Constant Content

While surfing the web for writing tips, I stumbled across an article that fiercely opposed to directly addressing your audience by using second person point of view. It claimed that it makes you "sound patronizing" or is "too informal". After a quick search, I found out that lots of other sources seem to support this view.

I like using second person narrative. Unless you intentionally make it sound patronizing, it is a more direct way of addressing the audience and I find that it makes it easier for the reader to relate to the content. I also find it impossible to write an article that attempts to provide advice or tips without directly "talking" to the reader. It just sounds too impersonal.

What is your take on that? Do you agree that using second person POV is not a good idea? If yes, how would you go about writing your articles without it?

The hatred of second-person stems from three places, I think: First, our grammar teachers would never tolerate such a thing for reasons never explained. Second, it's a great sin in fiction writing, one which would get a talented writer laughed out of the editor's office. Third, news providers and informative writers never use any person so that's what we're used to.

After doing tons of academic writing, I can tell you that it's very hard to write in "no" person. For web writing, third person is too distant. For ghostwriters (as we are at C-C), first person is too authoritative. So, we're left addressing the reader directly.

Second person is no longer as effective as it used to be, either, because millions of web writers lack the "voice" to carry it off. It does sound patronizing because it's the impersonal addressing the personal. If you're concerned about such things, you probably already have an authoritative "voice" and so your second-person narrative wouldn't be patronizing or weak. Keep using it and you'll be a successful web writer!

Personally, I hate second person. My grandmother taught me grammar, so when I make a grammar mistake I hear her voice in my head correcting me.

Wouldn't it be funny if the people writing their arguments against second person POV wrote, "When you use second person POV, ..."

I was also taught *never* to use second person, for fiction and non-fiction alike. I have since discarded that particular lesson, leaving it in the pre-Internet era where it belongs. (Though I doubt I'd use second person in fiction.)

Besides, even if you don't include the word "you" in a given article, the voice could be second person. For example:

"To update Windows, click on Start and type "Update Windows" in the Search box." ("You" is implied).

I feel most engaged when I'm reading pieces written in the second person, so I don't have a problem with it.

Hello, Evelyn!

You made some valid points there. I remember when I was still taking English lessons we weren't allowed to use "you" or "your" in essays and nobody even bothered to explain. It was a rule cast in stone that you wouldn't dare ever break. I can understand impersonal writing in news; it is like writing a "To whom it may concern" letter. You don't necessarily want the reader to relate to your writing. You're just laying out the facts for him. I like facts, by the way. They are so much easier to handle.

Anyway, I just can't seem to make impersonal writing flow naturally. It seems too stiff and awkward to me, unless it is used to describe a process or more technical subjects. My writing experience is not that impressive; I have only been writing articles for a couple of years, so I guess I still have a lot to learn...

Thanks for chiming in, Celeste and jellygator!

I guess it's alright to use it, then! For a brief moment, these articles got me feeling guilty and incompetent!
I have yet to understand why people who like doing things their way feel the urge to snub others for choosing different paths.

mnicol22 wrote:Hello, Evelyn!

You made some valid points there. I remember when I was still taking English lessons we weren't allowed to use "you" or "your" in essays and nobody even bothered to explain. It was a rule cast in stone that you wouldn't dare ever break. I can understand impersonal writing in news; it is like writing a "To whom it may concern" letter. You don't necessarily want the reader to relate to your writing. You're just laying out the facts for him. I like facts, by the way. They are so much easier to handle.

Anyway, I just can't seem to make impersonal writing flow naturally. It seems too stiff and awkward to me, unless it is used to describe a process or more technical subjects. My writing experience is not that impressive; I have only been writing articles for a couple of years, so I guess I still have a lot to learn...

In essays, and any reporting where the purpose is to educate an audience that may or may not have a personal investment in the material, I'd use third person. But for an audience that is likely to have a personal reason to read it, or when you're wanting that reader to build some kind of emotional rapport, second person would seem more effective, in my personal opinion (which is just that - an opinion.)

jellygator wrote:I feel most engaged when I'm reading pieces written in the second person, so I don't have a problem with it.

I agree. I've been using second person to lay out hypothetical scenarios for the reader. I hope the editors don't have a problem with it. It gives the articles a nice flow, I think.