Perspective

[Andrew Q Gordon]

Convention writing rules of thumb say one Point of View and one perspective - and 'one' perspective included 3rd Person Omniscient but if you go that route you need to stick to it and most authors don't and instead engage in head hopping. The problem with head hopping is, if the character knows something and you don't divulge it, your cheating just for the sake of suspense.

 

Anyway, I digress. I think that first person lends itself to multiple perspectives better than third but multiple perspectives are a bad idea when there is an element of suspense - i.e. a whodunit or you have a clear protagonist and you get 'their' perspective.

 

I suppose this is something a purist type question as most everyone uses multiple perspectives except a very few.

 

So how do folks feel about multiple perspectives - limiting things to just two - as a writing vehicle?

 

Is it easier to move the story along?

 

Does it help with character development?

 

Do you find it ruins suspense at times?

 

Do you just not care and just write it as it comes? - to be honest, really feel this last option is the easy way out. It is harder to do it right but I think the result is better too.

[Marzipan]

I'm not saying one is better than the other. It really depends on the story. I try out all kinds of pov choices, but I tend to stick with one type with each story. I write intuitively, I don't make hard decisions on what is the best solution. the story starts to build in my mind in a certain way and then it just comes out. I need more dicipline and practice and planning - I'm working on that

 

 

 

 

[Sara Alva]

Well I think you already know how I feel about head-hopping, so I'll skip commenting on your 'digression' and move on to the other bit

 

 

I've never written w/ first person alternating perspectives, most likely because I've never read a published book that does this. I'm sure they exist now, and I've read some online novels that do make use of this. I took me a little while to get used to it, but if the writer is good I can overlook my personal tastes for the sake of the story.

 

I have written in alternating third person (chapter-to-chapter) and IMO it was more difficult than writing w/ just one perspective. For each scene of the story I had to consider very carefully: whose head do I need to be in? Whose head makes the action more dramatic, or keeps the suspense for the longest amount of time? Sometimes I would write out whole bits and think 'nope, that's boring because he already knows x,y, and z so the reader has no reason to read on' . . . then I'd have to go back and switch things up so the story unfolded from the other character's eyes. I also had to be careful not to give too much away when I was in one character's head, so that it wasn't obvious what was going to happen in the next chapter when I was in the other character's shoes.

 

On the plus side, I got to develop each character with much more depth than I would have otherwise, fleshing out 'back stories' along the way. With 3rd person limited, I often hear that people want to "know" the secondary character in a way that really can't be achieved w/o going into their head (which is why I think people fall into the head-hopping trap sometimes . . .)

 

So, um, if you really like both your characters, or have a story you want told from different 'places' (physically or even emotionally speaking), then the multiple perspectives can be a useful tool . . . probably a little bit of a challenge, but perhaps a fun one

[Cia]

I typically write in third person limited. I do find that I often will switch pov between the two main characters as necessary though I try to keep it from being within the same chapter. I don't think omniscient works for me with two male leads within the story, though it's easier for a hetero type fiction with a more concrete separation between the male/female viewpoint. If I do first person I try to keep it to the main character's pov alone because to do anything else is 'telling' the story rather than showing it through the character's eyes which is what I always strive to do.

 

Classic literature was predominantely written in the omniscient pov with a narrator voice that often knew the thoughts of the characters, often multiple characters within a scene. I think that more modern styles lately have drifted toward using the limited viewpoint in either first or third and keeping that viewpoint from the main character in the scene or chapter as that shows the story rather than telling it. I've been trying to pay attention in published books I've read and even there that style is used now for the most part, rather than keeping the viewpoint to a single character through the whole story. The most common exception to that tends to be in mystery stories where having a single pov leads to helping maintain the dramatic impact of the AHA! moments and the ending.

 

Whatever style you use I think the biggest fact is remaining consistent through a story. Changing styles on the reader part way through is the worst thing you can do.

[Andrew Q Gordon]

For me, I don't think I like 1st person so much. I have a problem with the tenses - I tend to shift into present tense a lot as if I were writing the story like I am writing this post. Just cunfuzzles me to no end.

 

The only time I would agree with head hopping [as opposed to head hoping as I wrote originally in the email] is for something where the MC is separated from another MC or almost MC and the other MC's actions are important. i.e. two characters leave and have simultaneous adventures which are key to the story. But then the question becomes, who Perspective do you use when they are together?

 

What I have in mind that is behind this, is a story about two characters, each special in their own way, trying to come to terms with their abilities - it is a sci-fi sorta thingy and they both have different responsibilities that might lend itself to switching perspectives. For me, I like it when the switch does not recount the same block of time. So one picks up after the last as opposed to going back and recounting the same time frame. I have seen and have done the switch to get a different take on the same event if the different events are from three unique perspectives. Meaning all three have different but important parts in the same event. IDK, just blabbing right now.

[Sara Alva]

For me, I don't think I like 1st person so much. I have a problem with the tenses - I tend to shift into present tense a lot as if I were writing the story like I am writing this post. Just cunfuzzles me to no end.

 

The only time I would agree with head hopping [as opposed to head hoping as I wrote originally in the email] is for something where the MC is separated from another MC or almost MC and the other MC's actions are important. i.e. two characters leave and have simultaneous adventures which are key to the story. But then the question becomes, who Perspective do you use when they are together?

 

What I have in mind that is behind this, is a story about two characters, each special in their own way, trying to come to terms with their abilities - it is a sci-fi sorta thingy and they both have different responsibilities that might lend itself to switching perspectives. For me, I like it when the switch does not recount the same block of time. So one picks up after the last as opposed to going back and recounting the same time frame. I have seen and have done the switch to get a different take on the same event if the different events are from three unique perspectives. Meaning all three have different but important parts in the same event. IDK, just blabbing right now.

 

Alternating 3rd person perspectives from chap to chap isn't head hopping, IMO... I think that could work for the story you're talking about...I've seen a lot of sci-fi stuff that does this. Ever read any of McCaffrey's Talent series?

 

I'd agree w/ you on the 'not recounting same block of time' thing. I think slight overlap is okay, if the characters are in different places, though.

 

And yeah, you will have to make a decision about whose eyes to write through when you end up w/ your characters together...

[Cia]

The only time I would agree with head hopping [as opposed to head hoping as I wrote originally in the email] is for something where the MC is separated from another MC or almost MC and the other MC's actions are important. i.e. two characters leave and have simultaneous adventures which are key to the story. But then the question becomes, who Perspective do you use when they are together?

 

At that point you have to decide who is the central character to the scene? Who is the one where we need to know their motivation and/or thoughts in the story? For me, the hard part isn't so much making that decision but to make sure I don't fall into the habit of letting both character's motivations show. At that point you have to focus on really using physical cues to show what your other character is feeling and thinking, which can be difficult.

[Nephylim]

I don't know the rules and I don't care. I tell the story the way it comes to me and I 'see' it rather that deliberately crafting it. Therefore I am writing what I am shown, usually by the characters which is why my stories are character led.

 

I never, ever think... Oh i'm writing in this perspective or... I should be writing in that perspective. I don't even consider what perspective I am actually writing in. I didn;'t even know what perspective and POV were until I came here.

 

I guess I'm an intuitive writer and I am also very anarchistic. I probablly don't know the rules and if I do i ignore them Seems to work

[Andrew Q Gordon]

I guess I'm an intuitive writer and I am also very anarchistic. I probably don't know the rules and if I do i ignore them Seems to work

 

Guess that would be a 'matter of perspective' eh Nephy??

 

Okay, okay okay, I got a million of em.

 

But seriously. You not follow the rules?? I'm shocked and appalled. Hehe, okay, not really. And yes, it DOES work for you, but it doesn't work so well for most writers.

 

Love,

 

The grumy old man

[AnytaSunday]

So how do folks feel about multiple perspectives - limiting things to just two - as a writing vehicle?

 

It's harder to follow head-hopping and if multiple perspectives are used, I generally prefer it when the POV changes with a scene break. Also, I don't like it when the SAME scene is being done from another perspective (unless if it's essential to the story and it leads to a climax of somesort), but generally it feels too repetitive--chose one character (the more interesting one for that scene) and show it from their point of view--show me their thoughts and what makes that scene interesting from their perspective than another character's.

 

Mmmm, I love a story from one perspective (either first--'I', or third--'he/she'), but done right two (maybe three) can be a real treat. So long as the character's feel developed and they add to the story, the different perspectives can add to the story. Especially in romance, I think, as the different mindsets of the two protagonists can really add suspense to a story. We feel/see/hear what character A wants--we can understand and empathise even. But we also feel/see/hear what character B thinks--and help, it might clash BIG TIME, but we can understand where they are coming from too. It just add TENSION.

Is it easier to move the story along?

If the plot it complicated, sometimes using multiple perspectives helps with moving the story along. It can make the parts of the story that need to come across (but may be more difficult/and or boring if ALL were to come from one 'lens' so-to-speak) more entertaining, because you can add another character that has a smaller plot line but that is entertaining to tell* the reader what they need to know.

 

*tell--actually 'show and tell' might be better term here, LOL. (did you read that long email? )

 

Does it help with character development?

 

Absolutely, if done well. Because you get to see a character not ONLY from their own perspective, but from another person's. For example, you might get introduced to a self-deprecating guy with low self-esteem (from their own perspective) and then see the same guy from someone else's--and they see the other things this guy doesn't allow himself to see, maybe he's kind, considerate, attractive etc... It can totally help with character development.

Do you find it ruins suspense at times?

If executed poorly, then yes. It can ruin suspense. This is something I'm struggling with myself with a fantasy novel I wrote (with three perspectives) -- there's an element of mystery woven into the story, and a balance is required that I don't give too much away at the wrong times through one of the characters.

 

But in saying that, I find multiple perspectives have an amazing potential to ADD suspense, so long as not much is given away, but hinted at--this could work well.

 

Do you just not care and just write it as it comes? - to be honest, really feel this last option is the easy way out. It is harder to do it right but I think the result is better too.

 

Hmmm, I plan on a perspective before I start writing, but then, I like to plan my stories. Guess this is different for everyone. The more complicated the story, and if you DO use multiple perspectives, the more you have to plan to avoid things like losing the suspense and not getting deep enough into the character.

 

 

Very interesting thread. Thanks!!!

Edited June 19, 2011 by AnytaSunday

[Graeme]

Is it easier to move the story along?

 

Yes, most of the time. Some stories lend themselves to a single point of view, and because of that three of my four novels have been written from a first person POV. Two of those three were written to show the psychological development of a character, and getting inside the thoughts of a character were good for that. My fourth novel, however, has a wide cast of characters with lots of things going on. Multiple points of view were the only way to do it. That story was largely rotating third person limited... though my editor told me it was third person omniscient because I had references to what other characters were feeling, rather than what the current focus person thought they were feeling

 

Does it help with character development?

 

I'll interpret this to mean does it make it easier... and the answer is no. It makes no difference to character development what perspective you use, or how many different perspectives. Character development is purely based on your writing ability - to portray characters using written words.

 

Do you find it ruins suspense at times?

 

Not at all. Whether suspense is ruined is a question of the writing, not the points of view. An author can choose to make a reveal by using an alternative point of view, but that's their choice. You can disagree with that choice, but it's the writer choosing to make the reveal at what you consider to be the wrong time that's ruining the suspense, not the change of point of view.

 

Do you just not care and just write it as it comes? - to be honest, really feel this last option is the easy way out. It is harder to do it right but I think the result is better too.

 

No. I choose what point of view style I'm going to use for a story, and then stick with it. If I think the story is focused on a single character, I'll look at either first person, or third person limited from just that character's point of view. If I think multiple characters are important to the story, I'll either use rotating third person limited, or third person omniscient. Choosing the later makes the story more difficult to write, because there's an additional step required for every scene - whose point of view will be used? It also means there's more choices of scenes available to be written. As an example, in my only third person novel, I had a few scenes that I thought should be in the story, but I had trouble writing them. As a consequence, they ended up being 'off camera' scenes that were just referenced in later scenes. But that was a choice I was constantly making - what to include and what not to - because I had a lot more options available to me because the characters were dispersed to different locations.

 

 

 

I've got one published novel at home with multiple first person points of view. I'll admit that I gave up on it (even though it was one of my favourite authors), because the jumps between the different "I..." was confusing - it didn't make sense when I first encountered it, and I eventually gave up because I found it too confusing to get into viewpoint of different characters.

 

I've also got a couple of published novels that combined first person and third person. In one case, the third person was third person limited for a single character (the same character at all times), allowing essentially two stories to run in parallel in the one novel. In the other case, I'll admit the third person omniscient scenes were so well done that I didn't even notice that it wasn't first person anymore for the occasional short scenes - it was only when someone else references that novel did I go back and check and realised the points of view had been mixed.

 

The two novels are "Sharra's Exile" by Marion Zimmer Bradley, and "The Magic of Recluse" by L.E.Modesitt Jr. Both excellent stories

Edited June 22, 2011 by Graeme

[C James]

Perspective is indeed a matter of... perspective.

 

Hrmmm.. My own preference is to pick a perspective that best fits the plot and style. I've written in 1st person, 2nd person, and 3rd person.

 

Generally, I let the plot pick the perspective. For some things, you really have to go 3rd person. For example, if you have a great deal going on that can't be known by the protagonist, but is critical to the story, 2nd or 3rd person is your only choice. (and 2nd person is archaic, and has odd rules).

 

In 3rd person, you can indeed keep things from the readers. The narrator cannot lie, but the narrator is also under no obligation to tell everything, especially if it happens "off camera". One may, for example, in a scene with two people, only show one person's thoughts and feelings. Or, you may show both, but carefully, as that can be confusing to read unless done with care. What you don't have to do is divulge all that has occurred, or what a character knows. As an example, a character with a past. You are under no obligation to divulge said past, if you prefer to wait for the character to do so, or prefer to disclose it at a later point.

 

As an example, take most any mystery novel in 3rd person. Clearly, the narrator isn't going to give away the whole plot early on.

 

The general rule I follow is that the narrator can never lie or be mistaken, but characters certainly can. The narrator, however, is under no obligation to tall all, and may surely pick the time they do disclose things. Take, for example, a whodoneit, where there has been a murder. The narrator knows who the killer is, but chooses to follow the characters as they figure it out. At some point in the story, the truth will be known, but iut would ruin the whole thing id the story started off with "Last Saturday, as the storm's fury grew, Arnold listened to the rain pelting against his old windows. He heard a sound from behind, and was about to turn, only to be rent by cold agony from the knife ripping into his back. Frank had finally settled the old score by killing him." The last line, of course, does not need to be there, and in many cases shouldn't be.

 

In 1st person, you are limited by what the protagonist knows. That is not an absolute though, as there are limited ways around it. One way is to leave clues that the reader can pick up on, though the protagonist hasn't. Another angle is the narrative style in 1st person; are they recounting it well after the fact? If so, they may do so in a style that shows they know the entire thing, and are referring to future events from the narrative perspective; "I ran like hell, thinking I was going to be ripped apart. Months later, I learned the damn dog was toothless, but I didn't know it then. Laugh if you like, but I thought I was gonna die." (as an aside, if you do much of that, your first-person narrator is really becoming a 3rd person narrator.) Another way is to leave clues that the readers might pick up on, but the protagonist doesn't. A further option is the prologue; this can be in a different perspective and timeframe. It might be third person and halfway through a 1st person story's timeline, for example.

 

 

There are also ways to add a bit of 1st person to a 3rd person narrative. One of them is to give the reader a peek into a journal or log written by the character, which is written by them in 1st person.

 

Just my 2 cents, and just my opinions.

[RJ Santos]

Different stories "require" different perspectives, I think. Of course, an author's style is also a factor.

 

But generally, I find first person works on coming of age stories. There are times when first person perspectives would also make a romance story too sappy when an author tends to get lost in a scene too much. For me, it functions the same as limited third person. But good writing is good writing, whatever the perspective.

 

As for different POV's in one story, if it's done properly and if the author is good (as someone above pointed out) or the plot is compelling, I'd continue reading it. Though, I'd rather write in omniscient third person than different POV's. I find it's difficult and confusing to channel different persons to write a single story