Maximum Pain and Suffering…Picking Through Point of View.
Point of view is an interesting subject. Over the past few days, I’ve done a lot of POV research. What I’ve come to conclude is, after obvious POV rules are observed, POV use can become a matter of perspective…no pun intended. Let’s chat about it a bit and I’ll explain.
There are a host of view points. We’ll discuss third person options. Within third person, there are several types. We’ll discuss Omniscient and Third Person Limited.
A couple of painless definitions to establish common ground: Copied this (with shortening edits) from an article by Vickie Britton.
Third Person Limited– Everything is seen through (usually) the main character’s eyes and in past tense. The reader sees, thinks and feels only what the main character experiences. There are no shifts to other character’s thoughts or emotions.
Third Person Omniscient– The story is not shown through the eyes of one character, but an invisible, all-knowing, all-seeing narrator. This point of view works best in a story with a complicated plot and multiple characters. Most of popular author Stephen King’s works are written in third person omniscient. (Kindley adds: This form is supposedly in disfavor in modern day literature. Disconnects the reader from any one character.)
Mixed Points of View– There is no solid rule that a book must be written from a single point of view. Many authors mix points of view, alternating from third person limited to third person omniscient. In this case, part of the book is usually seen through omniscient eyes, the other through the eyes of the detective.
In researching the subject, I came across the first two POV definitions in one form or another several times in several sources. However, it’s the Mixed Points of View blurb that caught my attention. Note Vickie indicates, “There is no solid rule that a book must be written from a single point of view. Many authors mix points of view, alternating from third person limited to third person omniscient.” Woooo Hoooo. Here’s hoping she’s right, ‘cause that’s what I’ve done at least once.
For example, I have two characters who meet, and through dialogue, exchange back stories. However, immediately after they’re done, and prior to the chapter’s end, the narrator adds essential bits of information that both characters omitted to sanitize their recitations. Clearly omniscient. Up to that point, the POV was Third Person Limited. So, I’ve mixed POVs—intentionally.
Time for another painless definition, this one from Camy Tang.
Head Hopping– When the point of view shifts to a different character in the midst of a scene, this is called head-hopping because the reader feels as if he is hopped from one character’s head into another.
Head hopping is generally considered poor technique. Accordingly, I’ve scrupulously avoided it. In my example above, I don’t “play” one character and then immediately play the other, telling what they think or feel. Rather, the characters effectively exit the scene. (In the novel, they fall asleep.) Then, the narrator adds information in a dispassionate, objective manner. That is, the narrator steps away from the characters and just tells the reader key material.
During this POV research drill, I decided that much of what is acceptable is a matter of perspective. For example, using the definitions above, I could say that I’ve invented a whole new POV by stating that my work is in the Omniscient style, but, it’s “Selective Omniscient”. That is, by definition, I’ve can go anywhere, but, I’ve purposely chosen to stay in one character’s head until it suits me to widen the omniscient role. That would be legal. I’m simply limiting the narrator’s omniscient powers until I need them, then call on them when and where needed. (Maybe I should be an attorney.)
Another way to look at this is that I’m not really using omniscient at all, but Third Person Limited, and– observing Vickie’s Mixed Point of View convention–stepped outside those limited boundaries. This probably more correct an would satisfy most purists. However, many purists might about object to the concept of multiple POVs. It’s all a matter of perspective.
An additional POV problem: how zealous should we be in editing violations of Third Person Limited Omniscient rules. For example, the following line could, or could not, be a violation…
She leaned forward, looking in his pack. “You got a little of everything in there,” she said with a small smile and some amazement.
It’s the “amazement” part that’s the confuser. On the “no foul side,” the POV character/narrator could conclude based on her unstated tone of voice, expression, or body language that the woman was amazed. After all, just because the narrator didn’t tell us about these attributes doesn’t mean they didn’t happen and he didn’t see them. Narrators better omit mundane, take-for-granted things or the story will be boring in the extreme—not to mention a billion words long.
On the other side, critics could say, “How does the POV character know she’s amazed? She didn’t say so, nor do we have any written visual clues.” A sound, purist perspective position.
In scrounging my document for violations and seeking POV purity, I’ve discovered that if you shred every possible POV crime…you’re gonna end up with a pretty drab and bland story. It’s almost like the adverb discussion we had last week. For example, re-read the above quotation omitting, “some amazement” and you get get a different feeling for the woman’s reaction. There’s less insight into what she’s feeling. Initially, I struck it, then put it back. Yes, it could be re-written, but that’s for sure gonna use more words. Do that, and we’re fighting the word economy battle. Perspective.
My take…When we get to these kind of examples, it’s like picking fly poop out of pepper. Aren’t the readers the final test, as opposed to some esoteric rules. Most readers couldn’t tell you about POV to save themselves from a forced reading of Paradise Lost. They certainly don’t know the different forms of POV, and so far as the above example is concerned, most readers would slide right over it and not bat an outraged eyelid. So, exactly why do writers agonize of this???
Lastly, I’ve also learned that POV is filled with subtleties. For example, the distance at which the Third Person Limited is written, or narrative distance, brings significant differences to the novel. But, that discussion is for another day.
Themocracy
This really is an interesting subject, Galen. I’m like you–I don’t think readers notice POV unless the head-hopping is really blatant or confusing.
Elizabeth
Mystery Writing is Murder
You’ve done the research, you know the “rules.” Now feel free to break them. That’s my basic position on most things writing. As long as you know you’re breaking the rules and are doing it for a well-defined reason, then why not? Poor writing is when the author either doesn’t know they’re breaking the rules or doesn’t care enough to fix problems.
On the other hand, what are these “rules” we speak of? I feel writing is an art form and therefore subject to the whims of the individual artist (writer). If we all followed all the conventional wisdom all the time…wouldn’t reading get a little monotonous? Plus we’d all get confused, because conventional wisdom changes.
Of course, there are basics that must be observed. But I get tired of being told how I have to write–just because it worked for someone else. And, frankly, a lot of these things we writers discuss are as much for other writers as readers. As Elizabeth mentioned, readers usually aren’t looking for it. They just want a good story.
Oh, God, this makes me feel like I’m back in school. If I had to pay attention to all these rules, I don’t think I’d ever write another word. And I’d especially never try my hand at fiction. But I think we have to know the rules. It’s like in singing, there are techniques, but when you’re up there performing, you just have to be there, singing the song. I think we just have to be there, telling our story.
karen
I understand the basics of POV but all the little nuances tend to confuse me. I try not to worry about it too much as long as the story reads well and it’s perfectly clear which character the thoughts belong to. I do have a critique partner who is very good at pointing out POV confusions and that helps me a lot. I don’t like to read books where too much head hopping is going on because I find them confusing and hard to follow so I do try to avoid doing that when I’m writing.
This is my biggest nightmare. One of my current WIPs is told from the POV of six different characters. There is no head-hopping. I can’t tell the story from only one character’s POV because there’s too much going on and I find third person omniscient too distant for this particular story. I’ve written it the way it wanted to be written. But thanks, Galen, for giving me something else to ruminate over in the wee small hours!
Elspeth
It took me a long time to settle on first-person POV.
Each POV comes with its own set of challenges.
Quite the in depth discussion today, Galen – good job. I like the omniscient POV when writing, even though it is most challenging to do effectively, making sure the reader KNOWS who is thinking, feeling, etc., whatever.
Marvin D Wilson
I think I must be the type that likes picking fly poop out of pepper…meaning I’m a bit of a POV snob (which you graciously called a purist) when I’m reading someone else’s work. I don’t like oddball approaches that pull me out of the story (even if it’s to say, “Wow, what an amazing way to describe a sunset,” or “Hmmm. I think we’re suddenly in Bertie’s POV instead of Grampa’s POV.”
Of course, I’m much better at identifying POV slips (or innovative techniques, if you prefer) in someone else’s work than in my own. As a writer, I tend to do what feels right at the time and then wait to see if my critique group notices.
For me, Elizabeth, readers are THE final test. Of course, there are the basics writers need to observe, but readers are the litmus test of literature.
I’m with ya, Jack. These sacrosanct rules annoy me no end. There are basic conventions that help, but, too often, rules seem to have been invented by argumentative authors so they can ague with other authors. Or, so work can be negatively critiqued. One of these days I may write the Little Red Book of Rules. Collect all the annoyances in one book and call it authoritative. Non-compliance will be met with execution. Then, we will all sound exactly alike…but, we’ll be within the rules.
Nice way to put it Karen, we just have to be there, telling out story.
POV can be very subjective, Jane, as in the example in my post…at least to me it’s subjective as to whether that’s a “violation” or not. But either way, a reader is not gonna notice.
My Book Two is in Multiple Third Person Limited, Elspeth because it takes place in different time frames, so, two different set of protagonists and antagonists. However, a couple of chapters are also Omniscient, because they just work better that way.
Well, Carolyn, I’ll bet you picked it for a good set of reasons. Maybe you can share them in a post one day.
Omniscient POV is kind of like cabbage, Marv, some folks love it, others…eh, not so much. Patricia Stoltey for example, dislikes it…to put it mildly. Right Patricia?
Well, I don’t thing you the way you’ve defined yourself makes you a POV snob, Patricia. No one likes anything too weird…hard to follow. And head-hopping can be confusing. I’m not fond of either of those either. I’m just wonder for say, like the example I gave, if it couldn’t go either way as a violation, or, legit usage.
There’s fly poop in my pepper!?! LOL.
POV is a tricky thing. Lately, I’ve been challenged to go into deep POV, and that opens a whole new can of worms. Like not using the words “she felt” “she saw” “she heard”, etc. Not stating things like, “She ran her hands through her auburn hair” because I wouldn’t think that way if I were referring to myself. I run my hands through my hair, I don’t htink to myself, “I’m running my hands through my blonde hair”. Oh jeez….my head is spinning. My blonde, freckle-faced head is spinning.
Galen, one more blof I’m adding to my favorites. Good stuff all around. Like yourself, I’ve mixed POVs—intentionally. And as you state further along in your post, the reader is the ultimate judge and probably doesn’t even notice the mixed POV.
Stephen Tremp
http://www.stephentremp.blogspot.com/
Oh yeah, I posted a link to this blog on Twitter today. I need to do this more often with good blogs, especially the BBT’ers.
Great post on point of view. I agree with Elizabeth , the head hopping can be exhausting and confusing. I think if the story is told well, the reader is so caught up in the story he isn’t aware of the point of view as much as the story itself. Sometimes I have to play around with the POV to see where the most natural free flowing voice is that will entice the reader into the story’s world.
Nancy, from Realms of Thought…
I like how you say things;) Now you’ve got me wondering if I am a rigid purist or what.LOL I like to write in several points of view but in a new chapter or scene so as not to confuse as I don’t like head hopping either. But I am not really an omniscient kind of person–I want my character to show it somehow–more of a challenge for me!
I am the wrong person to comment, because I personally love stories told through multiple PoVs, and that is a purely emotional reaction of mine. Of course, there are some stories where it jars, when you don’t realise you have ‘head hopped’, or when it is gimmicky, but for the most part, I love stories that play around with PoVs.