So I shuffled through the first-person stories I've written in order to submit to a contest and come to the conclusion that first-person is a tough perspective to pull off. Though if I'd been sorting through my third person stories, I'd likely have thought the same thing about that point of view.

The trouble with first person is that the voice so often becomes a predominant concern in the story, preventing the story itself from achieving depth. It seems as though the character, in telling his or her own story, is unwilling to examine closely the reasons for telling the story, and would rather babble incessantly about whatever comes to mind. In short, my first-person narrators are solipsistic. They don't care a fig for what anyone else in their world thinks about their problems. In fact, they don't care what they think about things, either. As long as they can keep juggling enough witticisms to keep the projected reader interested, why would they want to examine the real conflict that brings their voice into existence in the first place? Although framing the problem like this is simply another way of saying that I can't seem to get the narrative under control and figure out how to maintain both a consistent and lively voice and at the same time lay the complexities of character open to the bone.

On a minor and completely unrelated note, I happen to be terrible a titling my stories. Either a name affixes itself to the piece for unknown reasons or I suffer with a work-in-progress title, but either way, the process of naming is a difficult one for me. Things ought to come with their names attached. For me, that is how the best of my writing has gone. As for the worst, well, I'll just say I've settled for a workable title on this submission and ignored all consideration of whether the writing is itself my best or worst. I'd be happy with passable, right now.

*Note: Add this contest to my list of rejections.