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

[LJ Beck]

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

So, both of these are head-hopping. In the first one, it goes from Jac’s pov, as there is a comment on something only Jac can know for sure. “Because she was…” is Jac’s pov. And then in the next line, we jump to Elovie’s pov as there’s a comment that only she can know for sure. “She’d known…” So it’s “head-hopped” from Jac to Elovie.

The one in 1st person is just more obvious and jarring. But they’re both examples of head-hopping.

If we were in Elovie’s pov for this section of the story, to avoid head-hopping, you could change that to:

Elovie walked through the door and Jac's jaw dropped. Elovie suspected it was 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.

This is solidly in Elovie’s pov. We only know what Elovie is thinking.

Head-hopping isn’t about being kept in a bubble of believability. That is a broad and somewhat subjective subject. The term head-hopping is specifically about adhering to the pov chosen. It is not subjective. It can happen in 1st, 2nd, or 3rd pov although uncommon in 1st or 2nd as it’s more obvious. Omniscient Is the only pov where head-hopping is the convention.

Hope that helps. I’ll see if I can find some articles that further explain it.

The tricky bit, as @JohnBertel ‘s original post was asking about is when you want to deliberately change pov within a chapter. It is done, but there’s no set convention. So the trick is to do it elegantly and deliberately so that the reader isn’t jarred from head hopping but instead is aware of the pov shift.

 

[LJ Beck]

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.

Yes, for the film, but the screenplay and the end film are two totally different things. It’s tricky as a screenwriter, as you can’t put in anything that tells the director or dop how to do their job. Unless you’re writing a shooting script, or you’re the writer/director. So in a spec script, no camera directions, no actor directions, no thoughts. You can only write what you see. It’s closest to an omniscient pov. And sure, you can and do write what’s most important to the story you’re telling, same as novels. It’s just never a 1st, 2nd or 3rd pov in writing style as you never say what someone is thinking and you’re limited to only what you see without providing camera or actor direction. It’s tricky! Lots of “rules” in screenwriting. But anyway…. This thread isn’t really about screenwriting so I’ll shut up now! Lol

 

[LJ Beck]

Found this article which is pretty good.

What is Head Hopping, and How to Avoid This Writing Mistake

Learn all about head hopping, with tips and tricks on how to avoid this common writing mistake.

www.scribophile.com

 

[JohnBertel]

Thanks so much, everyone, for all your input!

Thanks for the link to the article @LJ Beck It's very clear and helpful, but my issue with this, and other articles discussing head-hopping, is that they, more or less explicitly, talk about plot-wise uncomplicated scenes. It is clear to the reader and all characters that a woman enters in some kind of weird dress, and the decision of POV is mainly to give the characters reactions. I think it's a different issue in plot-heavy scenes. For instance about who sees someone do something. Or in scenes with connected parallel actions.

 

[Ed Simnett]

Thanks so much, everyone, for all your input!

Thanks for the link to the article @LJ Beck It's very clear and helpful, but my issue with this, and other articles discussing head-hopping, is that they, more or less explicitly, talk about plot-wise uncomplicated scenes. It is clear to the reader and all characters that a woman enters in some kind of weird dress, and the decision of POV is mainly to give the characters reactions. I think it's a different issue in plot-heavy scenes. For instance about who sees someone do something. Or in scenes with connected parallel actions.

Exactly- in a duel you might want to jump between characters, because that is where the action is going- fast and choppy and two sided. There are also lots of reasons why you might want to move from close third to omniscient third to give the reader a sense of foreboding/danger [accidents are definitionally often not dramatic if you don't see the pre-action. The protag is going along his/her business then gets hit by something from behind and knocked out. What can you say unless you pull the narrative voice back a bit?]

 

[Barbara]

Just a thought, @JohnBertel, and you have probably done it already, but have you road tested those scenes/chapters on readers? ... Because if readers don't have a problem with the POV changes ...

And I suggest you have non-writers (but not friends and not family) among the readers; people who don't have writing techniques on their mind. I find that having a mix of writers AND non-writers as readers is extremely useful. Writers often read with their writing mind switched on which is good but can take you down a technique-rabbit-hole when in fact it worked perfectly well in the first place. Non-writers just know whether it works or not.

I've started going to a writer's group on the mil base where I work. All apart from one soldier plus myself are non-writers. We get a prompt plus 30 mins, then read out the results, and it's interesting the stuff they love; stuff which, when I look at it, would then later spend hours rewriting and self-editing (and prob write the life out of it). But if it works it works. Writing is about engaging the reader's emotions, and if you do that despite your POV changes, then trust it's fine and don't touch it. ... Also a live audience to read to is good too. You get that instant reaction and body language. If they look puzzled then you know it doesn't work. If the go 'wow, love it' then you know it does.

 

[Pamela Jo]

Just a thought, @JohnBertel, and you have probably done it already, but have you road tested those scenes/chapters on readers? ... Because if readers don't have a problem with the POV changes ...

And I suggest you have non-writers (but not friends and not family) among the readers; people who don't have writing techniques on their mind. I find that having a mix of writers AND non-writers as readers is extremely useful. Writers often read with their writing mind switched on which is good but can take you down a technique-rabbit-hole when in fact it worked perfectly well in the first place. Non-writers just know whether it works or not.

I've started going to a writer's group on the mil base where I work. All apart from one soldier plus myself are non-writers. We get a prompt plus 30 mins, then read out the results, and it's interesting the stuff they love; stuff which, when I look at it, would then later spend hours rewriting and self-editing (and prob write the life out of it). But if it works it works. Writing is about engaging the reader's emotions, and if you do that despite your POV changes, then trust it's fine and don't touch it. ... Also a live audience to read to is good too. You get that instant reaction and body language. If they look puzzled then you know it doesn't work. If the go 'wow, love it' then you know it does.

On this line-remember that most entertainment today is produced by amateurs on Tik Tok, You Tube etc.

 

[LJ Beck]

On this line-remember that most entertainment today is produced by amateurs on Tik Tok, You Tube etc.

Not sure I'd call all of that "entertainment" ..... just sayin'

 

[LJ Beck]

Exactly- in a duel you might want to jump between characters, because that is where the action is going- fast and choppy and two sided. There are also lots of reasons why you might want to move from close third to omniscient third to give the reader a sense of foreboding/danger [accidents are definitionally often not dramatic if you don't see the pre-action. The protag is going along his/her business then gets hit by something from behind and knocked out. What can you say unless you pull the narrative voice back a bit?]

Well, you can always write in Omniscient POV. Dune is written like that, and is wildly popular and much beloved. Or if you decide to write in one POV (1st, 2nd, or 3rd) then you have to get creative with your foreshadowing or fight scenes. Red Rising by Peirce Brown is full of exciting action and fights and such and stays in 1st person. So it can be done. Or if you choose to head hop and it works, great. It's all part of the choices we make as writers.

 

[Peyton Stafford]

Butt in chair, hands on keyboard. Just write the book!

 

[LJ Beck]

Butt in chair, hands on keyboard. Just write the book!

Yerp, but nothing wrong with asking for a bit of advice, opinions or support along the way when stuck.