The Sword and Laser discussion

I haven't got far through The Night Circus yet, and though I'm enjoying it so far, the thing that's most struck me is a slightly jarring point - the use of person and tense.

So far, everything I've read is in the present tense, and the first few pages were in the second person. They're both unusual choices - the second person in particular - and that threw me.

Theoretically, you might expect these choices to make the story more immediate. After all, we live our lives in the present, and the second person perspective pushes us directly into the story.

But in practice, the experience is the opposite of that. I’m so used to past tense and first or third person that the unfamiliarity of it is unsettling. I assume this was Morgenstern’s intent – it’s in keeping with the tone and content of those first few pages – and any fiction writer who thought about it might expect the same result. But my initial thought was that it goes against the logic of language, and shows how our reactions are governed by where that language is used – in this case to tell a story.

Having blogged about this, I got a reaction from a reader who said that the use of second person actually breaks the fourth wall - it doesn't so much make you part of the story as act as a reminder of you, the reader, distinct from the made up story. Which is an interesting and different way to look at it.

So, having rambled on in contradictory ways about this, what do the rest of you think? How do you react to unusual use of tense and person in storytelling? And what's behind those reactions?

I read this book awhile ago (2012?) and didn't recall feeling particularly jarred by the use of person/tense...but I listened to the audio, and I wonder if that changed my impression or how I might notice the use.

I don't usually give it a lot of thought in general, but maybe I haven't read anything "unusual" in awhile. ;) But I do think that if I were listening, it wouldn't be as noticeable as it would be if I were reading the printed word.

Andrew wrote: "I haven't got far through The Night Circus yet, and though I'm enjoying it so far, the thing that's most struck me is a slightly jarring point - the use of person and tense.

So far, everything I'v..."

I think that in the first two pages, the writer wanted you to feel...like you were an observer in this circus. Wanted to attempt to capture the emotion of the circus from an audience member's perspective. To make it really clear that the book you are reading is, in a way, a performance piece that you are watching and there's only so far that you'll be able to get into the actor's heads.

Whether that was effective or not. :P I don't know.

This book is certainly ambitious. I read it a couple of years ago, and as you go through it, you will notice that the timeline is rather jumbled. I think the shifts in tense are there, in part, to distinguish which timeline you're reading during any given chapter. I imagine the movie adaptation would use soft focus, or a voice-over narrative, or a stage-play within the movie... something like that to distinguish each perspective while just telling the story out of order as a number of films have.

For me, the book was a challenging read until I let go of my desire to have the tale unfold linearly. The person/tense shifts stopped bothering me after a while, but it's hard to adjust when every chapter changes what you've grown accustomed to.

Robert of Dale wrote: "This book is certainly ambitious. I read it a couple of years ago, and as you go through it, you will notice that the timeline is rather jumbled. I think the shifts in tense are there, in part, to ..."

I am definitely feeling temptation to look up a plot summary because I'm super curious about what's going on and confused at the same time. I agree with you in that I think its aim was to make you feel the "experience" of a magic trick. Mainly red herrings and confusion and then prestige.

But yes. :P I keep feeling the temptation for structure.

Anja wrote: "I think that in the first two pages, the writer wanted you to feel...like you were an observer in this circus. Wanted to attempt to capture the emotion of the circus from an audience member's perspective. To make it really clear that the book you are reading is, in a way, a performance piece ..."

I definitely got the feeling it was about drawing attention to the constructed nature of the story, to remind you that you are looking at a carefully put together work of art rather than living an experience. Which is fine and fits the themes, but requires a produces a certain sense of detachment.

Robert of Dale wrote: "The person/tense shifts stopped bothering me after a while, but it's hard to adjust when every chapter changes what you've grown accustomed to."

That's interesting, and I hadn't got far enough in yet to see frequent changes. I'm curious to see whether I get used to it.

I'm always surprised when people have issues with tenses. I wouldn't say I don't notice them, but it's usually very subconscious for me.

I'm about 36% of the way through the book, and I don't feel like there are very frequent changes--I've noticed two timelines so far (ignoring the 2nd person sections which are extremely short), both of which progress linearly so far.

I'll see how the rest of the book goes . . .

I found the second person passages immmersive, not distancing. That may just be because I'm used to fiction in the second person/ fiction where the reader is addressed. If anyone is really enjoying those sections, and would like to read something similar, give If on a Winter's Night a Traveler a go (though the tone there is less wondrous and more whimsical/mischievous).

The use of present tense was *occasionally* distracting to me at first, but as I get further in the book I'm finding it really adds to some of the best scenes. I just got to the (view spoiler)[ Young Magicians meeting each other in the rain (hide spoiler)] scene and goodness did it help pack a punch with the final image.

I agree with Anja. With all the jumping back and forth between characters and timelines, this book feels more like a series of interconnected vignettes than a typical A-B-C plotted novel. At about the halfway mark my sense is the competition between the two magicians is the Maypole that all the other characters and plotlines dance around. Like the chapter on the Reveurs. I have no idea if that sets up something later in the novel. I kind of hope it doesn't--it's a neat little setting detail that this circus would inspire its own group of Trekkie or Deadhead-like fans who form fan communities, discuss their passion, wear distinctive attire, follow the circus around.

I get a retro-vibe from it. Instead of a more modern novel, where you're asked to share the headspace of one or a handful of protagonists through first-person or tight third-person narration, here I feel removed from the proceedings. "This is a story."

Joe Informatico wrote: "I agree with Anja. With all the jumping back and forth between characters and timelines, this book feels more like a series of interconnected vignettes than a typical A-B-C plotted novel. At about ..."

This is difficult to talk about without spoiling. I'll try.

I'm about 75% through and I also think the "Reveurs" are an environmental addition. But I also think that every single environmental addition in this book has some deeper metaphor behind it, especially considering what happens ~70% through.

I think it's important to consider that Celia and Marco are "dreamers" and that they're creating the "dream" that is the Night Circus. So each creation is in a way a message from them and has more than meets the eye. Since Celia talks with the head of the Reveurs on a regular basis, I can't help but feel that they have her influence behind them and that they're part of her portion of the dream.

Perhaps there's a red ~ blood symbol going on. With the black and white dream world having blood on its hands. I don't know. Or the red being the symbol of the temporariness of the dream and that being a reminder to the Reveurs.

As I get further in, the vibe I'm getting from the book is in keeping with the response I had to those first few pages. It seems like something clever and beautiful, but in a slightly distant way. I'm enjoying the challenge of keeping track of the different strands as more emerge, of trying to see and predict the connections. As Joe Informatico said, there's a sense of detachment, of being aware of 'this is a story', and the strange impact of the initial person and tense connects with that construction.

I've read stories focussed on the power of art that comment on the subject by drawing you in, immersing you in the story and the experience of crafstmanship - Guy Gavriel Kay's Sarantine mosaic springs to mind - but this seems to encourage you to step back and watch the intricacy unfold.

I rather like having those two different approaches available to read, and thinking about how they compare.

The jumbled timeline was frustrating at times. I found myself flipping back and forth to put events into linear order especially later in the book.
(view spoiler)[I found that when Bailey and the twins were more active in the plot this was especially frustrating. Bailey was directed towards them in one chapter and the Twins were expecting him in the next, but that chapter was 5 (?) years earlier. (hide spoiler)]

I love that the writing style mirrored the dream content, jumping in perspective and time (especially obvious around October 31 when the narrative jumps back and forth between years).

I haven't started yet... but I HATE present tense. I'm ok with a jumbled timeline (Katherine Kerr winds hers upp like tangled fishing line and I love her stuff) but the only PT stuff I've read is Patricia Cornwall, and I can never get more than a few chapters in. Tempted to try it so I know if it's just Cornwall's writing, but also tempted to just skip it...

Steve wrote: "The jumbled timeline was frustrating at times. I found myself flipping back and forth to put events into linear order especially later in the book.
[spoilers removed]"Hey Steve, I'm not sure if I've got the scene in question, but (view spoiler)[all the Bailey scenes with the Twins are October 1902, so I'm not sure where you're getting the "5(/) years earlier" scene. (hide spoiler)]

I finished the book, and I guess I'm a pretty easygoing reader since I didn't notice the present tense issue until this thread started. I'm also not having any timeline issues like the others are. It's still basically just two timelines that meet in the end. Am I missing people's troubles somehow? (view spoiler)[Timeline 1 is the Celia/Marco/Circus main-timeline (from the 187/80s through 1902) and Timeline 2 is Bailey/Twins (1897-1902, focusing on October 1902). (Yes, the Twins show up in the main timeline, too, as they grow up, but without Bailey). (hide spoiler)]

David wrote: "Steve wrote: "The jumbled timeline was frustrating at times. I found myself flipping back and forth to put events into linear order especially later in the book.
[spoilers removed]"Hey Steve, I'm n..."

I read the book on kindle, and at first wasn't keeping track of the respective years and hence my timeline confusion.

I am listening to this on Audible and the timelines make it a jumbled mess. Taking a peek at the physical book in B&N I can see that it would be MUCH easier to follow when you can easily refer back to the date/time at the chapter heads.
The writing is very elegant and I am enjoying the narrative, but I guess this is just one that doesn't work on audible.

Yes, the timelines were a lot easier to follow with the paper book, as I could easily flip back to the chapter before and remind myself where that was in the timeline, versus the current chapter. But after a while I got used to the switching between the later years and the earlier years of the circus, and felt this heightened the tension when the two timelines get closer and closer to converging.

I found the use of tense dreamlike. I find myself being drawn into the story and have ended up reading for several hours without realizing. It's a book you can't try and rush, you just sort of drift with it, letting it take you where it feels you should go next.

I found it strange at first because I had been reading a pretty action packed book before it, but the more I read of it, the more I love it.

I also feel like, through the second person sections, it allows the reader to visit the circus within the book and be one of the visitors.

Yes, those were some of my favorite parts.

Eleanor wrote: "I found the use of tense dreamlike. I find myself being drawn into the story and have ended up reading for several hours without realizing. It's a book you can't try and rush, you just sort of drif..."

That's my experience with the book as well. I think it is an example of Surrealism in literature, you need to just let go and let it flow, accept it for what it is and not try to impose an artificial order but enjoy the beauty of the current piece. I love this book.

Morgenstern is a brilliant writer. Her blog posts, Flax Golden Tales, are wonderful - poetic and magical. Reading the blog posts helped pull me through a rough 10 days in the hospital. I'm so happy Sword and Laser is reading it.