I came across a review of Licia Troisi's blockbuster “The emerged world”. Maybe some of you don't have a clue on who this writer is, but since it's not the point, it doesn't matter. At some point, I read the following: Actually, Troisi's point of view is a tangle. In some sections it's third person limited on Nihal or on the main character of a scene. In other sections it's omniscient. In some cases it's “schizoid”, going from one character's mind to another's in the space of a paragraph. This is nothing but amateur writing. Especially the last statement made me lift an eyebrow... is this person saying that a writer should choose ONE point of view and stick to it throughout the whole story? In my book I chose to use different POV's depending on what I want to achieve in the reader's understanding, on how deep I want to go into the character's mind. Sometimes I'm omniscient, sometimes I know less than what the characters know. Is this amateur writing?