I am planning to write a horror novel, and i have come to impasse of picking POV for the novel. What POV works best for Horror and why? All perspectives are welcomed.
Third person. Suspense, according to Sir Alfred Hitchcock, arises from audience knowledge concealed from the character. His example is of a man sitting down at a table. As that stands, no suspense. But if te audience knows there is a time bomb taped to te leg of the table, with seconds remaining, high suspense. However, if the character also knows the bomb is there, the suspense is greatly diminished. There is also no suspense if the character knows the bomb is there, but the audience does not. Strictly following first person, there is no good way to inform the reader that the bomb is there without the character knowing as well. However, third person can transition smoothly between the POVs of the bomber and the intended victim. And if you stick close to your character when he or she is in focus (3rd person limited), you have every bit as much access to his or her feelings and perceptions as in first person.
I absolutely agree with Cog, regarding suspense. But... I think suspense and horror are two different beasts. Suspense is the fear of something known, while horror is the fear of the unknown. Consider something supernatural; once you come to understand the powers behind it, it seizes to be scary. It has been explained and the fear is conquored. This relief is exactly what the kids show 'Scooby Doo' relies on. True horror, however, keeps the fear unexplained and unrelieved, so that it continuously haunt you. All the Lovecraft stories I've read were in 1st person or limited 3rd. They forge an intimate bond between the reader and the main character, so that you see the dark and mysterious horror only through their eyes. He makes you feel as clueless and helpless as they are. There's rarely much plot from the side of the antagonists, since that would require continual exposition of their side and by that, allow the reader power over them. It would add suspense, yes, but the horror would vaporize in the second the villain became subject to your gaze. It would make him mortal and thus vulnerable.
How many good first-person horror novels can you name? I'd say limited, multiple third is the best for horror. Dread is very much related to suspense. I'm not sure if masters of horror like King or Barker have ever used first person for a horror novel. If you use multiple third person, you can have a scene where the MC sees glimpses of the monster. She sees how it tears people apart. Think Jeepers Creepers. Then have a scene from the monsters POV. We get to see what he is doing. We get to know his thoughts of how and why he is going to kill the MC. This in itself can produce dread and anxiety. But it will raise suspense as well because we know the monster is coming for the MC, when and how and why, but she has no clue what she is in for. If it was first person, you miss out on all that. You can only raise dread by what she perceives.
I haven't read King's books (I just can't get into them, sorry), but I've seen the films based on them, and they're all pretty much limited to the MC's perspective. Maybe it's not the same for novels, but in visual media it's almost a rule: keep the monster out of sight for as long as possible. Once you understand what the monster is, the fear of it is conquored. If I knew the thoughts of the xenomorph in Alien, it wouldn't have been one bit scary... And this is one monster that kept me sleepless for a month, as a kid.
You can't consider them novels, but I always considered Poe's first-person short stories to be pretty scary. The Tell-Tale Heart is one of the better examples of that.
It's certainly possible to write decent first person horror. However, when someone asks straight out which POV is a better choice, I have to go with third person. In fact, third person is almost always the best first choice. You can get the same kind of intimacy from a third person limited POV as from first person, without the drawbacks and limitations of first person. Restrictions aren't always a bad thing. But newer writers in particular shouldn't be making the choices that make success more difficult. Why set yourself up for failure by taking the hard road, when even the so-called easy path is still quite challenging?
Thanks for the advice so far. Now can one write in horror in third person where there is a mix of limited and ominensce.?
To original question: You can also consider writing it in first person from the point of a view of a character who is, not only taking part in the story, but observing the other characters. For example, the novel can revolve around a certain pair of people, and, rather than write third person from their perspective, you have write it in first person from their friend who is also coming along on the adventure.
Ha, there's nothing like resurrecting a thread from 14 years ago, but I'm dealing with this now. Newbie me wrote the entire manuscript in third omniscient and now I'm told that's out of favor for the past several decades. Will probably go back and edit it to third limited. Got to give the characters an inner voice i suppose.
All of this is an IMO thing, of course. Usual disclaimer . . . Omniscient is probably your main obstacle and not really 3rd person. The key is to keep the horror above the MC and the reader so that neither of them can second guess it. It's greater than them at all times, and so it's somewhat removed, at a distance. You can do that in 1st person and 3rd. The reader & MC are lost within an enveloping horror. You want the confinement of a limited perspective. Don't get me wrong. I don't have anything against 1st person. One of the scariest (to me) books is "Will Storr vs. the Supernatural." That thing is all 1st person. It's basically an investigative journalist giving his impressions of spooky events he's in. The key is sincerity. All great horror books are sincere. Just be careful about cliche horror emotions in 1st person (my pulse hammered, my throat tightened, etc.). Those add very little, IMO. Your real advantage is being able to reach into the MC's imaginings and memories, which can be done in 3rd person too.
I find it easier to write horror short stories in 1st person. I prefer horror that doesn't jump out and scream "Boo!" at you, and on a personal level, first person suits me better in that respect. It works quite well for short stories. For a novel, the limitation is that it keeps the horror confined to one person's point of view. If you want to present it from the POV of multiple characters, third person is a better choice. In most of his books, Stephen King does this. In Salem's Lot, most of the action is presented from the POV of Ben Mears, the primary protagonist, but it will switch to Mark Petrie, the secondary protag, as well as many other side characters, often right before they get fanged.
My novel-in-progress is a horror told in first person. Honestly, I can't imagine this story from another POV and feel like it's working. I also write short stories. I sold a horror story to a magazine that was written in omniscient. And that worked well for that particular story. No matter what POV you use it all comes down to the execution, how you tell the story and where you place each word, more than anything else.
Psychological horror can likely do well in first person, although third person is the norm. Third person deep can mix the two well. I generally don't take serious nonsense about how "this or that pov is out of favor" or anything like that. That isn't how art really works.
