Tense Confusion

[AlexH]

Here's an abridged opening to a story I've written that's in the present tense for all but the very start:

I picked the biggest oak, where Liela and I often sit together, to etch my love into. My knife is getting blunt. I could have sharpened it, but missed the chance to jump the shifting land to my parent's house. I'll wait for the street to circle back around the pole.​

​

As I carve, the oak creaks and moans. It's as if it's singing a mournful song for the yellowing leaves about to fall for winter. The land sways and the knife barely misses my hand as I slip.​

An edit to the opening sentence from two people has been "I pick the biggest oak..."

I've been told to generally pick one tense and stick to it before, but the PoV has already picked the tree - that's why the knife is already getting blunt and he's missed the chance to sharpen it. If it started "I pick the biggest oak..." then he's only just got to the oak?

 

[Guillermo Stitch]

It works as is in my opinion. Another option would be "I've picked the biggest oak..." and that might sit a little easier with the present tense context.

 

[Brian G Turner]

The opening clause in past tense, then present in the second, throws me off - mentally I'm editing "sit" to "sat".

 

[Cat's Cradle]

I picked the biggest oak, where Liela and I often sit together, to etch my love into.

I agree with Brian. Using 'picked' and 'sit' throws me off, and might make a fair number of readers pause to work out the tense change. Alex, could you not just use 'pick', instead of picked, and solve all possible problems here? Present tense just sets things in motion, and there's no jarring change of tense to slow or confuse your readers. CC

edit - Ah! I should have read the entire post, sorry! How about this:

I picked the biggest oak, where Liela and I would often sit, to etch my love into.

(I'd eliminate 'together'.)

 

[The Judge]

It's not wrong -- it's the present tense equivalent of "I'd picked the biggest oak, where [we] often sat together" where no one would query the change from pluperfect into simple past -- but it is potentially confusing. I'd suggest starting the second sentence with "Now my knife is..." which makes it clear that there's a time difference between when he picked the tree and the knife being blunt.

I didn't have any problems with "sit" by the way.

 

[Guillermo Stitch]

I don't have any problem with the tenses in the sentence either.

 

[AlexH]

Thanks everyone - this is interesting. I think I need to do something given it's causing confusion here too.

These are my options from above:

It works as is in my opinion. Another option would be "I've picked the biggest oak..." and that might sit a little easier with the present tense context.

I picked the biggest oak, where Liela and I would often sit, to etch my love into.

I'd suggest starting the second sentence with "Now my knife is..." which makes it clear that there's a time difference between when he picked the tree and the knife being blunt.

 

[TheDustyZebra]

I picked the biggest oak, where Liela and I often sit together, to etch my love into. My knife is getting blunt. I could have sharpened it, but missed the chance to jump the shifting land to my parent's house. I'll wait for the street to circle back around the pole.As I carve, the oak creaks and moans. It's as if it's singing a mournful song for the yellowing leaves about to fall for winter. The land sways and the knife barely misses my hand as I slip.

The picking is not just simple past, and if you start with that tense, it sets the tone and then the rest gets confusing. And if you start with I've picked, or I'd picked, it's going to make some agent or publisher snort in the future. How about if you rearrange the paragraph slightly to prevent that part from being the very first word someone reads?

***
My knife is getting blunt. I'd picked the biggest oak, where Liela and I often sit together, to etch my love into. I could have sharpened it, but I'd missed the chance to jump the shifting land to my (parents'?) house. ...

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I’d work around it eg

Earlier, I picked the tallest oak. Now, my knife is sharp....

 

[The Judge]

I was just coming to suggest that instead you could start with the knife being blunt, then picking the oak, but TDZ beat me to it!

 

[AlexH]

My knife is getting blunt. I'd picked the biggest oak, where Liela and I often sit together, to etch my love into. I could have sharpened it, but I'd missed the chance to jump the shifting land to my (parents'?) house. ...

I like that idea, but I don't think "My knife is getting blunt." sets the right tone as a first sentence, which of course only people who've seen the whole story would know. I'll try and figure out other ways of rearranging the paragraph.

Earlier, I picked the tallest oak. Now, my knife is sharp....

I think this might be the one.

Maybe as simple as this, but with em dashes due to the added comma:
Earlier, I picked the biggest oak -- where Liela and I often sit together -- to etch my love into.

 

[tinkerdan]

My two cents here::

I picked the biggest oak, where Liela and I often sit together, to etch my love into.

For me sit suggests that this is something ongoing and they will sit again and so she shall see it here the next time they are sitting there. He's left it for her to see
Sat could suggest that this has occurred but may never occur again(though it does admitably leave that open)and it leaves a chance that she might never see it. He's left it for a memory of what once was.

Depending on how the reader sees it, it could change the mood.
This might affect what mood you intend.

On another note:
All this land shifting and swaying and the street circling--I'm not sure if that's all real or metaphor.

 

[TheDustyZebra]

I’d work around it eg

Earlier, I picked the tallest oak. Now, my knife is sharp....

If I were copy editing this, I would itch to change it to "Earlier, I'd picked...". And then Jo would change it back.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

If I were copy editing this, I would itch to change it to "Earlier, I'd picked...". And then Jo would change it back.

It’s only cos you don’t speak fluent Norn Irish

 

[TheDustyZebra]

It’s only cos you don’t speak fluent Norn Irish

Gosh, I'd think I was getting close, after all these books. You're saying there's more?

 

[HareBrain]

Of the suggestions so far, I much prefer Guillermo's "I've picked". To me, "Earlier" just doesn't feel right to start a present-tense narrative. It's not technically wrong, but it feels like the narrator has decided to start telling the story at this point, which for present tense feels weird (because presumably he's not "telling" the story at all, he's living it). For me, present tense should feel almost like you're dropping in on a narrative that's been going on the whole time. But I have various hang-ups about how present tense is done, so I'd ignore this unless it happens to click with you.

 

[Guillermo Stitch]

I wholeheartedly agree with Harebrain's agreement with me. I believe this settles the matter...

 

[Ursa major]

I picked the biggest oak, where Liela and I often sit together, to etch my love into. My knife is getting blunt. I could have sharpened it, but missed the chance to jump the shifting land to my parent's house. I'll wait for the street to circle back around the pole.

For me, the problem is that the first phrase sets up an unfulfilled expectation that the rest of the sentence would be in the past tense.

(Note that I see this a not being the same as starting a past tense narrative with the pluperfect: the pluperfect is rarely used for as the main narrative tense, even when dealing with longer flashbacks.)

So the choices are: 1) to change the order in the sentence; 2) to separate out the picking of the tree from the rest, so that it literally stands alone; 3) to rewrite the sentence.

I prefer the last of these, e.g.:

Liela and I often sit together to etch my love into the biggest oak, the one I chose.

My knife is getting blunt. I could have sharpened it, but missed the chance to jump the shifting land to my parent's house. I'll wait for the street to circle back around the pole.

This has the advantage that it removes the "into" at the end of the sentence, which looks a bit clumsy (in my opinion). (It also separates out the "this is what we sometimes do" part of the paragraph from the "this is happening now" part.)

Doing the above brings up other questions. Is it significant that the narrator chose the tree? Is it significant that he (or she, or it) did so without Liela being involved?

These questions popped into my head as soon as I changed the order of the first sentence. In the original, they did not do so, for some reason... possibly because the sudden change of tense in the original drew my attention more than wondering what the implications of "I picked the biggest oak" might be, or perhaps because the focus in the original is on "I" and not "Liela and I".

So what I take from the above is that we should be be aware that the way we write something can determine the underlying message it conveys to the reader even if this is not always our intention.

 

[AlexH]

I agree with your reasoning @HareBrain.

And that's a great post @Ursa major. I tried removing "into", but to me it read that the PoV is etching Liela!

It is significant that the narrator chose that tree, and did so without Liela being there.

I could start with something like:
"Liela and I often sit together by the big oak."

Or:
"I etch my love into the biggest oak, where Liela and I often sit together. My knife is getting blunt."

That shows he's picked the oak because it's where he and Liela sit and/or because it's the biggest, without specifically saying he picked it. So I think that's it! Unless anyone thinks it's rubbish. Submission date is two days away so I'll be forced into a decision soon anyway.

This has been really helpful, much more difficult than I thought and very interesting. Thanks everyone!

 

[Ursa major]

I should apologies: I ought to have added -- I was pushed for time -- that sometimes it's useful to not explain exactly what's happening, while not actually leaving something important out (which the writer may not want to do in case the readers notice the absence and complain later when they feel that the text was being less than honest)... and I see now that this may very well have been your intention.

(Note: I have mentioned this before elsewhere on this site. The example I recall -- though I can't remember where exactly on the site this is -- was about the importance of grammar, because using it properly allows the writer to remove ambiguity from their text... unless the writer wants the text to be ambiguous....)

By the way...:

I tried removing "into", but to me it read that the PoV is etching Liela!

The "problem" isn't the into itself; it's where in the sentence the into is. (This is, of course, still only my opinion. )