I need some advice, please. I am beta-reading a novel written in multiple first-person POVs. The book opens in the third person of one character and then includes paragraphs written in first person of another, which is presented in italics. We hop back and forth. In another chapter, there are two or maybe three characters in the first POV, head-hopping in the same scene. Okay, I understand (from research) that multi-person FP POV is possible when each POV is presented in different scenes/chapters. However, there is head hopping in the same scene. Is this a no-go? The author is an excellent writer, and the plot is complex, but the characters are not memorable and don't have a distinctive voice... This goes way beyond my writing frame of reference. I wrote my first novel in first but not multi-POV (I subsequently rewrote in third.) (I am told the book has been critiqued to death so I assume it must be. But is this usual?
Huh. That is interesting. By itself, multiple first person POVs isn't that unusual in modern times but was quite rare not too long ago. And by itself, omniscient POV with the head-hopping isn't all that unusual either, though kind of opposite to the former in that it was much more common in previous centuries than it is now. But both of them together? Omniscient first person POV? That's like the narrator got tired of the God's eye view and decided to impersonate the characters directly. My first thought it that is either a super awesome choice or an entirely avoidable shitshow. The author better have a damn good reason for it and be able to execute. I know I wouldn't have the stones for it. That last part doesn't surprise me. Nor is it absolutely necessary in a lot of cases, like Sci-Fi, where the characters often suck but nobody cares. Again, I wonder about the necessity of the whole thing, but if it works, far out, man! If you're having trouble critiquing it piecemeal because of the whole POV crackup, I'd maybe just read it with more of a reader's eye and report back to the author: your POV is fucking nuts and I think it works/doesn't work for XYZ. Best of luck on the details, but in the broad sense, if I randomly picked this off the shelf, I would say blah blah blah. In general, does it work? Those multi-first person POV headhops within scenes? Or is it too confusing? I find the situation fascinating.
No, they do not want critique, and if I'm honest, I wouldn't know where to start LoL. I am trying to read from a reader's eye but my inquisitive writer's eye is saying WTF?! If I'd randomly picked this off the shelf, it would have been abandoned after the second chapter. A lesson learned: Ask for a sample chapter before you commit to beta-read. Books are like food. We all enjoy different flavours and this was not to my palate. aka, nothing wrong just hard for me to swallow.
Critiques are more in depth. Beta read request 1. believability vs. plot stagnation. 2. plot holes 3. Areas I felt bored or confused
Gotcha. I guess #3 is going to be a doozy. #1 is a little strange. Those aren't exactly mutually exclusive traits.
When you were given this story, PiP, did they ask what sort of feedback they would like? It seems to me that they are hellbent on keeping this 'head hopping' narrative and if they don't want you to comment about that but give an honest opinion, I would be honest with how you feel... ie below: I think all writers appreciate honesty above all else. We all love compliments but if something doesn't work, it doesn't work. I was beta reading a writer a few months back (they have stopped writing since they have had so many real life issues) but it was written in 3rd person. Nothing odd here, but each chapter alternated between two main characters and the 3rd person voice was very different in each. One was set back in 'ancient' times and the other was a modern 'future' present. It's a good story but I was waiting for when the two MCs would meet and how the author managed with this mixed 3rd person narrative, and it didn't work and I told them that. Because of the complexity of the story and changing timelines, the 3rd person voice being an old style ancient times voice and then switching to a modern voice after each chapter, when the two characters met the 3rd person voice was a complete mish-mash. I didn't like it at all and suggested that it all to be rewritten in 1st person so that distinct styles of writing can be kept. They acknowledged the problems I highlighted and as I read more, I could see what they were trying to do but problems still existed. In the later chapters, the 3rd person voice became the 'modern' one and the author knew this. How of if they will change it is up to them, but as a beta, I felt pointing this out was absolutely necessary (I am very close to this writer and we have a very good relationship) and in the end they know I am not attacking them nor saying how bad the story is, but pointing out big issues I experienced. I even think your words here is really important for them. Would you read on if you didn't know them? If no then the story didn't work, and again, this has nothing to do with the writer. If the story has been critiqued to death, then the writer in question has strong beliefs in the story, but since it has reached the stage where they are approaching others for a different review it is the case of doing the same thing but expecting a different result. Being an excellent writer is one thing, but I view it as being a poor writer if they do not consider the heavy feedback they have received in amending the faults of their story.
When you were given this story, PiP, did they ask what sort of feedback they would like? It seems to me that they are hellbent on keeping this 'head hopping' narrative and if they don't want you to comment about that but give an honest opinion, I would be honest with how you feel... ie below: Beta read request 1. believability vs. plot stagnation. 2. plot holes 3. Areas I felt bored or confused I think all writers appreciate honesty above all else. We all love compliments but if something doesn't work, it doesn't work. Yep, but also remember it only doesn't work for that reader. BUT when you get several beta readers ALL pointing out the same thing (If they have read the work closely) then you have an issue. BUT as the writer it is your choice. I was beta reading a writer a few months back (they have stopped writing since they have had so many real life issues) but it was written in 3rd person. Nothing odd here, but each chapter alternated between two main characters and the 3rd person voice was very different in each. One was set back in 'ancient' times and the other was a modern 'future' present. It's a good story but I was waiting for when the two MCs would meet and how the author managed with this mixed 3rd person narrative, and it didn't work and I told them that. Did anyone else highlight that point? Because of the complexity of the story and changing timelines, the 3rd person voice being an old style ancient times voice and then switching to a modern voice after each chapter, when the two characters met the 3rd person voice was a complete mish-mash. I didn't like it at all and suggested that it all to be rewritten in 1st person so that distinct styles of writing can be kept. I am guessing this is fantasy? Goodness it sounds complex They acknowledged the problems I highlighted and as I read more, I could see what they were trying to do but problems still existed. In the later chapters, the 3rd person voice became the 'modern' one and the author knew this. How of if they will change it is up to them, but as a beta, I felt pointing this out was absolutely necessary (I am very close to this writer and we have a very good relationship) and in the end they know I am not attacking them nor saying how bad the story is, but pointing out big issues I experienced. I wish more people would offer honest feedback rather than pandering to a writer's ego. But delivering negative feedback is hard ... it's like saying your baby is ugly. LoL because it is their baby. I know the first time my mentor read my book she never held back and I was gutted. Once I set my ego aside ... I retuned with fresh eyes. 90% of the points regarding pacing, word choice, screwing a pair of balls on the antagonist and stopping dwelling made sense. She was not worried about grammar gremlins because they would be fixed by the editor. I even think your words here is really important for them. Would you read on if you didn't know them? If no then the story didn't work, and again, this has nothing to do with the writer. I don't know them. I was approached to beta read within a two-week timeframe with the promise if I started, I would commit to finishing, and I did. I also enjoy reading mysteries and courtroom dramas. If the story has been critiqued to death, then the writer in question has strong beliefs in the story, but since it has reached the stage where they are approaching others for a different review it is the case of doing the same thing but expecting a different result. Being an excellent writer is one thing, but I view it as being a poor writer if they do not consider the heavy feedback they have received in amending the faults of their story. There is a difference between a beta read of the whole book and a critique of various chapters. IMO, and I could be wrong, a beta reader looks at the book/story as a whole from a reader's perspective. Critiques delve into grammar gremlins, pacing, etc. usually the writer posts chapter by chapter. http://blog.janicehardy.com/2019/01/the-difference-between-critique.html Maybe this is a better explanation. Actually, if there is no thread discussing the role of a beta reader, I will start one.[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE] To me, PiP, what this writer expects from a reader (the bullet point lists) to quite similar to a water-downed critique. Skip the grammar, but how a story is paced, how a story is told; whether it is boring or not etc stems from every passage of each chapter that reveals every plot, event and the overall story. For example, their #3 asks if something was boring or was confused, these are huge questions and I would split these into 2 questions. What is boring can simply be over writing in certain parts that can be remedied by removing passages. It could be that there is no hook, no excitement because the characters are dull and the style doesn't work but to get to why a reader felt like this lay in how each chapter is developed. Being different in providing more than one pov in a chapter isn't new, though it is extremely difficult to pull off. I view the role of a beta reader is to answer the questions posed by the author. Whether the writer asked for generalised views and not an 'under the microscope' view of a chapter is (in my eyes) not important. The questions they asked (why something was boring) is answered by the reaction of not wanting to read past chapter 2, and this can be explained by answering question 3 with the pov issues. To explain about the pov issues requires closer attention to the writing. Personally, I think you can ask for feedback (as is the case here) but it will blur into a critique. Had the writer been more specific in asking for a reactionary view and nothing more, then I would say this is very different from a critique... but i don't think this is the case with what was asked.
The type of head hoping you are describing would be better done in third person omniscient. Or break it into scenes for each POV even if you are repeating the same scene with a different POV. Even with the font change, this is a distraction that can pull the reader out of immersion in the story. I think these two points cover the problem you have encountered. While the author should be commended for trying to experiment with a new technique / style, they must be prepared for those experiments to fail / fall flat for the reader. I think you would be doing them a disservice by not pointing this out to them. The key here is how you present the problem to them.
