Craft Chat CRAFT CHAT: Point of View (POV)

[Barbara]

The problem with these experiments, is 99 times out of 100 they are no fun for the reader. They are just annoying.

True, but not every experiment has to go under the nose of a reader.

I suspect it would be hard work to read.

 

[Carol Rose]

The problem with these experiments, is 99 times out of 100 they are no fun for the reader. They are just annoying.

But she can still experiment for her own sake, to gain a better perspective on her characters and how their story is best told in her novel.

And I now see @Barbara answered before me. Sorry.

 

[Barbara]

It might help find a voice for dialogue. A 'you' narration is kind of like a dialogue.

 

[Carol Rose]

It might help find a voice for dialogue. A 'you' narration is kind of like a dialogue.

It was interesting when I tried to write my scene up there in second person POV. Because it's Ravenna's scene, not the Guards', but when I went to write it in second person from her POV, it didn't work. The scene couldn't contain any of her watching the Guards as she was hiding in the tree, because it read so awkwardly and it made no sense. At least I didn't think it did. And it's my story so I guess I would know. LOL!

 

[Barbara]

It might work better in past tense; like a re-telling of Ravenna's story to her child perhaps.

Depending on the the story question and on who the 'you' is, some of it could be used to establish a relationship between the 'you' and the protaginist i.e. 'I'm doing this for you, then that. And I'm about to xyz because of...' It could be accusatory, show regrets ect.

It might work in a ghost story, or a story where the protagonist narrates it for someone who died.

Not sure I'm making sense.

 

[Amber]

The Great Gatsby along with the Sherlock Holmes books utilise a trick where you combine 1st & 3rd person, so that your narrator is there in first and they describe the actions of the titular protagonist in third.

Yeah. People disagree about what POV The Great Gatsby is written in. But now that I think about it, the Sherlock Holmes stories were the other example of omniscient where the narrator is a character.

If you've got loads of viewpoint characters you want the reader to spend time with then first becomes quite difficult. The reader's going to have to be constantly checking who's head they're in if it's in 1st and that will frustrate your reader. If you've only got 1 or 2 characters then 1st is more acceptable, but then if you are doing 1st with more than one character, each character needs to have a very distinctive voice. The same applies to 3rd limited with multiple characters, but distinctive voice is vital in 1st if you have more than one viewpoint character.

I used to think so but I'm not so sure anymore. Putting the character's name at the beginning of a chapter to indicate whose POV that chapter is in has fairly common. I've gotten used to it.

I've done something with two of my stories. I didn't do it on purpose and didn't even notice I did it at first. Since, it hasn't been published, I suppose it remains to be seen whether I'll pull it off. I started the chapters with omniscient or maybe you could say one of them is third person. Then in the next chapter I switched to first person, with a different character. Lots of people have read these stories and no one has noticed, commented, or even mentioned it. I didn't notice myself. Now, I don't know that no one noticing means there isn't a problem with it, but I'm going to keep it that way and see if it needs to be addressed later. My point is that you never know...

The Great Gatsby is a book that probably demands a particular viewpoint. Other books can have any viewpoint and still retain the same essence.

I'm not so sure about that. If you can change the point of view character without changing the essence of the book, it's likely the book doesn't have much essence. The viewpoint character is the character whose head you're living in.

One of the rules I used to use, or guidelines, is that the point of view character should be the character who has the most to lose. While I think it's an okay general rule, it's somewhat rigid. Or, maybe it's a better guideline for third person. I mostly write in first person.

Number of Viewpoint Characters
How intimate/personal is the story?
Lies & Misinformation

I think what matters to me is whose eyes it will be most effective from. Which might be a variation of who has the most to lose. Sometimes-not really.

These are probably good guidelines though.

Lies and misinformation is interesting. I found that characters lie to themselves, withhold from themselves. I have a story written in first person where the character objectifies themself. A lot of people find it off putting and it's been criticized for having passive voice. It doesn't have that much passive voice--it's mostly avoidant language.Mostly, the character is lying to themselves-they don't think about their own interests-or their future. The story needs to be tweaked because it's the opening of a novel and I really don't think I can get away with it. I submitted that one to popups. But it isn't true that because something is written in first person, they know their own mind, know what's best for them, or know what's important to them. It was fun to write the character because she starts off as an object, then she becomes a servant, and finally becomes someone with her own interests who can object and discern--who has goals and desires.

At least, that was my intention. I'm not so sure because while people liked it, not sure they noticed the part about her going from being an object to a heroine. I need to work on that one too.

I feel that intimate/personal stories should be 1st or 3rd limited to that character only. Omniscient is suicide in personal stories; you're too far away to develop empathy with the protagonist and therefore the reader cares less about their plight.

In general. If you think of omniscient as a panoramic view and first person as a close up, you can say it's generally accurate. But because I'm me I have to wonder ... aren't panoramas sometimes broad breathtaking moments where you feel like you're connected to the whole world... and aren't close ups sometimes disconnected and impersonal? Tight focus on one small part of the tiny landscape often has the sense of disconnectedness... disenfranchisement even.

Stories with an epic scale are more suited to omniscient or 3rd limited with multiple viewpoints. In these stories it's the plight of the world that usually matters more to the reader than the intricate feelings of each character.

My favorite epic fantasy is told in first person. Thousands and thousands of pages. What's true about the character is that she is in the center of things. Also, she cares about the fate of the world. Or rather, her country. Also, she's very observant.

There are always examples to disprove a rule though. Or is it example the proves the rule? Exception that proves the rule.

I don't think present or past tense matters that much. Present is more immediate and probably better for 1st person narratives, but apparently readers stop noticing what tense a story is in quite quickly.

First person present tense has a very immediate feel. Past tense is pretty easy to read and doesn't have the same sense of urgency. I think tense is important. My guess is that readers stop noticing it pretty quickly unless it's something that makes them uncomfortable in a way they aren't prepared for. But I think the tense chosen is really important.

 

[Amber]

One of these days, I'm going to explore second, present tense. I can't wait to disover the pitfalls (I haven't fully caught up with all the contributions on this thread here yet, so it might be covered above). I suspect it can't be maintained over an entire novel, or can it? Any thoughts?

Just reading short pieces of it gives me a headache.

 

[Carol Rose]

It might work better in past tense; like a re-telling of Ravenna's story to her child perhaps.

Depending on the the story question and on who the 'you' is, some of it could be used to establish a relationship between the 'you' and the protaginist i.e. 'I'm doing this for you, then that. And I'm about to xyz because of...' It could be accusatory, show regrets ect.

It might work in a ghost story, or a story where the protagonist narrates it for someone who died.

Not sure I'm making sense.

It makes sense.

 

[Tim James]

A very interesting thread, Carol.
I have written or started books in virtually all the different combinations of POV: close third, multiple third, omniscient, first person and even second person. Mainly because I like to experiment and try out new things.
I found second person to be the closest POV, inferring, as it does, that the reader is a part of the story. It was quite hard to write at first but it got easier. It may lend itself best to crime fiction, making the reader either the criminal or the sleuth.
For my own second person story I didn't even give the narrator character a name, they were always just 'you', and I carefully avoided naming them in any narrative. As far as the reader knew, the narrator of the book was them.
My preference is for close third (single or multiple) or first person. I'm not keen on omniscient as I like to hide stuff from the reader sometimes and let them make assumptions that later prove to be wrong.
When choosing a POV I look at what fits the story best. Sometimes it can be advantageous to your narrative to be able to hide details from the reader by switching POV to another person who has no knowledge of what is really going on. For example, the Sherlock Holmes series by Arthur Conan Doyle are all told from Dr Watson's POV, as to tell them from Sherlock's POV would give too much away.
Which brings me to something you didn't cover, although it is somewhat related to POV, and that is the 'unreliable narrator'. Where the narrator of the book gives the reader false or misleading information. When done well it adds a whole new dimension to the story.

 

[Susan]

I wrote the first draft of my current WIP in 3rd person past tense, then changed to 1st person, past tense. I'd been experimenting with 1st person, present tense, and am almost finished a rewrite in 1st, present tense, which is by far the most enjoyable (for me!).

Also, I feel I've "seen" it from several angles which is really interesting.

I'm really enjoying these conversations @Carol Rose (when do you sleep?!) and I'm learning loads

It's good to experiment and find your strongest overall voice.

I'm experimenting with a novel that was originally in close 3rd person with two POVs, but I'm now trying it with a 1st person narrator who's composing the story from beyond the grave. He's also part of the earlier action that he's relating, so his scenes are in the 1st person, while scenes where he's absent are in close 3rd (though he's the overall storyteller).

It's all a bit ambitious. The main issue is making clear whether opinions expressed during 3rd person scenes belong to the overall narrator or to the main character of each scene.

He does his beyond-the-grave commentary only very occasionally, either in separate short scenes or as introductory transitional paragraphs. Most chapters follow on from each other without interruption.

 

[Tim James]

If I am working on a book that is in multiple third person, I will often try a scene out from the POV of each of the main characters in it to see which I like and which works best. It can be time consuming if it is a long scene, writing it out several times, but often the effort is worthwhile.

 

[Carol Rose]

Lots of wonderful points in this discussion! I'm so happy people find this interesting to talk about. It's one of those craft aspects that is practically invisible when we've found the right POV for our particular story, but also quite obvious when we haven't. I find it so interesting to experiment with different POVs when writing.