How do you approach POV?

[NickP]

That third person, single POV (per chapter) - usually starting distant but narrowing in quickly, that's the norm nowadays. But people forget how the reader had to learn the convention - the earliest novels tended to be epistolatory so were 1st person past. This created a problem of loss of immediacy and the "they are at the door, help me! help me! NO-Ooooo...!' with crimson splattered on the pages at the end.

Now we all understand that the narrator is a sort of invisible, neutral observer - except when it is the head of the character. But when you think about it - that "invisible" narrator is still a variation on the omniscient author. Who is talking in the opening line of Pride & Prejudice?

 

[Rich.]

Who is talking in the opening line of Pride & Prejudice?

Jane Austen.

I'm not sure that readers in earlier times took issue with the notion that somebody was telling them a story, much as we might tell each other stories around a roaring campfire. I'm also not entirely convinced that very much has changed, except superficially.

 

[NickP]

Interesting. Is the narrator's voice the same as the author's, or is the narrator yet another invented character?

 

[Rich.]

Depends on the author.

 

[NickP]

Depends on the author.

Surely not? Is Dickens being himself, or has he created a "narrator-Dickens" to tell the story? And if so, is the narrator neutral? Certainly Jane Austen is being arch - does she really believe a single rich man needs/wants a wife, above all other things? If she does, then actually the first line is a statement of theme (and the basis of all romance!), if she doesn't she is being satirical. But is she being, quintessentially, herself - or is the narrator a construct?

 

[Rich.]

I have no idea. But in each case Dickens and Austen are telling us a story, whatever clever devices they may be using to tell it. When Dave-the-actor pretends to be Hamlet, we know it's really Dave, but we want to believe it's Hamlet. It's much the same contract between author and reader, isn't it? Doris-the-writer wants you to believe you're reading a story told by an authority on the subject of romance in war-torn third-century Egypt, and you do while you're reading it, even though you know Doris is really a shelf-stacker from Uxbridge.

 

[NickP]

But Doris has created a narrator to tell the story. And the bits of Doris (or anybody else) she imbues her narrator with - those are the choices of the author. Yes, everything in a story comes form the storyteller, but the voice he/she uses a narrative device.

 

[NickP]

Sorry to bang the drum like a pub boor, but actually it's in answer to the thread question. You choose your point of view but 3rd person or omniscient require decisions about voice and moral perspective, too.

 

[Rich.]

Yes. Umm, isn't that what I said [the narrative device bit]? You've lost me now. My old brain can't keep up.

 

[NickP]

Well, we are not disagreeing.

If I begin a story "Let us picture a foggy Whitechapel night, yellow gaslight hissing and the muted, distant sound of raucous, gin-swamped revelry at a nearby hostelry - The Princess Alice. Let us wait a moment and see who appears. Hark! Almost immediately comes a man - but what sort of man is this?"

You've got pastiche and a narrator - but would you want to continue in that vein? Effectively reporting upon and commenting on, the action. Actually I quite like it, but I think the reader would quickly want me to get on with it. But who is this annoying narrator? Moi?

 

[Rich.]

What's your actual preference, Nick? That's really what I was driving at when I started this thread. How do you, personally, approach POV? What are your likes, dislikes and fallbacks when you're writing? I wasn't being facetious earlier; I really did get lost.

 

[NickP]

I'm not sure - I prefer what works to prise some buy-in from a reader. Also like to play with voices - might have a go with my annoying narrator to see how far he/she will carry me.

 

[AliG]

3rd person limited usually, but I'm about to re-write one in first person. I think the plot is fine, love my charactes in a children's perfect murder- but it never quite sat correctly. Was a light bulb moment to realise that it lacked the close connectionthat first will give it. Bit of a project, but at least I've got plot, characters, dialogue...sigh..

 

[AliG]

Sorry, I didn't phrase my question very well. I meant how do *you* do it – any particular tics or quirks you've developed over the years, specific tools in your box, things you avoid – other than the hackneyed old mirror? [for example, I seem to have a preference for revealing physical details in action: Dave steepled his fingers, knowing full well they were longer than most – clunky example, but you get the idea]

I tend to just state it, but in small chunks, when needed. I think the problem is the info dump, not just being told a few key characteristics. The characteristics that really matter come from action/dialogue. Physical description is not too tricky with 3rd person, more of a problem when in first person, I think. Then probably needs to come out in dialogue 'Just because I'm blonde doesn't mean I'm stupid' or suchlike.

 

[James Marinero]

When it comes to telling a story I think of the oral tradition and the image in my brain is that of a wizened natural American Indian in a tepee telling a story to younger Indians. However that usually excludes (I imagine) character dialogue - which I include in my tales.

 

[Rich.]

When it comes to telling a story I think of the oral tradition ...

Me too! Except my teller is by the fire in some kind of Beowulf-esque long hall.