2

I am drafting a nonfictional manuscript that, not being about me, seldom refers to me. I do nonetheless appear in the manuscript, though—or at any rate my perspective explicitly emerges—a few times, as for example in this instance:

The writer lacks a preference between [A] and [B].

Many writers would rather put such a sentence in the first person but my manuscript is to avoid the first-person singular in instances like this.

Question: can I vary the word choice in the following way?

Your author lacks a preference between [A] and [B].

Or is such a word choice likely to confuse my readers? And even if it is not likely to confuse, is it just too offbeat? Why, please?

My manuscript is not a thesis, report or petition. Thus, my audience are not my superiors. Cheek for the mere sake of cheek would be distracting, but I can very slightly color the prose without inconsistency of tone.

The manuscript is neither about authors nor about things authors write, so no other author is mentioned nearby. Citations are footnoted to support facts but, in the passage in question, cited works are not quoted or otherwise discussed. Thus, no other author is in play.

Can I be "your author" in this instance?

thb
  • 995
  • 2
    Not an answer per se, but when these questions come up it's always a good idea what tricks civil servants have come up with. – JJJ May 01 '19 at 01:40
  • Using "your author" or "this author" (or "the writer") can be confusing when the context is such that the intent is unclear. – Hot Licks May 01 '19 at 02:19
  • @HotLicks If I understand, "your author" is not necessarily better or worse than the other options. It depends on context. Is this right? – thb May 01 '19 at 02:26
  • @HotLicks (And you would probably prefer "this" to "the.") – thb May 01 '19 at 02:28
  • The main problem is that when you use a third-person reference to yourself (and you are writing non-fiction) you have to somehow make it clear that you mean yourself. – Hot Licks May 01 '19 at 02:36
  • 2
    This writer has a preference for first-person references. – tchrist May 01 '19 at 02:55
  • @tchrist Yes, I know, but I've read a book of yours and I am not you. Your style is very difficult to pull off. I can't do it. And even you couldn't do it if you had my topic. – thb May 01 '19 at 02:59
  • It's your book. You can say whatever you like. But if you want most people to understand you, I would not use your author. (Not unless you happen to be talking to the protagonist in the movie Stranger Than Fiction – Jason Bassford May 01 '19 at 09:36
  • Point: When I read tchrist's comment above, it took me a few seconds to figure out that he was referring to himself and not Opie. – Hot Licks May 01 '19 at 16:03
  • @JasonBassford I want most people to understand me. Moreover, I do not want attention for being offbeat. My prose needs only to be brief and clear; it does not need to sparkle. The book is not about me and my readers are no more interested in me than you are. My readers are interested only in my topic. I must avoid the first-person singular in certain instances. If you had to do this, how would you phrase it, please? – thb May 01 '19 at 17:37
  • What do you mean? How do you write about yourself when you can't use the first-person singular? You already did in your question: this author. While there may be other methods of doing so, what we're all saying is that your author doesn't sound normal, and it should be avoided. (Assuming you're asking for our opinions.) – Jason Bassford May 01 '19 at 21:14
  • @JasonBassford Interesting. Unexpected. Yes, I see that. That is indeed what you're all saying. It does seem to be a consensus. Except in the preface and a few other places in which my reader will expect me, as author, to enter his or her field of view, as it were, I am extremely reluctant to use the words I and me in this kind of work. The work is not about I and me, but, yes, I can sense that something has gone wrong with my approach. Otherwise, I would not have asked the question. – thb May 01 '19 at 21:24
  • @JasonBassford The trouble is, my topic requires the reader's concentration. A reader concentrating on the topic does not want me to intrude. I am his guide, but the reader should be allowed to forget about the guide, giving his full attention instead to the thing to which the guide has guided him or her. If not by avoiding "I" and "me," how else can I allow my reader to do that? – thb May 01 '19 at 21:29
  • But by mentioning your preference, you are "intruding" anyway. The verbiage you use to do so doesn't change that. (And the more awkwardly it's phrased, the more of an intrusion it is.) The convention to not use the first person in academic papers is mostly arbitrary—and institutions are gradually starting to accept it more, even if it's still more commonly discouraged. Personally, if you are dead set on not doing any kind of "intruding," I would use the simple first person to mention such things in an introduction or in the text of one or more endnotes. – Jason Bassford May 02 '19 at 05:08
  • I add this comment a week later. The advice is appreciated but, after experimenting with it, I have decided not to follow it. I have tried converting various passages in my manuscript to the first person and have determined that mid-20th-century authors had good reason to avoid the first person, despite the occasional awkwardness. The question has been closed and so I doubt that anyone will ever read this comment, but if you are reading it anyway then my advice to you is to write in the older style. Avoid the grammatical first person singular in most instances in technical work.... – thb May 10 '19 at 10:14
  • ... The pronouns I and me seem so simple, so direct; but I am a whole person whose personality and life hardly interest the reader of a technical book. The pronouns I and me can be separated from the whole person by overburdened phrases like, "In my role as author of the book you are reading, I ..." But do such phrases really help? No, upon reflection, I believe the third-person phrasing of "Your author" is usually preferable on the whole in technical work. No mere archaism, the third-person phrasing serves a real purpose. I think that you should use it. – thb May 10 '19 at 10:14
  • 1
    If you still have time, see https://writing.stackexchange.com/q/12472 – thehole Jun 02 '19 at 17:35

1 Answers1

0

I would use yours truly as a more familiar construct to refer to myself while avoiding the first person.

thehole
  • 360
  • 1
  • 4
  • 3
    Yuck. I would throw in the bin any formal document that used yours truly instead of your author. Yours truly should only appear in letters and other personal messages, and even then, preferably not. – Chappo Hasn't Forgotten May 01 '19 at 08:36
  • 1
    @Chappo I don't see where it's mentioned that it's a formal document. yours truly, IMHO, satisfies the requirements of avoiding the first person while being the least likely to confuse or distract, meanwhile only slightly coloring the prose. – thehole May 01 '19 at 16:41