its use in their songs is often coupled with the 3rd person plural i.e. "they".
Here's some examples:
"When we grew up and went to school there were certain teachers who would hurt the children anyway they could" - The Happiest Days Of Our Lives.
"At a higher altitude with flag unfurled we reached the dizzy heights of that dreamed of world" - High Hopes.
"We don't need no education, we don't need no thought control" - Another Brick In The Wall Part 2.

[Bella Figura]

Joe, loved your poem...

I don't have not much to add intellectually to this discussion except to point out, personally I've always thought that writing in the third person was more difficult then in the first person since the majority of songs are written in the first person. Not many songwriters do third person and in fact Courtney Love expressed in an interview that it was one of the reasons, she is such a huge Stevie fan.

To me writing in the third person implies additional thought and even wisdom, and twisting what seteca said to support my case"a song in the 3rd person is like a story book, so you know there's going to be an "ending", regardless of whether its happy or sad. This means that there is no "confrontation factor" involved i.e. the writer, if talking about himself/herself in the 3rd person, has accepted that "it is over", and is now telling his/her story." There is a sense of contemplation and lessons learned to a third person story...

The first person seems to be a more immediate songwriting style which conveys strong emotion but not always a care and contemplation...Carne illustrates this perfectly with his example ""I hate your guts." Now you have a more powerful statement because it's more direct and conveys emotion more effectively. Those words pack a hell of a wallop." but do just emotions, in the end, have anything really to say, any sincere meaning and any learned truth...

In the end, to me, music can just be an expression of raw emotion but great music should also can also convey a songwriters knowledge, experience and even life philisophy. Music, that can rise above just raw anger, raw hurt, raw love, raw longing and express profound ideas, create a deeper meaning is much more interesting to me...

but then again, sometimes, I just wanna dance...

[jwys_soapbox]

Over the years, I've thought a lot about the perspective Stevie uses in her songs. In relation to Thrown Down, I have two points to make. The first is that her use of third-person in songs that are likely about herself is an effort to diffuse or even cover the power she has (or maybe wants to have) in her relationships. The second is that Stevie often confuses the issue by switching from third to second person.

In relation to my first point, I think it is unquestionable that Stevie is a powerful woman. Anyone that can build and sustain a career like hers has to be powerful--a born leader. The downside of being powerful, however, is that you can't flaunt it and be very likable. One's appeal as a "star" is related to how well one'e audience can relate to you. Could someone come off as sympatethic if he or she openly discusses the amount of power he or she possess and uses in dealing with others? I would say it is more likely one would come off as conceited or vain. In my observation, conceited and vain performers are few in Rock--especially if they are female. Female rockers walk a thin line between disclosure of their strength and the necessity of being "womanly." Their audience is primarily male so they have to, in some way, also seem as if they need their man. Can you imagine Stevie without her association with men like Buckingham? Her entire career has had him somewhere in the background of everything she writes: Stevie and Lindsey in love, Stevie and Lindsey breaking up, Stevie and Lindsey are apart but still getting over each other, Stevie and Lindsey are friends, etc. etc. etc. I offer the following as an illustration of what I mean, it is based on lyrics found on SaraRhiannon's Stevie Nicks Underground site...

He fell for me again, I watched it happen
Every day, day by day...
But more important... night by night
I watched it all come into play
He held my hands, I listened to what he had to say

Thrown down... like a barricade
Maybe now he could prove to me
That he could be good for her
And that we should be together

I say I'm sorry, now I should walk away
But it's so overwhelming, I have nothing left to say
I can sit outside his door and wait...
I can dedicate my pain to him

Thrown down...
Like a barricade
Maybe now he could prove to me...
That he could be good for me
And we should be together
(Thrown down...)
About just how much he never really told me,
Thrown down...
Ooh, about how difficult it had been to be without me...
Thrown down...
Thrown down...
Thrown down...
Ooh, he fell for me again...
I watched it happen
Thrown down...
I watched it happen...
Thrown down...
I watched it happen...

I have edited the above into the first person. How do you like the narrator now? I don't think she's as appealing as she is when Stevie tells her story. The story goes from one where Stevie is omniscient to one where she is the subject. Either way, you can judge the subject as you will. I would say she's certainly realistic, but not very deserving of sympathy--her heart is closed off to any future with this guy who clearly means well and loves her. Whatever way you judge her, how does Stevie come off? In the third-person version, Stevie is safe, she's not hard-hearted and somewhat braggy ("that guy told me he loved me again, what am I supposed to say to that? I just said "I'm sorry you feel that way"). Instead Stevie is just the reporter and is safe from any ill felings we might have about the subject. Another song to consider in relation to use of the first person instead of third and how the change would effect the narrator is "Sweet Girl." Instead of a story of a woman who gives up her personal life for her career, we have Stevie wining about how bad she's had it over the years.

As for my second point, what is it about Stevie switching from third person to second ("you say you're sorry, you should walk away"), who the hell is the you? Is it the guy or girl? In the above, I assumed it was the girl, but I could have easily made it the guy. Stevie does that in several songs and it drives me nuts. If we have any idea about her feelings on the matter, they are confused by her switch from an observer to a participant in the events.

Anyway, that's enough for me. I've probably pissed a couple of feminist off and God knows who else. My intention is not to stereotype female rockers, just to relate what I've observed.

John

[Johnny Stew]

I agree, John.
As I expressed in my earlier posts, I'm definitely of the mind that in some songs... "Thrown Down" in particular... Stevie would simply come off as conceited, if she were to sing in the first-person.

I'm not saying that I prefer that perspective over her songs featuring first-person narratives, just that in some cases it works better in the third-person.

And I know what you mean about her switching from third- to second-person, but I kind of have a theory on that.
To me, it seems that she intentionally sets up the story, and then switches over in order to "talk" to the characters in question.
Offering her wisdom on the situation, as Bella Figura suggested.

From the writer's guides I've read, that's perfectly acceptable (at times), though it's not done very often, because it's difficult to pull off.

As for "Love Is"...
I think that the first verses in the song, are implied to be quotes.
She's relaying the conversation, without the addition of "she said" or "he said" (terms she doesn't use until later in the song).

"Do you know what this is?"
"No, i don't... but whatever it is, it's very powerful"

"You know that I cannot stay"
"Yes, I know"
Etc., etc.

Re-read the lyrics, John, imagining quotation marks around anything that has "I" or "you" in it, and I think you'll see what I mean.
When you think of it in these terms, she never really leaves that third-person narrative.

Again, it's left open enough for us to interpret that it was *her* who had this conversation with someone, and yet, she could also have been an outsider listening in.



Johnny Stew

[Brad]

Originally posted by seteca
Hi Brad, nice to meet a fellow Floydian on The Ledge!

First person plural is basically using "we". As many of their songs have some sort of social and/or political meaning, or at least innuendo, it allows them to sound like "the voice of a whole generation". Unsurprisingly, its use in their songs is often coupled with the 3rd person plural i.e. "they".
Here's some examples:
"When we grew up and went to school there were certain teachers who would hurt the children anyway they could" - The Happiest Days Of Our Lives.
"At a higher altitude with flag unfurled we reached the dizzy heights of that dreamed of world" - High Hopes.
"We don't need no education, we don't need no thought control" - Another Brick In The Wall Part 2.

Wow. Apparently my four semesters of English did me a lot of good! I was looking for something much more than "we"! Thanks for the info.

Brad

[sulamith]

You guys are really turning this into an interesting discussion. I totally agree with the point about Stevie using the third person to diffuse some of the heavy emotion as I said before, then a "Duh" response from someone, that is exatly what I meant. It keeps the listener from saying, "Oh, there she goes again....whining about her life......pining over Lindsey when she was the one who left him." I think the third person takes that and flips it around. It does draw you in, makes you want to know more about this "person" she is talking about.
I also very much enjoy the change to second person, because she does keep you guessing as to who the "you" is! Sometimes it is her, sometimes it is him.

Like in "Dreams", the first line is

Now there you go again you say
You want your freedom

This line has confused many a-FM listener because they think, wait, I thought she was the one who broke it off (at least that time), but what I have come to realize is that those are not her words to him, but most likely his to her, and the same thing later in the song, the question

Have you any dreams you'd like to sell?

I believe these again are his words to her, being angry over the way she changed once they joined FM. By using this, and by keeping you guessing, she takes a situation where she might just come off looking like a shallow bitch and by the end of it she has you eating out of the palm of her hand. Amazing. It softens a raw emotion.

I really like Thrown Down, but I know it is not the pinnacle of their work from this last year. I'll agree the lyrics are not an example of her mystical best. I'm going to hold my opinions until I hear the whole thing.

[The Tower]

Originally posted by sulamith
Like in "Dreams", the first line is

Now there you go again you say
You want your freedom

This line has confused many a-FM listener because they think, wait, I thought she was the one who broke it off (at least that time), but what I have come to realize is that those are not her words to him, but most likely his to her, and the same thing later in the song, the question

Have you any dreams you'd like to sell?

BINGO!!! Sulamith, you have always been my favorite Ledgie... We think so alike.

Perspective is EVERYTHING. So, sometimes third-person is necessary to convey an idea of separation. While I haven't heard "Thrown Down" and I'm not thrilled by the lyrics one bit, I DO respect Stevie for her ability to dig down into the emotion of a song and really find the core.

[DownOnRodeo]

lol Thanks Bella Figura, thought my half-assed comedic efforts had gone to waste!

OK, I'll join the academic analysis session if I can cause I just noticed something about the third person while listening to it (yes I finally dloaded it).

One of the conceptual problems, versus the TISL outtake, is that Lindsey is singing. The way it's written, it cant really be about those two .. yet you sort of want it to be. Alterantively, Lindsey singing about some friend of Stevie's romantic miseries just doesn't ring true. In Dreams the others just help out on the vocally explosive phrase 'Thunder only happens..." which is just some "commonaly known proverb", whereas only Stevie sings the bit about the material situation "Women they will come and they will go..you will know etc". In Thrown Down, Lindsey is singing substantive content 'about the story', not just airy phrases like 'Thunder.." or "Thrown Down like a Barricade".
In fact i think if he only backed up on "Thrown down like a barricade" it'd work a bit better.

[Sarah]

Originally posted by Bella Figura
I don't have not much to add intellectually to this discussion except to point out, personally I've always thought that writing in the third person was more difficult then in the first person

I have to agree with you. It is my opinion that 3rd is a more difficult voice in which to write a song. I'm not sure why that is. Itmight be because 1st is a standard, and if you use 3rd, you don't really have a template to go by.

That being said, I've been thinking about this topic in 2 ways. (Which conflict.)

1. Variety is the spice of life. I think it would be somewhat sucky if every song used the same type of voice, sounded the same, told the same stories, etc.

2. People don't like change. We become so uncomfortable around things we're unfamiliar with that the simple fact that it is alien inhibits us. This is a lot of the reason, in my opinion, that many people do not like newer music. They automatically brush it off as saying it sucks after they've heard a song 2 times. I used to do that. My friends would listen to, in my opinion, the most God-awful things and it would totally grate my nerves. Until I thought about it, and I was like, "K. I'm going to try to listen to this for what it is and see if it really does suck." (Half of it does, Half of it doesn't.)


So, I guess it depends on the type of person you are. If you like to have what you listen to mixed up a little bit.. or if you're perfectly straight with listening to one song or one cd on repeat because you know you like that and you don't want to deviate from your routine... then you probably won't like anything that gets off the track that your mojo is on.

I dunno.

Sarah

[Rumours]

I don't know, I guess maybe I don't analyze as much as others do. I tend to get more interested in the lyrical content OTHER than the "He said" "She said" or "I said" stuff. Take for instance the line from Thrown Down that I've had in my signature for a while now (hmm, it HAS been there a LONG time, maybe I need to think about changing these things more often--but that's another can of worms!). The "day by day" "more important, night by night" comments caught me more than the fact that it's He and She and not Me. It's the lyrics that make you go "hmmm", or "wow", that I'm more in tune to, than if she happens to be writing it like she's talking about herself, or if she writes it like she's speaking of someone else.

Just some ramblings by me....I've found the conversations going on here to be very interesting....thought I'd add a tiny bit in myself.

Stephanie

[CarneVaca]

Guys, a couple of points about all this. And let's keep in mind a very important thing here, ultimately, there is no right or wrong. It comes down to what really speaks to you. I can look at a piece of writing and decide if it's good or bad. If it is particularly bad, from the standpoint of the mechanics of writing, most people who understand the mechanics will agree with me. But if it is bad writing but still evokes certain feelings and strikes a chord with the reader, then maybe it ain't so bad. I can think of a pretty good example: "The Perfect Storm" was one of the most compelling narratives I've ever read, but all along reading the book I couldn't help thinking how much better it would have been if the writing were better. As it was, it was written at sixth-grade level. Compare it to "A Civil Action," and you might see the difference. "A Civil Action" is a wonderfully engaging narrative that was crafted very skillfully by a top-notch writer.

But I digress again. Sulamith, your point about the first line in "Dreams" really only reverberates with those of us who are big fans of the band. The listening public in general probably never thought about it much or cared. They like the song because it's a good song with engaging lyrics and a nice, if disarmingly simple, melody. And they might be able to applk it to their own life experience.

The other point I would make is that some songs are not worth writing. I think Stevie has done some of that, and I don't even mean "Thrown Down" because I think "Thrown Down" is an OK song that could have been considerably improved if she had been a better self-editor.

[Hawkeye]

Ok guys I'm a bit confused on this 1st 2nd 3rd person stuff. So i don't know what i like better. Can some one tell me what stevie songs ARE written in 3rd person, and which are written in 1st.

[sulamith]

DownonRodeo, I think your parody of Stevie's lyrics is DEAD ON, lol, and I thought it was very funny! Sorry I didn't address it in my post.

The Tower, thank ya, darlin', for your compliment,
and Carne, I know, what you said about my comments on Dreams is only applicable to us hard-asses, but then again, so is this ENTIRE conversation. Like someone else commented, I don't think the general public cares about all the first, second, third person stuff anyway. Either they like the vibe or they don't. Whatever, baby. I still luv you, too!

And Hawkeye, it's hard to give you a short, definitive answer, because Stevie changes person so often. First person is the use of "I", second person is "you", and third person is "he, she, or it". I'm not trying to be a smart ass. I just wasn't sure about what you wanted to know.

-Sharon

[Hawkeye]

can you give some examples of songs written in third person.