Hi all I'm currently mulling over some ideas for a possible new story. One of the main thrusts of the story is that there are two alien species who coexist, but are unable to communicate and understand very little of each other. One is basically being kept in a zoo, and the other doesn't know how to communicate with it. The overarching theme of the story centres around the 'owner' trying to understand the species it has in captivity, and the captive species trying to understand what is happening to it. Now, because the two species can't understand each other and cannot communicate, I'm considering alternating the POV between the 'owner' and the 'captive', but repeating the same scene each time. So the scene will be played out from the POV of one, and then in the next chapter the same scene will be told from the POV of the other. I am slightly worried though that this will become tiresome and slow the pace of the book. Alternatively, I'm considering writing two separate books in tandem. They will both tell the same story, but one book from the POV of the 'owner' and one from the POV of the 'captive'. That means people can choose to read from either POV depending which book they buy, or read one and then the other, or choose to read the chapters interspersed so they can alternate POVs. I was even thinking, if this story had legs and could be published, it could be one of those double-sided books where half the book is one story and the other half is another, and you flip the book over to read the other story. I'd be interested in any and all opinions about these ideas
I've read manuscripts with that approach - telling the same scene from two POVs. I found it really tiresome. It's the same problem you get with flashbacks: while you're covering old ground, the plot isn't moving forward. The plot should always be moving forward. Well, E.L. James managed to make more money out of the suckers who read her books by releasing Grey, so it can work! Some will definitely see it as milking it, though...
I had a similar issue in my WIP. I had two important characters and didn't know how to show both off. The two options I gave myself were to either use the protagonist POV and develop the other character through his eyes, or alternate POV between scene breaks. I decided to just use one POV and develop the other character through his eyes. I made a thread asking how to do this and I got good responses https://www.writingforums.org/threads/developing-a-character-from-somebody-elses-perspective.155252/#post-1614749 Alternatively, you could try third person omniscient. I don't know exactly how it works, but it's something to look into. I, personally, wouldn't touch a book that repeated scenes constantly ( I could barely handle that happening once ) unless it was done extremely well, no matter how much more I learn about the characters. It's important to keep the plot moving as @Tenderiser said.
I don't like the "repeated scene" idea, but you can maybe repeat similar situations? Like, rough rough rough example... Bob tried bananas this time. The creature hadn't liked any fruit so far, but bananas were different, weren't they? Maybe. He needed to find a treat, something this creature actually enjoyed, if he was going to have any chance of training it. He approached cautiously, the food scoop extended with the sliced bananas at the tip... [and then a scene about Bob offering the bananas, hopefully written with some subplots or other details to make banana-offering seem interesting] *** The creature had returned. Seventy-two thousand parsecs from the previous visit; Xenon's jailer couldn't even manage to keep a precise schedule. And it seemed to have no idea of how to balance a diet, either. The previous offering, the beige flesh in its yellow wrapping, had not included any of the nutrients Xenon was currently in need of. Could the creature not even sense that? What primitive culture had Xenon stumbled into? The creature extended its offering in the traditional manner, and as always, Xenon considered it. His sensors scanned the green globes, smaller than previous offerings, and noted the panthogenic acid present. He wasn't in immediate need of that, but his stores weren't at maximum levels. He extended his proboscis and plucked three of the globes from the scoop, then placed them in his mouth. The creature grimaced in the way that always seemed like a threat display, with so many teeth visible, but Xenon had long since learned to ignore that expression. So obviously your scenes should actually be interesting, but the general idea is that you can have very similar scenes one after the other without them being the exact same scene. But it may feel like you're beating the reader over the head... like, if the format above continued for the entire book, I think I'd definitely find it tedious, as if the author thought I was too stupid to understand what was going on without having my hand held. Maybe use a modified repetition very sparingly, rather than for every interaction?
I have had 2 MCs interact in the same scene, without having to repeat where they are. I agree that repeating a scene from multiple points of view is a tad repetitious.
Thanks for the replies That's what I was thinking. I'm gonna scrap the idea of interspersing the POVs. The POVs will be radically different. One species is an intelligent race which uses language to communicate, and the other is of similar intelligence cognitively, but this particular specimen has never had contact with its own kind so has not acquired language. It therefore has a completely different understanding and perspective on what is happening. I can understand your point about not wanting it to be seen as milking, but my aim would be to make the two parallel stories radically different due to the differing interpretations each species will have of the same situations. You know, I did actually wonder about that. Since one of the POV characters has no language, I think the narration will need to lean towards omniscience, since there will be things that the character could not understand, so will not be able to report on. It would also mean that both species' perceptions could be included in the one scene. Yeah, I get that. That's why I'm thinking two separate books might be a better approach. That or 3rd person omni. @BayView I loved your example. It seems basically like head-hopping within chapters, switching at points where it is important to understand the other species' interpretation of the actions of its counterpart. I'll definitely consider that as a format. Did you include each of their POVs though? If so, I'd be interested to know how you accomplished that. It's important for this particular project that both species' understandings of what is happening are presented to the reader. I realise this may not be as marketable, and may well be seen as milking it, but I do really love the idea of having two completely independent novels which tell the same story but from radically different POVs. People will get a different re-telling of the story depending which MC's book they choose to read. Or if they choose to read both, they get to experience the story from both sides in order to get a full picture of what really happened. The only thing I'm not sure of is if I can make each story different enough that it's worth reading both.
This is how I did it, otherwise if they are not in close proximity to one another I use time/space jumps. Mother Confessor: Standing frozen in fear of my life once again. Even though I still have the sword, I do not know what this second intruder has hidden in his coat. Judging by his general physique and stature that he is Terran in origin. Though unlike the one I impaled with the hammer, this one hides his face with some sort of mask. I will find out it’s purpose later, instead of making wild speculation. Only thing I know is that he is military, and most likely high up in chain of command, based on his demeanor. I watch as he shifts the short bladed weapon into a downward angle, suggesting he really is peaceful. With the other hand outstretched and open as he approaches me. This affirms that in fact there is no harm to be dealt me. Softly I offer,” Apologies for your tech.” “No, not one of mine. I understand that you have the right to defend yourself”, he replies calmly, in a low gravely tone. Stepping closer to me. “Can I see that sword you have there”, he asks. I nod but remain frozen in place. My eyes follow his hand as it slowly makes it’s way to the handle of the weapon. Slowly withdrawing the curved blade from the sheath. Stepping back a few meters he gives it a few test swings. “Fine blade you have here. Haven’t seen any like it in over two hundred years”, he states while taking a moment to inspect and admire the weapon. Just then another enters the mutilated portal. A Centurian , he too reacts in similar fashion as the Terran. Blinking his eyes back into focus. “Ober-Commander, what is your will to be done’, the Centurian asks the Terran. “Well Captain, get the Confederation engineers to pack up everything in this compound, then take a few to the ship and set everything up, later the Confed Commander and his right hand men are going to have a nice chat with us. While that is being done, Red Wolf and I will go with the Mother Confessor and retrieve the natives. You are more than welcome to tag along if you like. One more thing if possible, outside of our prisoners, chain up the rest of the Confederation troops and have them outside the city,” the Terran orders the Centurian soldier. “Yes, Commander”, he replies as he leaves. The one called the Ober-Commander comes back to me and replaces the sword. For an odd reason this excites my nerves a bit. “Shall we”, He addresses me and gestures to the scarred hatchway. Feeling more at ease with him, I comply with his invitation. Marckus: Glad to be getting affairs squared away. Red Wolf accompanies the Mother Confessor and I to one of the drop ships. Rhino and Graxis are further up, heading to the other drop ship with the Confederation Commander. Barely audible insults and empty threats can be heard from the disgraced officer. The moments pass between the three of us in silence. Then a short time later the Confederation officer goes silent. I see that Rhino and Graxis have had enough of the officers shit. Now dangling limply over Rhino’s shoulder in unconsciousness. I smile to myself at the sight of this. A small chuckle escapes Red Wolf. The Mother Confessor shows no regard, in light of our amusement. Now all we need is a scout vehicle from the drop ship.
Read E. M. Forster's A Passage to India, which gives three conflicting views of colonial India without repeating scenes.
What you're thinking of is what I would call "simultaneous arcs". TV Tropes has an entry on it, with a bunch of examples, if you need some. Personally, I like the idea of two books or the double-sided book, but I also tend to be a sucker for gimmicks so those area possibly gimmicky.
So you head-hop within the chapter, and use the character's name to indicate POV, right? Thank you! I'll look at it I didn't know there was a name for this. I'll have a read up about it. Thank you! TBH that's my favourite idea too. The double-sided book would probably be the best way, as it would prevent the reader from feeling short-changed that they're only getting one side of the story unless they buy another book. As I said earlier, though, I would have to make sure I could make the stories different enough that they are both worth reading. I'm fascinated by the idea of reading the same scenes in the same order but from two radically different POVs.
Yes, as it is in 1st POV. Though if you are writing in third you could do the same without having to use the Name Tag, just use the indicated characters name in the new paragraph and put a gap between them to indicate a POV shift.
Thank you! I haven't decided between 1st or 3rd yet. This idea is still just a cloud for now. I'm waiting for something more concrete to coalesce
I think the story begs for two alternating POVs. Depending on how you tell the story it could be great. As for the same story from different POVs, Poisonwood Bible does a great job of that.
I go back to the book from time to time to remind me how she introduces each new POV. The book is first person told from three sisters' and the mother's POVs. The youngest sister and the father are the other main characters.
'Flipped' by Wendelin Van Draanen is a successful book with a similar approach. There are two POVS: the girl that has a crush on the boy, and the boy who feels annoyed by the girl. Each chapter is a different P.O.V on the the same event, but in a completely different way. It allows the reader to enjoy both sides of the story. Here's the thing...even though the book is highly rated, I did find the technique annoying after a while. The plot does move along, but not at a pace I really enjoyed. I eventually preferred the girl over the boy, to the point where I wanted to skip the boy's P.O.V. Then I began preferring the boy over the girl, and so on until the book ended. Still, I think its an interesting technique to use (if done skilfully, of course.)
I also dislike repeating scenes unless the perspectives are completely different. How I Met Your Mother had a great episode called The Ashtray where they repeated the same scene four time I think but each time added new information and completely changed your view of the last time through. I feel it may be difficult to take such a thing seriously and it only worked because it was a comedy.
So I have 2 girls, 17 teenish. Anne and Bea. They have been best friends for more than 10 years. There is this recurrent social event where they notice Clark. No one of them has had any relationship with a boy before. This is one such social event. Actual story in italics “I really would like to date that guy,” says Anne. As author I know. Anne is not going to elaborate anything on the subject, Bea knows this so there is no use in even asking. Anne knows why she wants to date him but is not going to say something at this time. Bea has no idea why Anne wants to date. She is also afraid that this will ruin or change their relationship. How do we narrate this? This is in third person. Anne is the MC. In the stories I have written So far I have only let the narrator look into the head of my MC. So I could do: Anne had noticed, from the first time, Clark’s beautiful ears, but she couldn't tell Bea that, she would never understand. But then I need to step into Bea’s head Bea could not understand what Anne saw in Clark. She was also afraid that this could ruin her friendship with Anne. I have so far avoided things like this by: 1. Letting the narrator observe the non MC from the outside. This can be done here. Bea looked at Clark with nonchalant expression. (Not the best way to illustrate, but I hope you follow.) 2. Letting the non MC say something. (But as my character don't speak in this situation I want to avoid this.) “I am afraid that your interest in Clark will ruin our friendship,” said Bea. I understand that you should avoid omniscient narrators. (And getting into two heads is that?) Have I gotten this right? Is there a way around?
I don't think you should avoid omniscient narrators, not if it best suits your story. If you feel omniscient would be too difficult for you or you don't think it fits best with your story, then my advice would be to write it in third person multiple. That way, you can still get both characters viewpoints. You can have one scene (or chapter) told from the Anne's viewpoint and the next scene (or chapter) told from Bea's. Both can be putting their own input in on how they feel about this guy and this situation. If you feel omniscient viewpoint is better suited, though, I see no reason to avoid writing it that way.
Not what you asked but from my POV, Bea is not going to have the insight you describe, that it will threaten their friendship. Rather people act on these matters as an underlying issue. For example Bea might feel annoyed with Anne and discredit anything about Anne's interest in Clark. But Bea is not going to consciously understand why she's annoyed. This is one of those cases where showing Bea's annoyance rather than telling the readers why she's annoyed is going to the be the more interesting tack.
How important do you want to make this point? The general "rule" is to "show" things that are important, "tell" things that aren't. You're "telling" pretty much everything. You're giving us the conclusion, the summary, the big picture seen from a distance, but not giving us the bits of evidence that would allow us to reach our own conclusions. If this is important enough to "show", I think you may need to leave room for a little ambiguity, at least for a while, and then later on the girls can have a showdown, or Anne can come to a realization, etc. Like, for now, you could go with: "I like him," Anne said. "You know. Like him." Bea snorted, that horrible sound she'd picked up from her brother that made Anne's back crawl every time she heard it. "What? I'm not allowed to like him?" "You can like whoever you want." Typical Bea. or whatever. Just plant the seeds of the tension. And then later, they can have their realizations... "You never even liked him anyway!" Anne said through her tears. "I did. Kind of." "Kind of." "He's fine, okay? Is that what you want to hear? He's just--I'm your best friend, Anne! You're not supposed to run off and forget me just because you like some stupid boy's ears!" Or, more to the point (the "tell" version of this post!) if you don't want your non-POV character to talk and your POV character doesn't know something, it's really hard to get that information across. Might be best to plant the seeds and then wait until your non-POV character is ready to talk for the harvest.
Third person. For me (and possibly for many others here) it's what I personally am more used to writing. Haven't really tried to write in First Person narrative as much as Third Person narrative.Much easier to look at a story in Third Person than First Person to be completely honest.
As a reader, I have no strict preference. First feels a bit more intimate, but I love books with multiple viewpoints, which in my experience tend to be written in third. As a writer, I use both fairly often. Maybe a 60-40 bias toward third. When I write in first person, my prose seems to flow a little easier, almost as if I'm talking directly to the reader, in my own words. I tend to use it for more introspective, ruminatory pieces, or when I have a voice I really want to highlight. Working in third, you have more flexibility with things like viewpoint and narrative distance. I use it for things like main characters without a human voice or intellect, and stories with multiple POVs. Lately I've been using it for the purpose of having an omnipresent narrator that's a character in its own right.
