Wow, okay, so first of all: Thanks! You guys really tried and succeeded in being helpful. I got something out of this! To clarify though: It is not important to me to switch tenses. I am just looking for good way to show the subplot (with a different pov of course) while my main narrator is the MC himself. Had I started out with the omniscient third person narrative, I would have had no problem going with that one all the way. But now the tone is set and I don't want to confuse the reader by suddenly shifting from limited ego perspective to an omniscient 3rd person view.
I'm just going to assert that doing just that didn't exactly cause The Martian to go down in flames as an abject failure... Other people must have other examples?
The Martian is a great example. I remember feeling a sort of relief when it first switched to the third person sub-plot POV because it was getting a little repetitive being with Mark. A shift in tense however would have been very confusing because I wouldn't know if the two POVs were running in sync or not. I can't think of any others off the top of my head... but most of the books I read are in third anyway.
There are definitely pros and cons to both POVs. I think most adult novels are written in third, but that's not to say there aren't several incredibly well-written first-person adult novels. When I think of novels I've read and which stand out more than others, it is always the ones written in first-person that stick with me, that (not to be cliché) set up shop in my soul. But it really depends on the work and what you're trying to do. As several other replies have mentioned, first-person is much more limiting than third-person. You're stuck inside your protagonist's head and can't express to the reader anything to which your character doesn't have access. But, while that can be a con, it can also be a pro: if you're looking to write an unreliable narrator, first-person lends itself perfectly to that end. The reader is given only what the narrator thinks/sees/feels/etc., but maybe the narrator isn't perceiving everything as it really is. Think of, as another reply mentioned in passing, Nabokov's Humbert Humbert. He was an incredibly unreliable narrator, expressing to the reader all the ways in which Lolita was seducing him, all the ways she wanted him, all the ways he treated her like royalty. But imagine if Lolita had been written in third-person: we would see Humbert Humbert more objectively; we might have insight to his thoughts and feelings, but we wouldn't feel them as acutely; we wouldn't empathize with him the same way we do when he speaks in first-person. We would see him as the monster that he is, rather than a character with whom we can actually empathize. So really, as with any stylistic choice, it all depends on what you're trying to do and how you want to convey your characters. Do you want a less restricted, more objective viewpoint or a limited but very subjective viewpoint? How clearly do you want your readers to see your characters' flaws? How objectively good or evil do you want your characters to be? Every villain thinks he's a hero; is your protagonist, like Humbert Humbert, objectively a villain but a hero in his own mind, or is he objectively a more moral person? Even if your protagonist isn't objectively a villain, how reliable do you want him to be? Once you figure out how you want your characters portrayed, the decision between first and third will be much easier. Best of luck! (P.S. I apologize for the androcentric pronouns throughout, particularly if your protagonist is female. They just tend to roll off the tongue – er, keyboard – more naturally for me.)
Hi, welcome to the forum. Nice to see a post that isn't linked to a product. Hope to see you stay and that it only turned out to be something you were just enthusiastic about.
Really depends on the type of story and how you want the audience to read it (if that makes sense). Personally I feel that first person is tougher to pull off, there have been times where I've read a novel/story where I just really don't like the main character's voice and the way they see particular things, however loved the idea of the story. I do tend to have a preference for novels written in third person, however, it's not a conscious decision, they are just easier for me to read/write.
I enjoy both, but I've read more first person lately. Just finished "Gone Girl", which was a great first person book. I love being right inside a characters head. Only being aware of what they're aware of, or what they choose to reveal, and how their narration directly or indirectly builds their character. I find it very compelling, great for any story with a psychological bent.
First person narrative means writing from the "I" point of view. As in: I walked down the alley, I picked up the phone, I told Tony that he was going down if he didn't cough up the money by Saturday. I thought about it, then shook my head. I told myself I didn't care, but I picked up the paper anyway and glanced over the business column. Third person narrative form is writing from the omniscent point of view. Here, you use the he-she form. As in: he walked down the alley, she picked up the phone, and Jason told Tony that he was going down if he didn't cough up the money. Mort thought about it, then shook his head. And Cleary told himself that he didn't care, but picked up the paper anyway. Second-person is the least-used form in novels, mainly because it usually reads more awkwardly. Second person is the "you" point of view, the imperative (command) form, the way this web site is written. For example: "If you're looking for an agent, consider reading the info in the agent's file.
That's only one type of third person, and it's a type that is largely out of fashion these days. Third person limited is more often used these days. In third person limited, you choose a "point of view" character, and the narrative only knows, sees, etc., what that character knows, sees, etc.
Hi everyone and happy 2016! I'm well into my novel, which is mainly a love story. I have twelve chapters so far, and so far I've alternated his and her pov, a chapter each, that is third person limited to his or her experience. Now, things have evolved in the story and I l'd like to write one chapter, just one long descriptive chapter where povs are "mixed". That would mean that all of a sudden the omniscent author is telling the story, rendering both povs at once, so we know what both characters are thinking. Do you think this is feasible, and, in case, what are the risks and do you have any suggestions to get the best out of this choice? Thanks.
I'd have to see how that actually works before saying for sure, but I'd be wary of suddenly switching to head-hopping in mid-story. If it's possible, I'd work this scene from a single character's POV, but make sure the reader can accurately guess the other person's thoughts by what they say and do within the scene. And of course your POV character can do a lot of guessing as well ...perhaps accurately, perhaps not. It's fun when the reader knows the POV character is getting the wrong idea about the other person. I'm speaking from some experience, as I came to this sort of problem partway through my own book. I had been taking the route of showing the same scene twice, on occasion—once from the female character's POV, then repeating it from the male character's POV. I thought this was a terribly clever approach because it would be so interesting to see the same thing from different perspectives—until one of my betas (who liked my story otherwise) said it annoyed him because 'he already knew all that.' He pointed out (paying me a compliment in the process) that I'd done a good enough job showing one character's reactions via another character's POV that I didn't need to explain them later on. This was nice to know. I ended up ditching all the 'repeats' and choosing the best POV character to convey each scene instead. This involved a major re-write of only one chapter, and had the added bonus of cutting lots of words from my overly-long MS.
My romance follows the same pattern - one chapter for her, then one for him. I also had events that were more effective if told from both perspectives, so I split them into multiple chapters with no time passing in between (the course of a single evening spans six chapters, three of hers and three of his). I always try to make it clear immediately - in the first paragraph of each chapter - whose head we're in. I would never mix perspectives in a single chapter because, as a reader, it would be confusing and pull me out of the story if I suddenly had to adjust to an omniscient point of view. I think most readers would feel that something was off, even if they're non-writers who couldn't phrase it in terms of point of view. If they're used to a (presumably) third limited POV, they'll be searching for clues as to whose head they're in and will get mixed signals. They might even think it was an error on your part rather than deliberate. Another risk with omni is that, generally, it makes a reader more distant from the characters - like they're hovering in the sky looking down at them, instead of in the room with them. I think that's a big mistake in a romance, where you want the reader to feel almost like they're part of the relationship themselves.
Thanks to both The reason behind this question is I'm finishing this chapter where the guy takes the girl up to the top of a mountain to see the dawn from a high place (very simply said). The chapter is from her POV of course, cos it's a surprise. The last scene in the chapter was meant to be where she opens her eyes and is dazzled by the sun shining on the mist... It's a crescendo, and this should have been the last scene before a new chapter and new change of POV. The fact is, they're a fresh couple. I need a sex scene there. It is unthinkable that a fresh couple of reasonably young people wouldn't feel the need for sex after such a breathtaking moment. What I thought to do was just stop the chapter with the dazzling sunlight and then start a new chapter from the hot scene (THERE on the rocks). But, wait, the next chapter should be from HIS perspective and I just don't need his thoughts on making love to her, not now. So I think I'll just stick the sex scene at the end of HER chapter. Let's see how it comes out!
Ha, I had the same problem. My first sex scene 'should' have fallen on a Him Chapter, but for various reasons I decided it was more effective from her perspective. So I split the day and night up into three chapters, meaning we didn't have to spend AGES in a single perspective but I could have the POVs I wanted. Perhaps yours could go something like this: Woman's POV: Going up to the mountain, feeling excited about the surprise, etc Man's POV: Observing her reaction to the dawn, can be a very short scene to really give it emphasis as it's a turning point in their relationship [I suspect this could actually be more effective from his perspective than having her describe the scene, and her wonder, to the reader] Woman's POV: Sex scene Man's POV: Next chapter
I have a related question for a beginner looking for examples... my google-fu has been failing me on this one... Are there any examples of works with primarily 3rd person limited, interspersed with 1st person limited? Such as a narrator or character interrupting a story to offer exposition or insight into their thoughts that we didn't get through the 3rd person limited? 2nd question: I'm assuming this would be executed with a new chapter or footnotes - but are there other ways this can be accomplished?
I know this isn't what you asked, but there's nothing that can't be delivered in a 3rd person limited POV. Include all the thoughts and introspection you want, just don't use "I". For example: 1st person: I had hated John since the moment I set eyes on him. His cold stare had a way of making me feel like an ant about to be torched with a magnifying glass. 3rd person: Jane had hated John since the moment she set eyes on him. His cold stare had a way of making her feel like an ant about to be torched with a magnifying glass. You don't lose any character voice, and the reader gets exactly the same information and impression. Personally, I would need a better reason than adding introspection to mix up POVs. Mixing 3rd and 1st has been done, though I can't think of examples off the top of my head. I certainly wouldn't use footnotes in a fiction book but there are a thousand ways you could present the 1st person passages. One of the most common is diary entries. The important thing is to make it clear at all times whose voice is speaking.
I appreciate that, but I'm considering doing it as a sort of style. The 1st person would be breaking the fourth wall to speak directly to the reader, interrupting the story. I'm thinking of Pratchett's footnotes ("Said log, by the way, was one of five dozen that were abandoned in that meadow 50 years ago after the Great Caber Toss Elbow Epidemic."), but with the speaker being a character rather than the author. We see it work in film/theatre (it's a fun feature of detective film genre), but I couldn't locate any good examples in prose.
I think there's a reason for that. I mean, it can work (anything can work if it's done right) but it's much easier to do it in a way that doesn't work.
I've played with this a couple of times in short stories - usually just by treating it as a POV change, and switching when I changed scene. The first time is actually an ancient piece in the workshop, though the only first-person part is a single paragraph some way down. The one I'm writing at the moment uses it, and I think it works - but since it's not quite done I haven't given it to anyone to read yet, so I could be wrong. In this one, I established with the first scene that there was an 'I' who was telling the story, so in theory the reader isn't too surprised when the fourth wall gets broken. There's another that flips to first person when the characters meet the narrator - though again, the narrator is made clear to be a character from the start, and there's some I dotted throughout, so I guess that's more like omniscient-first. Anyhow, you're welcome to have a look at any of it if you like to see how I've tried it and if you think it works - PM me if you want a copy.
My collaborated novel is the same actually - alternated his/her POV. We had one character each. There was one occasion when my character's reaction to realising the girl actually does love him and to seeing his first ever sunrise was needed, but my co-author really wanted to have her character give her POV instead - so I simply had my POV chapter as 1-2 paragraphs long, show his reaction, and then switched back to my co-author's. As for the dilemma of perhaps mixing POVs halfway through - I'd advise against it 'cause it'd cause confusion. If you really want to do it, I'd seriously question why, and if that's the only way or even the best way to achieve what you want to achieve. There's nothing wrong with going against convention, but you need to know what you're doing or else it just messes everything up. I once decided on a whim that I'd like my novel to be in 3rd person, except when there's my MC present, when it'd be in first person from his POV. I'd never done it before, never seen it done, wasn't that experienced, and frankly had no good reason for it other than that it seems fun. And yes, it was a disaster.
Okay. I have a book I plan to write in a few months. I am not sure in which way I should go in terms of POV. Let me give some needed context. For one, I already wrote it. lol. Last April, I challenged my self to the rules of NaNoWriMo. Since then I haven't touched it. I am thinking about using the old draft as a guide to rewrite it with my new writing skills. But I am not sure which I should write it in. The old book I did in 3rd. Here is the thing. In all 35 chapters or 50k. I only changed POV twice. So 3 in total. for quite literally 98% of the time. I was inside my MC's head. Her name is Jackie. lol. But then I am thinking. Those 2 moments were pretty neat. One was a fake out. I implied my girl died. I swiched to her sister, but that only lasted like 800 words. The other time is at the climax where I hang around everyone involved in fighting. Not just ones Jackie was in or saw. The story of Jackie is interesting. She is a 33 year old woman, that mentally is 17. Because she has spent so much of life focusing on how to survive and push herself physically, that she never really developed emotionally. This story in all its glory is that catching up to her. Her feeling love for the first time towards a boy and just not knowing how to deal with it (to the point of literally suspecting she is sick and going to a hospitial.) Or her dealing with grief and her desire to want to destroy the everything from the pain. The ultimate resolution is about her learning to express herself without over doing it. I guess when I say it like that. I am really making the argument for first person aren't I? But I like opinions! Also, if I do firt, does that ruin the set up of my two shifts in POV?
Nope. You can do that just as well in third person. Third person can be just as close as first. It just gives you more tools for expressing that information, because you're not forced to always use the character's voice.
I personally prefer reading third person, not sure why but I just do. I agree with ChickenFreak, you would have more tools for expressing information because you are not forced to use the character's voice. As well as this, you've already written quite a lot in third person already and it can be tiresome to have to go back and change the story around like that. However, it's really up to you how you feel like Jackie's story should be told. If your story works better as a first person, then that's how you should write it and you can always change it back if it's not working.
Not sure how much help we can realistically be here. If you've already written the story in third and you think it works, I'm having a hard time seeing why you'd change it, unless it's as an exercise. If you've written the story in third and you think it doesn't work, I'm having a hard time seeing why you wouldn't try first and see if that makes it better. You probably are going to have to drop the POV changes if you go with first. I mean, it's certainly possible to pull them off, but that strikes me as something pretty difficult to do well. Mind you, it sounds like you're already switching from close-third to omniscient-third for the finale, so maybe that's not a problem for you. Thing is, I don't think we can help much based on what you've given. The story you've described can be told effectively in first, in closed third, in omniscient third, probably even in second if you're good enough. If I was writing it, I'd probably go with first. I think I'd be able to handle the mental state of the character better that way. But @ChickenFreak's absolutely right that the tools are there in third, I just trust myself to do a better job in first. Depends how you write, where your skillset lies. Maybe stick a couple of chapters in the workshop and ask people what they think of the POV. You'll get more useful answers.
