Scene breaks in different formats. A good or bad idea?

[JohnBertel]

I have scenes where I switch between two different POVs several times. Maybe not a good idea, but I'm not (yet) convinced it can't work. Each POV have a couple of pages before the switch. Example: Character A struggles to get to a control room to turn off the lights, and then we switch to B to see what happens when the lights are turned off.

Reluctantly, I have admitted that it's easier to read if the POVs are separated by scene breaks. But now I worry it may be confusing to use the same format for "true" scene breaks, e.g. jumps in time or location. So maybe use two different formats for scene breaks. But would that be even more confusing? Or maybe a blank line for a POV switch, and ornamental scene breaks for a jump in time/location, but I think blank lines look somewhat unintentional.

Your thoughts, ideas, experience, and examples will be highly appreciated.

 

[Pamela Jo]

I have scenes where I switch between two different POVs several times. Maybe not a good idea, but I'm not (yet) convinced it can't work. Each POV have a couple of pages before the switch. Example: Character A struggles to get to a control room to turn off the lights, and then we switch to B to see what happens when the lights are turned off.

Reluctantly, I have admitted that it's easier to read if the POVs are separated by scene breaks. But now I worry it may be confusing to use the same format for "true" scene breaks, e.g. jumps in time or location. So maybe use two different formats for scene breaks. But would that be even more confusing? Or maybe a blank line for a POV switch, and ornamental scene breaks for a jump in time/location, but I think blank lines look somewhat unintentional.

Your thoughts, ideas, experience, and examples will be highly appreciated.

I'm reading a series where there are two protagonists. The main one? Speaks in first person. The secondary? female character is narrated. When I hit that change it stopped me cold. But I was sufficiently invested in the story to carry on and now I'm considering if I could use that somehow. Lesson: Readers will accept anything if they want to get on with the story.

As Pete says, what works, works. Even head-hopping. It's hard to really tell wo reading it-but I think the squiggly line between POV changes within a chapter is less obstructive to a reader than starting a whole new chapter. For me that is when that POV is in a completely new place/time/circumstance.

 

[Dragonrider]

The most important thing is consistency and introducing it early enough. Make the scene break clear and do it in all or most chapters and you should be fine.

 

[E G Logan]

I think blank lines look somewhat unintentional.

Kindle would definitely agree. It has a bad habit of closing up missing lines, resulting in anything from puzzlement to complete perplexity.

 

[Ed Simnett]

I once did something which was deliberately designed to be confusing (an arial dogfight, where the reader being thrown from plane to plane in a way that was intended to mimic the confusion of being in the space with the planes). The result was a bunch of trained readers complaining about head hopping, without anyone actually say whether or not it actually impacted the reading/comprehension (indeed one reader's feedback on the entire book was complaining about this, even though it only happened in the first two pages). My conclusion was sadly that you need section breaks.

good luck!

 

[James Charles]

Tough one. Agents and editors don't like multi-pov, even if it's done the way you're suggesting. Funny how we're supposed to trust our readers, but then they're not smart enough to go with it?

 

[LJ Beck]

To make it easy on yourself, and readers, would it work to name the sections by the POV char? I’ve seen that done before and it’s clear and works. It is more common to have a full chapter in one POV, but if you’re doing it within chapters, it can be confusing head hopping. If the first word in that section (on its own line) is the POV name, then job done.

 

[Nikky Lee]

I always use scene breaks to signal either a POV change or a scene changes. As a reader, I find it much easier to follow a story when they do this so I emulate that. For me, a scene break signals to that something has changed since the last thing I read, either the POV or the time and place (often both).

 

[TimRees]

I use screen breaks in novels in exactly the same way I use them in scripts - new setting means new scene. I use a single asterisk with three returns each side.

 

[LJ Beck]

I use screen breaks in novels in exactly the same way I use them in scripts - new setting means new scene. I use a single asterisk with three returns each side.

Well in screenwriting it’s a lot easier, though, right? Slug lines are for a change in time/place but there’s no POV to worry about. Also slug lines have a very specific format, whereas in prose, there’s no one way to do it. It would be easier if there was, but then I also really enjoy the freedom with prose that you don’t get with screenwriting.

 

[TimRees]

Well in screenwriting it’s a lot easier, though, right? Slug lines are for a change in time/place but there’s no POV to worry about. Also slug lines have a very specific format, whereas in prose, there’s no one way to do it. It would be easier if there was, but then I also really enjoy the freedom with prose that you don’t get with screenwriting.

Of course, in the script the transitions require standard formats and in scripts you just write the bones whilst in a novel we get to flesh-out scene and character - which is why I always write the novel first. However, POV is no different. In a novel and script you set the scene from the perspective of the significant character in the scene.

 

[LJ Beck]

Of course, in the script the transitions require standard formats and in scripts you just write the bones whilst in a novel we get to flesh-out scene and character - which is why I always write the novel first. However, POV is no different. In a novel and script you set the scene from the perspective of the significant character in the scene.

Ah, I never considered pov when I was screenwriting. It’s most similar to an omnipotent pov I think. Come to think of it, pov, or changing pov, never came up in all the classes and books I’d read when learning screenwriting. You’re never in anyone’s head. You just have to show what you’re looking at. You can open a scene with a group of people, and never pick anyone out to be your pov char.

Once I started writing prose and taking classes, etc, it was one of the first things i had to learn and I discovered it’s one of the biggest decisions a writer of prose has to make.

Nice that you are writing novels first, then scripts. When I was screenwriting I never wrote prose. When I switched to prose, only 3 (?) years ago, it was quite a shift! So much more to think about. I found pov to be one of the biggest difference. But that’s maybe just me.

 

[TimRees]

You’re never in anyone’s head. You just have to show what you’re looking at.

Sorry, am I missing something? Isn't showing what you're/character/collective looking at the POV?

 

[LJ Beck]

Sorry, am I missing something? Isn't showing what you're/character/collective looking at the POV?

I did a quick google and found this… “The term point of view, or POV, refers to who is telling a story, or who is narrating it. The narration of a story or novel can be told in three main ways: first person, second person, and third person.” (Or omnipotent)

In screenwriting there is no “narrator”, (I wouldn’t call the descriptions/action narration) and no one really “tells” the story. You watch it without being in any one chat’s head. You show main characters by having them on screen more, and showing what’s important to tell their story, but I personally find pov is much more than that. So that’s what I meant.

I can see what you’re saying, and it’s interesting to think of pov in scripts. I never considered it before. Maybe it’s a matter of degrees of complexity? Which could be why pov never specifically comes up in screenwriting?

 

[Barbara]

I have seen/heard the word 'POV' used by filmmakers. Maybe it's a DOP thing, I'm not sure, but I've heard references to it esp in regards to camera use and how to film something depending on who's head we're in and how deep.

I do think there are 'narrators' in screenwriting, esp if we read it with the film maker's eyes. A film is someone's story. But it's restricted cos we can't actually film from inside someone's head. But camera angles, lighting, music, acting, can make it intimate and close. Films follow characters. Some movies have multiple POVs. Pulp Fiction for example has several POVs. In Sleepless in Seattle we have two. Kill Bill we only have Beatrice Kiddo (BUT the opening scene is sort of omniscient). I think it's a matter of who the drama is focused on, or the main person in a scene. If it's on nobody in particular and the scene is there for info with no clear character, it'll be omniscient. Films like Independence Day are more omniscient because the focus is generally zoomed out, but it also has individual or dual POVs.

 

[TimRees]

I have seen/hear the word 'POV' used by filmmakers. Maybe it's a DOP thing, I'm not sure, but I've heard references to it esp in regards to camera use and how to film something depending on who's head we're in and how deep.

I do think there are narrators in screenwriting, esp if we read it with the film maker's eyes. A film is someone's story. Films follow characters. Some movies have multiple POVs. Pulp Fiction for example has several POVs. In Sleepless in Seattle we have two. Kill Bill we only have Beatrice Kiddo (BUT the opening scene is sort of omniscient). I think it's a matter of who the camera is focused on.

POV in cinematography is placement of the camera. That is a decision of the director and DOP. So maybe that is where the confusion is. I was referring to POV of characters or storyline. Both creative mediums, filmmaking and novel writing, are focused on telling a story and a story is usually told through character(s) and narrator. In both mediums, as the writer, I'm telling the story through the POV of character(s) (both protangonist(s) and antagonist(s) however many there are). I suppose scene setting can be a POV in novels and scripts as that determines the potential bias. Interesting...

 

[Jonny]

There is a popular belief in writing craft that proclaims any form of head hopping or POV shift in a scene is forbidden and the work of Satan. This rule seemingly handed down on tablets of stone by those in the know. Or perhaps that should be - those with a vested interest to sell their obscenely overpriced courses and services.

I am reading something currently. It's commercially very successful that has occasional POV shifts within chapters. That is to say, stylistically craft that would be seen as head hopping by the writing gurus and 'experts'. And thus would render it invalid or the work of an amateur.

Does it throw, bother or take me out of the story? Not in the slightest. I read for the story and characters. Not for the craft.

If the writing is of sufficiently good quality and takes me with it, then I honestly believe rules don't really matter one jot.

Am I talking rubbish? Well, to answer that I invite you to read the classics. Had their authors adhered to the rules and wisdom of today, then so many would never have seen the light of day.

We are are all story tellers who tell our stories in our own many different voices and styles. We’re not pilots. builders or surgeons. We don’t need to use the manual to do our job ‘properly’.

I'm not saying incessant POV shifting is to be encouraged. Far from it. But if used skillfully then it's perfectly fine.

 

[TimRees]

I thought the term 'head-hopping' was about novels written in first person shifting POV to other characters. I hate that, although I have read a self-pubbed novel where the author made it work... somehow.... not sure how. But novels written in third person have the freedom of shifting POV's. I have written one novel in first person, but found it limiting. However, I love the novel, but appreciate that a reader of the novel is stuck inside James' head for the whole story.

POV is decision that has to be made before the author embarks on the story. When I conceived the idea of The Drama Merchant, the reader 'experiencing' or at least fully understanding his POV is at the heart of the story, so I thought first person would work best. But I found writing first person a very intense experience, not only because I'm locked inside an individual's (character's) head, but because I still have a duty to the reader to make it entertaining.

For more straight forward storytelling, I find it best the reader is a viewer to be entertained, and for that third person is best.

On a plus side, the first draft of the first person novel (The Drama Merchant) only took me six weeks to write, whilst third person novels can take many months...

 

[Hannah F]

Head-hopping can be in first person or third perso. In first person, the narrator is the character. Everything comes from inside their head. They might guess what another person is thinking, but they cannot know it (without a superpower that enables mind-reading). In 3rd person, the narrator is sitting on the shoulder of the character. The narrator knows the character's thoughts but, as in 1st person POV, doesn't know the thoughts of others. The Omniscient POV is a god-like narrator who can see the actions and thoughts of all the characters.

You can have more than one first person or third person POV and can have the main character as 1st person and a secondary character as 3rd person POV, but the switch has to be done for good reason and in such a way as not to confuse the reader. If the author simply hops from one head to another, it is head hopping. Apart from causing confusion, it can inhibit immersion in the story.

 

[Ed Simnett]

I was just looking at the first page a relatively recent book (first in a published series). Without a scene break it went from:

1. Describing a scene, authorial objective or something- mentioning 4 people by name, and referring to 2 others by position
2. Introducing the hero (so the fifth named person), in a curious mix of internal observed, but filtered (he wondered) and observational third person*
3. Then the hero interacts with someone and then we have a paragraph where it is completely unclear whether we are in the hero's head or the other side of the conversation (e.g. "she though he had a cute smile." is that his assessment of her, or are we in her head (reads more like the later, but unclear).

Net result- I was confused and struggling.

#other_moans
*Never mind the pov mess, we are in complete <tell not show> mode "He had had a good war as a spitfire pilot and won the DFC... he had arms like tree trunks"
my cross to bear, but of course I noticed an obvious Americanism/anachronism in a book set in the UK shortly after the war

It does make you wonder sometimes...

 

[TimRees]

Sorry, Hannah, but the term 'head hopping' can only apply to first person as it infers unnaturally jumping from character to character in first person, which to me always feels wrong and must cause the reader to think, 'Eh?'. Whilst writing in third person the author can naturally shift from character POV to character POV with the reader being carried through the story as the observer regardless of the narrator.

 

[Ed Simnett]

There is a popular belief in writing craft that proclaims any form of head hopping or POV shift in a scene is forbidden and the work of Satan. This rule seemingly handed down on tablets of stone by those in the know. Or perhaps that should be - those with a vested interest to sell their obscenely overpriced courses and services.

I am reading something currently. It's commercially very successful that has occasional POV shifts within chapters. That is to say, stylistically craft that would be seen as head hopping by the writing gurus and 'experts'. And thus would render it invalid or the work of an amateur.

Does it throw, bother or take me out of the story? Not in the slightest. I read for the story and characters. Not for the craft.

If the writing is of sufficiently good quality and takes me with it, then I honestly believe rules don't really matter one jot.

Am I talking rubbish? Well, to answer that I invite you to read the classics. Had their authors adhered to the rules and wisdom of today, then so many would never have seen the light of day.

We are are all story tellers who tell our stories in our own many different voices and styles. We’re not pilots. builders or surgeons. We don’t need to use the manual to do our job ‘properly’.

I'm not saying incessant POV shifting is to be encouraged. Far from it. But if used skillfully then it's perfectly fine.

In a world where Google, Microsoft and Grammarly can't agree on basic grammar, 100% agree its a bit rich to says they're "rules" on POV.

[I know I am guilty of blind rule monitoring at times]

 

[Ed Simnett]

Sorry, Hannah, but the term 'head hopping' can only apply to first person as it infers unnaturally jumping from character to character in first person, which to me always feels wrong and must cause the reader to think, 'Eh?'. Whilst writing in third person the author can naturally shift from character POV to character POV with the reader being carried through the story as the observer regardless of the narrator

Not sure I'd agree: I think this, all third person, would be considered head hopping (and confusing)?

"Have at you!" shouted Ed, swinging his epee. If only he could pierce Tim's resolute defenses. <Ed's head>
"Never!" Ed was not going to get past Tim today. <presumably Tim's head>
He swung again, this time connecting with a glancing blow. Tim swore, at least the point had not counted. <unclear, but probably both>

 

[TimRees]

Ed, I agree that there are no rules for any creative medium. But the goal of writing fiction is to wrap the reader in a bubble of believability. In my opinion, even fantasy has to be believable in order for the reader to relax into that bubble. I can only speak for myself, but when i read a work of fiction, it needs to take me to a place where I'm not reading, I'm seeing the characters, action and scene in my imagination. The more vivid the images, the better the writer. But some things jar me. When I read they're instead of their, I'm jolted out of the bubble. When I read, for instance:

Jac's jaw dropped when Elovie walked through the door because she was wearing such a garish floral-print dress.
Elovie, struggled to smother a giggle. She'd known he'd hate the floral pattern she'd chosen.

That, for me, flows in third person and keeps me in my bubble..

But:

I felt my jaw drop. What on earth was she wearing? So ugly!
What a great reaction! I knew he'd hate this floral print and struggle to smother my giggle of delight.

In my opinion, that is head-hopping and doesn't work because it takes me out of my bubble and as that goes on it gets very confusing, for me, anyway.

I repeat, you can't have head-hopping in third person because that is the natural flow of the scene, i.e., he said, she said... etc...

Anyway, that's my opinion. My hope is to keep my readers in a bubble of believability...

 

[Hannah F]

Sorry, Hannah, but the term 'head hopping' can only apply to first person as it infers unnaturally jumping from character to character in first person, which to me always feels wrong and must cause the reader to think, 'Eh?'. Whilst writing in third person the author can naturally shift from character POV to character POV with the reader being carried through the story as the observer regardless of the narrator.

We will have to agree to disagree on the definition of head hopping.

 

[Pamela Jo]

Ed, I agree that there are no rules for any creative medium. But the goal of writing fiction is to wrap the reader in a bubble of believability. In my opinion, even fantasy has to be believable in order for the reader to relax into that bubble. I can only speak for myself, but when i read a work of fiction, it needs to take me to a place where I'm not reading, I'm seeing the characters, action and scene in my imagination. The more vivid the images, the better the writer. But some things jar me. When I read they're instead of their, I'm jolted out of the bubble. When I read, for instance:

Jac's jaw dropped when Elovie walked through the door because she was wearing such a garish floral-print dress.
Elovie, struggled to smother a giggle. She'd known he'd hate the floral pattern she'd chosen.

That, for me, flows in third person and keeps me in my bubble..

But:

I felt my jaw drop. What on earth was she wearing? So ugly!
What a great reaction! I knew he'd hate this floral print and struggle to smother my giggle of delight.

In my opinion, that is head-hopping and doesn't work because it takes me out of my bubble and as that goes on it gets very confusing, for me, anyway.

I repeat, you can't have head-hopping in third person because that is the natural flow of the scene, i.e., he said, she said... etc...

Anyway, that's my opinion. My hope is to keep my readers in a bubble of believability...

Tim I like your example. It works for me. Though I've also seen examples of Romance writers using 1st person head hopping. Those like Nora Roberts can occasionally make it work.

HOW do you pronounce Elovie. I'm still struggling with Irish names, now I have to face the reality of Welsh too?

 

[Pamela Jo]

There is a popular belief in writing craft that proclaims any form of head hopping or POV shift in a scene is forbidden and the work of Satan. This rule seemingly handed down on tablets of stone by those in the know. Or perhaps that should be - those with a vested interest to sell their obscenely overpriced courses and services.

I am reading something currently. It's commercially very successful that has occasional POV shifts within chapters. That is to say, stylistically craft that would be seen as head hopping by the writing gurus and 'experts'. And thus would render it invalid or the work of an amateur.

Does it throw, bother or take me out of the story? Not in the slightest. I read for the story and characters. Not for the craft.

If the writing is of sufficiently good quality and takes me with it, then I honestly believe rules don't really matter one jot.

Am I talking rubbish? Well, to answer that I invite you to read the classics. Had their authors adhered to the rules and wisdom of today, then so many would never have seen the light of day.

We are are all story tellers who tell our stories in our own many different voices and styles. We’re not pilots. builders or surgeons. We don’t need to use the manual to do our job ‘properly’.

I'm not saying incessant POV shifting is to be encouraged. Far from it. But if used skillfully then it's perfectly fine.

Jonny, you have the wisdom of Frank Zappa and Obi Wan Kenobi combined.

 

[TimRees]

PJ, I think Elovie is phonetic for love -L O V E. I really like the name and intend to use it at some point.

Yeas, it was a romance I read where head-hopping seemed to work to a point. I was very confused at the beginning, but had promised to read it for a friend.

 

[Pamela Jo]

Exhibit A: Trust.
Won a Pulitzer Prize. Book Club uniformly found it incoherent and unreadable. For me it was like trying to listen to John Cage. If you haven't had the pleasure.

One winter I did publicity for the Cleveland Symphony. Someone booked two Cage concerts. Despite my best efforts- I couldn't give away the tickets. Season ticket holders made it very clear they felt cheated out of two nights and wanted money back.

Maybe why I have sympathy for agents.

 

[TimRees]

LOL....

Another example of when undeniably creative individuals get it wrong in my opinion!



Love the look on Chuck Berry's face!!!