Board Thread:Administration/@comment-4832646-20140831003335/@comment-1706206-20140831124626

I think it would all depend on what sort of story we're ultimately going for, since all three perspectives have their own pros and cons.

First person is good because it can add a layer of authenticity to your work. Having it read as though it is a character relating the story does make it a bit more personal, but on the other hand it can diminish suspense, since you know the narrator at the very least is going to survive, otherwise how would they be telling the story? (though there are tricks to getting around that, the "found manuscript" format commonly used in Lovecraft's stories allowed him to end several with the narrator realizing they were about to die and scribbling their last words)

Third person has the advantage of being able to cover a lot more than first, but it make you an objective viewer to the whole thing. The story therefore becomes a bit less personal.

So I guess it's a matter of figuring out which perspective's advantages are most useful here. If I'm correctly understanding the nature of this project (to create a series of relatively self-contained short stories that all center around a common horror), than first person could work, with perhaps an overarching narrative to tie all the stories together. You'd just have to be sure it's clear that each one has a different narrator.

Alternatively, if we went with that approach, perhaps a mix of first and third person could also work. Maybe the story could use the framing structure of a character investigating this horror and relating all the different accounts he/she has uncovered. Some of the stories would be written accounts and others (in third person) could be stories that they found out about through word of mouth and transcribed.