Is Horror Fiction About Perspective?

Well, I thought that I’d talk about writing horror fiction again. This is mostly because, whilst the early 2000s detective thriller novel I’m reading at the moment (“The Apprentice” by Tess Gerritsen) contains a lot of horror elements, I noticed that it is both very similar and very different to a 1990s horror novel called “Exquisite Corpse” by Poppy Z. Brite.

But, I should probably include a mild SPOILER warning for both of these books before I go any further.

In short, the premise of both novels revolves around two serial killers teaming up with each other. However, although both novels feature many moments of horror, one thing that sets Gerritsen’s “The Apprentice” and Brite’s “Exquisite Corpse” apart from each other is the use of perspective.

Although Gerritsen’s detective novel features a few brief segments narrated by one of the killers, the main character is the detective who is trying to catch them. This lends the novel a much more fast-paced, suspenseful and mysterious atmosphere which, whilst it contains a decent amount of horror, is somewhat reassuring given the distance between the reader and the story’s “monsters”. After all, the reader spends most of the story in the company of a well-trained detective.

On the other hand, Brite’s horror novel makes the two killers the main characters. Yes, the novel uses a mixture of first and third person narration but, by using a slightly different focus, this story instantly becomes significantly creepier and more disturbing. In short, the reader is forced to see the events of a detective novel type story from an unexpected perspective and this makes the story much more of a horror novel. After all, the reader isn’t spending time in the reassuring company of a competent detective, but in the company of two vicious murderers.

An interesting middle ground between these two novels can also be found in Jeff Lindsay’s “Dexter” novels, which are detective novels where the detective is a serial killer who catches other serial killers. This allows for a really interesting blend of disturbing horror (thanks to the creepy protagonist) and more reassuring detective-based drama.

So, perspective can have a surprisingly large impact on the atmosphere, tone and general creepiness of a horror story. But, this isn’t a simple case of “horror stories are stories from the monster’s perspective”.

For example, some of the best vampire novels I’ve read (like Jocelynn Drake’s awesome “Dark Days” series and Anne Rice’s “The Vampire Armand) have vampire protagonists, yet they aren’t really that scary. Sure, these stories are thrilling, atmospheric, gothic, beauitful and/or generally awesome, but not really that frightening. After all, the narrators are powerful vampires who are on the reader’s “side”, so to speak.

So, it’s probably more of a matter of vulnerability and character than anything else. In short, horror fiction works best when the main character is vulnerable in some way (eg: the protagonist in Nick Cutter’s terrifying “The Deep” is a scientist trapped in an underwater research base). Likewise, in the scariest novels where the protagonist is some kind of “monster”, they will usually be pursued or persecuted by a more powerful group of people who think that they are the “good guys”.

In addition to this, horror novels can also use perspective to scare the reader by making the main character frightening. This can be because the main character is completely and irredeemably evil or because they are an unreliable narrator in some way or another. Because the story is told from their perspective, the reader is forced to empathise with them – which is a really disturbing experience. A good example of this is probably Whitley Strieber’s “The Hunger“, which is a rare example of a vampire novel that is actually scary.

So, yes, horror fiction is about perspective. But it is more about vulnerability and/or characters than just simply making the main character a vampire, zombie, monster etc…..


Anyway, I hope that this was useful 🙂

Should You Use First Or Third Person Perspective Narration In Your Story?

If you’re about to start writing a story, then working out which perspective to use can be a bit of a challenge. Although you’ll either develop a preference over time or an instinct for which one works best with a particular story, this is something which can be a bit confusing if you’re new to writing.

So, I thought that I’d list some of the pros and cons of first-person and third-person narration.

First-person narration: First-person narration is easier to write for a number of reasons. Since your story is narrated from the perspective of one character, you only really have to worry about the things that this character sees, does or hears about. This also immerses the reader in the story a lot more easily, since they are quite literally placed inside the mind of the main character.

First-person narration is also great for shorter stories. After all, if your main character is the narrator, then you can focus more on what is happening to them or what they see than on describing them.

Likewise, it is easier to use a distinctive narrative voice, to show your main character’s thoughts, to make your story “flow” better and to give your main character lots of characterisation if you’re writing from a first-person perspective.

On the downside, you can’t really show what other characters are thinking since your story is told from the perspective of just one character. Yes, this can be used to add mystery to other characters (the famous example being Sherlock Holmes. Most of the original stories are narrated by Holmes’ colleague Watson). But, if you want to give lots of characters lots of characterisation, then this is more difficult from a first-person perspective.

In addition to this, since you’re only showing things from one character’s perspective, first-person narration feels a bit more subjective and unreliable. Whilst this can be useful in some types stories, it doesn’t always fit in with literally every type of story out there.

Likewise, if you’re telling a large-scale story or even just a story that involves several plot threads, then this is a lot more difficult in first-person perspective. Yes, there are ways to do it (eg: dialogue, documents or even using more than one first-person narrator), but these are often a bit awkward to read unless handled really well. So, it only really works for stories with one main plot thread.

Third-person narration: Third-person narration gives you a lot more control over what you can show the reader. If you want to focus on one character, to focus on several characters or to describe something that the characters don’t see, then this is easy to do in third-person. It is a more “cinematic” form of narration that gives you more choice.

Likewise, third-person narration means that it is easy to have multiple plot threads – which are essential in longer stories, or stories that have a much grander scale to them. For example, an epic sci-fi, thriller or fantasy story will probably involve multiple characters in multiple locations. This is much easier and more intuitive to do with third-person narration.

Third-person narration also sounds a lot more “objective” and “authoritative”. Since the narrator is looking at the events of the story from a distance, this means that the reader is too. So, a story will feel a lot more weighty and dramatic if you use third-person narration.

On the downside, third-person narration is more difficult to write. After all, since the narrator is separate from the characters, you have to make a lot more creative decisions about what you describe, the pacing of your story, how you handle dialogue, what style of narration you use etc.. Likewise, handling multiple plot threads means that you have to plan and think about how they interact with each other too.


Anyway, I hope that this was useful 🙂

Four Better Alternatives To Rotating First-Person Narration

Well, I thought that I’d talk about rotating first-person narrators today – since, to my dismay, the book I’m reading at the moment uses (a thankfully rather mild) version of this modern narrative technique.

If you’ve never heard of this narrative technique before, it’s a style of first-person narration where there are several narrators and the story switches between them every chapter or two.

Yes, it’s a style that supposedly allows writers to use both the omniscient perspective of third-person narration and the intense immersive immediacy of first-person narration. However, rather than being the best of both worlds, it is the worst of both worlds.

This is mostly because it tends to ruin the immersive nature of the first-person narration due to jarring changes between narrators, and because it still limits what you can and can’t show (when compared to third-person narration).

So, here are some better alternatives to rotating first-person narration. Yes, most of these still involve multiple first-person narrators, but they’re more intuitive to read than standard modern “rotating narrator” narration is.

1) Letters, Journals etc..: One way to introduce other narrators without breaking the immersion and narrative flow that comes from using just one narrator is to include the other narrated segments as letters, journal entries etc… This way, they’re something that the main character could still theoretically see or read, but they don’t involve any jarring jumps between perspective characters. After all, when you’re reading a letter, you’re still you. And the same is true for your narrator too.

The only thing that I would say about using this style of multiple narration is to make sure that you clearly signpost when your story’s letters, journal entries etc… begin. Ideally, you should differentiate them from the main story through the use of italic text, or a different font or something like that too.

And, yes, this is a very old narrative technique. If you don’t believe me, then read Bram Stoker’s “Dracula” – this novel mostly consists of letters, journals etc… by different characters, and the multiple narrators work really well because you get the sense of reading a collection of documents, rather than eerily jumping between different people’s consciousnesses.

2) In-depth third-person narration: If you want to show lots of things happening in different places in an in-depth way, then using third-person narration that focuses heavily on what a particular character is thinking or feeling is a much more “ergonomic” way of doing this. This also has the bonus of allowing you to use a single, consistent narrative voice- which means that it is easier for the reader to follow the story.

If you want a good example of this, then read G.R.R Martin’s “A Song Of Ice And Fire” novels. Each chapter usually focuses on a particular character but, because Martin uses third-person narration instead of first-person narration, the jumps between characters and locations feel a lot more natural and organic than they would do if he’d used first-person narrators instead.

3) Don’t repeat your narrators: If you absolutely must use multiple first-person narrators, then use the format to full advantage!

In other words, don’t repeat your narrators. This might sound like it would make the inherent problems with rotating narrators even worse, but – surprisingly – it doesn’t. This is mostly because using a totally new narrator for each chapter or segment of the story means that your novel reads a lot more like a short story collection, rather than 2-3 novellas that have been awkwardly grafted together.

A great example of this narrative style is Max Brooks’ “World War Z”. It’s been quite a few years since I’ve read it, but it’s a novel that follows a UN official in the future who interviews the survivors of a zombie apocalypse. Because there’s a new narrator for each chapter/interview, the novel feels like a really cool short story collection. Seriously, if you want to know how to use multiple first-person narrators in a good way, then read this book!

4) Framing story: One way to avoid breaking immersion whilst including multiple narrators is simply to include an old-fashioned framing story. In other words, your narrator listens to another character narrate the main story. This way, you get all of the benefits of multiple narrators, whilst also having a single consistent “main” narrator too.

This technique also feels more “natural” than modern-style rotating narrators because it mirrors the traditional experience of sitting down and listening to someone tell a story.


Anyway, I hope that this was useful 🙂

Art Changes The Way You See The World – A Ramble

Although I’ve talked about this topic at least twice before, I felt like returning to it again because it is always interesting. I am, of course talking about the way that creative works change the way you see the world – whether you make them or are part of the audience.

I was reminded of this subject when, a couple of hours before I started preparing this article, there were two power cuts. After noticing that I couldn’t turn the downstairs hall light on, the upstairs hall light started flickering ominously. My first thought was “Oh my god, this is like something from a horror movie. Cool!“. Which, in retrospect, was probably better than feeling scared.

Then, when I went upstairs, I happened to notice that the bathroom was bathed in the early evening light. Thanks to my years of daily art practice, I was able to memorise the way that the light looked – so that I could turn it into a stylised painting later. Here’s a preview of said painting:

This is a reduced-size preview. The full-size painting will be posted here tomorrow.

Whilst I was somewhat puzzled by the power cut, the wails of car and building alarms in the distance suddenly made me think of this absolutely hilarious “SMBC” comic. Remembering this comic lightened my mood considerably and meant that I felt amused, rather than annoyed or frightened, by the power cut.

Finally, after the first power cut had finished, I powered up my computer and the first thing I did was to look online for a music video for Billy Joel’s “Miami 2017“. Why? Because it was a song that I’ve associated with power cuts since I found myself in the middle of one when I was in Aberystwyth about 7-8 years ago. This also brought back lots of wonderful memories and helped me feel nostalgic, rather than angry or annoyed, about the power cut.

This is far from the only time that creative works have lightened the mood. When, last year, the afternoon sky turned an ominous shade of muddy orange due to a combination of a distant storm and sand from the Sahara (or something like that), I was quite surprised to read in online news stories about it that people were joking that it was a sign of the apocalypse. My thoughts at the time hadn’t been “it’s the apocalypse! The end-times are upon us!“, but “Cool! Everywhere looks like part of the intro movie to ‘Silent Hill 3‘. This is awesome!

So, what was the point of mentioning all of this?

Well, it’s yet another example of how important creativity and creative works are. Whilst “the arts” or “culture” are often commonly seen as frivolous or pretentious, they have an incredibly important everyday role in our lives – since they can be one of the things that shapes how we see and think about the world.

And, before anyone says anything, this isn’t a call for censorship. Whilst creative works can shape the way we see the world, they aren’t all-powerful things. In other words, they can slightly influence the way we see the world to an extent, but they can’t control us. We obviously still have brains, personalities etc…

Not to mention that most of the ways that creative works influence how we see the world are positive. They make us look at “ordinary” landscapes in interesting ways, they can provide an emotional boost to us, they can add humour to our lives and they can provoke interesting daydreams.

Plus, of course, if you’re a creative person yourself, then every creative work that you see will probably influence what you create to some extent or another – even if it’s just a “I’m not making something like that!” negative influence.

Not to mention that making art regularly also means that you tend to notice things like realistic colours, the exact outlines of everything, the beauty of everything, background details in TV shows etc… This is kind of hard to describe, but it’s a little bit like gaining an extra sense or something like that.

So yes, creative works are important, valuable things because they can shape the way that we see the world.


Anyway, I hope that this was interesting 🙂

Three Cool Art Tricks I Learnt From Films, TV And/Or Computer Games


You’d be surprised at how many artistic techniques you can learn from “new” mediums like film (or TV) and games. After all, an individual frame from both of these things still has to obey the same “rules” that ordinary two-dimensional works of art do. After all, all of these things can be displayed on a flat, two-dimensional computer screen – even if the image itself might appear to be three-dimensional.

So, here are three cool art tricks that I learnt from films, TV and/or computer games:

1) Perspective tricks:
One technique I have been experimenting with recently is similar to a technique used in films (and photography) in order to give an image a sense of depth. In films and TV shows, the camera lens will sometimes focus sharply on the foreground which leaves the background looking significantly blurrier and less detailed.

Likewise, some 3D computer games use a similar version of this technique – albeit for different reasons. By only using detailed textures for the foreground and using lower-resolution textures for areas further away from the player, not only do games create a subtler version of this effect but they can also reduce the amount of time and processing power required to “draw” whatever is on the screen at any moment.

When you’re making art, this technique can be re-created using either traditional or digital methods. Of course, you can also combine these two methods if you want the effect to stand out even more.

To do this entirely traditionally, just use a precise drawing-based medium (eg: waterproof ink pens, ordinary pens, pencils, thin markers etc..) to add detail to the foreground and then use paints or pastels exclusively for details in the background.

Here’s a cropped, but otherwise unprocessed, scan of one of my upcoming paintings that shows how this technique can work when trying to portray a smog-covered landscape:

This is an example of the "traditional" version of this technique. As you can see, the foreground details have been drawn using waterproof ink, but the distant background consists of nothing but watercolour.

This is an example of the “traditional” version of this technique. As you can see, the foreground details have been drawn using waterproof ink, but the distant background consists of nothing but watercolour.

To do this digitally, scan or digitally photograph your artwork and then use an image editing program (you can find a free open-source one called “GIMP” here) to select the background. To do this, find your program’s selection tool (in GIMP, it’s called the “Free select tool” and it’s icon looks like a grey lasso) and then use it to draw around the area of your picture that is in the background.

Once you’ve done this, then just apply a few image effects to the background in order to make it look more blurry and/or undetailed. Although these effects vary from program to program, you’ll probably be able to experiment (just remember to save backups and to use the “undo” function) until you get it right. Likewise, you can also select the foreground and apply a few effects to make it look sharper too. Like in this reduced-size preview of one of my other upcoming paintings:

You can just about see the technique in this reduced-size preview of a painting that will appear here on the 15th of July.

You can just about see the technique in this reduced-size preview of a painting that will appear here on the 15th of July.

After my usual digital editing routine in an old editing program called “Paint Shop Pro 6” (with some small corrections in MS Paint too), I selected the buildings in the distant background and added a “dilate” effect, before severely reducing the highlight/midtone/shadow levels in this part of the image.

Then, for good measure, I selected the pillar and computer screens in the close foreground and added a subtle “sharpen” effect to make them look like they were closer to the viewer.

2) Framing and composition: I’ve discussed this technique before, but one cool technique that was used by pixel artists in old “point and click” games was to “frame” the picture by including a few close-up details in the near foreground.

Usually, these close details would be near the edges or the corners of the picture and they instantly add a sense of depth and visual drama to the picture (as if the camera is “lurking” somewhere in the distance).

Back in the old days, when backgrounds in adventure games (and survival horror games) were pre-rendered 2D images (in order to save processing power and make the game look more realistic than it actually is) this compositional technique also allowed a totally static background to appear more three-dimensional. But, although art doesn’t really require much “processing power”, the technique can still be used to great effect.

Here’s a modified version of the preview picture I showed you earlier, where I’ve highlighted how I used this technique (albeit in a slightly less prominent way than in old games):

As you can see, the screens, poster and pillar in the close foreground "frame" the rest of the picture.

As you can see, the screens, poster and pillar in the close foreground “frame” the rest of the picture.

3) Visual storytelling: Since computer games, TV shows and films are storytelling mediums that rely on constant motion (eg: even if nothing is happening on screen – 24-60 frames are being shown every second), they tend to include a lot more motion and drama than “traditional” art sometimes can.

Likewise, since films and games need to tell a story within a relatively short space of time, they often have to rely on visual storytelling. This is where you use actions and background details to hint at the fact that something has happened or that something is happening.

So, if you see your drawings or paintings as being a single “frame” from a film or a game, then this will encourage you to use these techniques. It will make you think of your picture as part of a much larger story. This will, of course, add some extra drama and visual interest to your art – even if you do it in a fairly subtle way. Take another look at the preview image I’ve shown you before:

There's a lot more storytelling in this picture than you might think...

There’s a lot more storytelling in this picture than you might think…

You can see that the picture is set in the distant future due to the relatively modern computer monitors displayed in the window of an antique shop. Giant advertising screens tower over the picture, giving some hint that this is a dystopian future.

In the foreground, a woman stares at something inside the shop with nervous excitement. Behind her, a man walks past – talking on an old-fashioned mobile phone. Further away, another man smokes a cigarette and looks at something in the direction of the audience, his expression masked by futuristic sunglasses. Another man, to the left of him, does exactly the same.

Even though all of this stuff is fairly subtle and there isn’t really much “action” in this picture – it still hints at some kind of story. It still looks a little bit like it could be an individual frame from a film or a computer game.


Anyway, I hope that this was useful 🙂

A Short Ramble About Perspective Experiments (With Art Previews :) )

2017 Artwork perspective ramble article sketch

Whilst making a series of paintings (that are vaguely similar to the “awesome stuff” series that I posted here last year) that will be posted here later this month, I suddenly found that I’d started doing something slightly different with the perspective..

Here’s a reduced-size preview of a painting that I’ll be posting here on the 20th of this month:

The actual painting will be significantly larger.

The actual painting will be significantly larger.

Although I mostly tend to use one-point perspective in many of my paintings, I ended up putting a slightly different twist on it in several of these paintings.

If you don’t know what one-point perspective is, it’s where you draw a large “X” over the page in pencil and – everything closer to the centre of the “X” is smaller than anything closer to the edges of the page. Likewise, the lines of the “X” also serve as guidelines when working out the line angles when drawing 3D objects. It’s one of the most basic types of perspective, and it looks a bit like this:

Here's a very basic diagram that I made in about two minutes in MS Paint, showing flat forward-facing 2D shapes in one-point perspective.

Here’s a very basic diagram that I made in about two minutes in MS Paint, showing flat forward-facing 2D shapes in one-point perspective.

But, when I started making these paintings, I noticed that I was doing something very slightly different with the perspective. For a number of reasons, I was placing the centre of the “X” slightly to the left of the page. What this meant was that everything on the right side of the page was closer to the foreground, and most things on the left side of the page were in the background, kind of like this:

It's disguised slightly by the "metro" sign, but most of the foreground is on the right-hand side of the picture.

It’s disguised slightly by the “metro” sign, but most of the foreground is on the right-hand side of the picture.

The interesting thing about this type of perspective is that, when I was making these paintings, it made the picture feel wider than it actually is. Since I’d planned to cram a lot of detail (and several characters) into these paintings, this suddenly seemed like the simplest way to do it.

I suppose that one advantage of this technique is the fact that it means that a large part of the background (on the left-hand side of the page) is unobstructed by too many foreground details. This also helps to lend the picture a sense of scale that it might not have if I’d used a more traditional one-point perspective.

Here’s another small preview of a painting that uses this technique, although you’ll have to ignore the parrot in the foregound (which I instinctively added because leaving all of that blank space just seemed “unnatural” to me. Which may sound unusual, if anyone has seen any of my more minimalist paintings):

 If you ignore the parrot, you can see that the foreground is only on one side of the painting.

If you ignore the parrot, you can see that the foreground is only on one side of the painting.

This technique probably won’t work with every painting, but it can certainly be interesting to experiment with perspective sometimes.


Sorry for the ridiculously short and rambling article, but I hope that it was useful 🙂

Narrative Voice And Perspective – A Ramble

2016 Artwork Second person narrative voice article sketch

As regular readers of this site probably know, I tend to write these articles quite far in advance of when they’re actually posted. So, at the time of writing, I’m working on an interactive fiction gamebook project that may or may not have been posted online sometime around last Halloween.

Anyway, I noticed something very interesting when I was writing this gamebook. My narrative voice was different to how I remembered.

Back when I wrote fiction on a much more regular basis, I was very proud of the fact that I had a distinctive narrative voice. I’m not quite sure when it first emerged, but it was probably sometime in early-mid 2009. I’d gone through a few other narrative voices and I’d finally found the one that was perfect for me.

It was the perfect fit for the fiction that I wrote in 2009-11, since most of these stories were sci-fi/ horror/ detective stories that were narrated from a first-person perspective. In fact, my narrative voice was only at it’s best when I wrote stories in the first person. Whenever I tried to write from a third-person perspective, my narration often just sounded kind of dull and “functional”.

As fans of old-school 1970s-90s gamebooks (eg: “Choose Your Own Adventure“, “Fighting Fantasy” etc.. ) will know, these books are always written in the present tense and from a second-person perspective. In fact, this is the only genre of fiction that has to be narrated in this particular way.

Still, having had relatively little experience with writing from a second-person perspective (apart from this, this and part four of this ), the effects that this had on my narrative voice were extremely surprising.

If my usual first-person narrative voice sounds a bit like a twentysomething punk/goth woman from the future, then my second-person narrative voice in the gamebook that I’m writing sounds more like a cross between various American comedy writers, a rather posh old man, Missy from “Doctor Who” and something from this hilariously melodramatic vintage horror movie trailer.

Seriously, the difference really shocked me.

Even so, I can still just about see a few traces of my first-person narrative voice when I’m writing in the second person but, for the most part, my narrative voice is totally different when I write in the second person.

Interactive stories narrated from a second-person perspective have to do both of these things. Not only is the narrator an omniscient figure who is only partially in control of the world of the story, but he or she also has to talk directly to the reader too. I guess that this means that the narrative voice you use for second-person stories has to be tailored to the kind of story that you’re telling.

So, if you’re telling a horror story, then I guess that your narrative voice will probably sound a bit more nihilistic or “evil”. If you’re telling a fantasy story, then I guess that your narrative voice would probably sound more old and wizened. If you’re telling a detective story, your narrative voice will probably sound more “hardboiled”. I’m sure you get the idea.

I don’t know if this is true for everyone, but my narrative voice is certainly a lot more flexible when I’m writing in a second-person perspective.


Anyway, I hope that this was interesting 🙂