when writing a book in first person is it bad to not give the name of the main character in the 1st chapter?

Answer 1

Depends entirely on how you are doing it. If the person is actually "introducing" themself, that could work. Just remember that first person is extremely limiting. You cannot report on anything the narrator is not present to actually witness or know about nor can you report on other people's thoughts. That makes it very difficult to get information out to your readers. Think of Great Gatsby. The narrator basically has to be in every single scene or he cannot report on it. It also limits your use of dialogue. Pax - C

Answer 2

It kind of depends on how much happens in the first chapter. For instance how often do you meet somebody without greeting them and visa versa. During most conversations a persons name usually comes up also. Aside from that it can get clunky working around providing a name, but it depends upon the events of the chapter. It really all depends upon how it is written.

Answer 3

Not at all. But it would be really nice if you have it put on the blurb (the thing on the back of a book). This way they can see who your character is & would criticize less the few times you mention their name in the book. Writing in first person is the easiest way you can write, not to mention the most flexible since you can easily flip in & out of actions & thoughts. I wish you the best of luck with your work. Hope this helps!

Answer 4

this is not weird and wonderful, few human beings do it (author of each thing is Illuminated), yet you ought to have an exceptionally stable reason to place your call because of the fact the biggest character, because of the fact no remember how plenty you preserve it, it does look a splash such as you're putting your self up there. whether it quite relies upon on the variety of tale, in basic terms how biographical this is or how comparable you're to the character. attempt to come again up with yet another call, however. in case you prefer it to be revealed, you ought to save the e book as open and as relatable to others as achieveable. Like, it is your tale, whether this is not the comparable as a secret diary ya comprehend?

Answer 5

Not really. In fact the success of your book would depend how well the readers would be able to identify themselves with the main character. So bare it all in the first attempt.

Answer 6

Not really, I have read books without ever learning the main character's name. It's strange (not in a bad way), but I've never thought of it as "bad." What really matters is how well it is written.

Answer 7

No, it's not bad at all. It can present an aura of mystery or create the idea that the storyteller is not as significant as the story he tells.

A notable example of giving no name for the "narrator" is the book Rebecca by Daphne du Maurier. In fact her first name is NEVER told.

Answer 8

Not bad, but confusing.

If it is a monologue with no other characters involved then it would be strange for him to call himself; unless he does an introduction to the audience. However, if he is talking with another character then that character should address him by some name.

It is permissible to keep somethings secret, but you do need to give you readers a handle for the major character besides 'I."

Answer 9

Not really, no.

If it's just one of those randomf first person narratives where it's someone recounting a story or event as if they were talking to the reader rather than it being like a journal it would seem odd to just start out "Hi I''m so and so."

Answer 10

I don't think it would be terrible, but it might be nice to give the name in the first chapter just so the reader doesn't get confused. y 'know actually know who "I" is?
anyway those are my thoughts on the matter.