Forum: Author Hangout

The last sentence of the novel is: "I smiled, exhaling one last time, never hearing the priest's response."

That is my point - the MC died just before or as the priest was making his response, so the MC could not have made that statement. The MC would have had to be still alive to make the statement.

I haven't read the story, but based on your description, I think it would have been better if you had identified the priest as the speaker making his response in present tense. Then having the priest say something like, "I wonder if my words were a comfort?"

The MC would have had to be still alive to make the statement.

Which is a major difficulty writing in 1st-person. I ended the story when she died so the reader doesn't know the priest's reaction or what he said.

As you said, the last sentence that was spoken by the MC indicates the MC never heard the priest's response.

The priest's response was, as you said, after the MC's death.

This is a chicken and egg conflict.

One of the better solutions I've seen to this is to end the story with an epilogue clearly written by someone else,

Like switching to third person.

It can still be first-person, if the person is a known character or can introduce themself.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but this is Mrs. MC. Unfortunately, Mr. MC passed away just after the most recent set of events. I wanted to make sure you knew what happened next. [...]

As the executor of Mr. MC's estate, I would like to clear up some details about his unfortunate passing. [...]

Yes, in both cases the first-person narrator is more clearly narrating from a given perspective than most first-person narrators are, but it still counts.

will start with the disembodied soul

The second line of "The Lovely Bones" is something like: "I was fourteen years old when I was murdered."

So the 1st-person narrator was already dead when the story began.

Another is that the MC has been writing his journal or memoir.

Are you addressing the subject of my original post or something else?

The original post is addressing the MC speaking after he dies. (Although it could be extended to include the MC writing in their journal or memoir after they die.)

The only way something like that would be realistic in a story would be if the story were a DoOver. The stories I was referring to are not DoOvers.

Switch Blayde's example of reading the last thought of the first person MC just before expiration.

I was just checking.

You may want to reread Switch Blayde's post. The last line of the story isn't referring to the MC's last thought. The last line is in parenthesis indicating a spoken statement. The wording indicates the statement is being made by the MC just prior to their death.

As written, the last line is not possible. As you said, the MC stating circumstances that occurred after their death would require a change in the story's perspective, which Switch Blayde didn't mention in his post. I haven't read the story, so I don't know is such a change is defined earlier in the story.

You may want to reread Switch Blayde's post. The last line of the story isn't referring to the MC's last thought. The last line is in parenthesis indicating a spoken statement.

I assume you mean quotes when you said parenthesis.

No, the last line is not in quotes in the story. It's part of the 1st-person narrative. I put it in quotes here because I was quoting the story. I should have used the "Quote" feature here. The last paragraph in the story is:

I closed my eyes and waited for the next journey in my life. Would it be heaven or hell? The priest had said I had a good heart. I did. I was at peace. I smiled, exhaling one last time, never hearing the priest's response.

Yes, I was referring to the quotes in your post, not parenthesis.

Yes, inclusion of the quotes around the stories final line is confusing. I had the impression that they were in the story.

Sounds more like a lack of imagination on the part of the reader than an error on the part of the writer.

The author is responsible for their story's timeline and content - not the reader. When the author includes something that is not possible in the context of their story and timeline, responsibility for the error is not that of the reader's lack of imagination.

When the author has the MC speaking or contributing to the story's content after the MC's death, then that is an error made by the author; unless is a DoOver and I was not referring to DoOver stories in my OP.

the entire series takes place after the MC's death.

That's like "The Lovely Bones." But that's different. You know the 1st-person narrator is talking from beyond the grave. That's not the same as @REP's issue.

If it's not a memoir or a ghost or something like that, then the story ends when the 1st-person narrator dies unless another narrator takes over (another 1st-person or 3rd-person narrator, hopefully not an omni narrator because that would sound like the author). That has to be done with skill so not to be jarring to the reader.