Point of View Lapses... When is it okay?

knightrunnermatt · Mar 7, 2006

I beta read for several people in addition to my own writing. One of the woman who I read for employs an omniscient third person voice, constantly changing the view point of the story. She does not do this in between chapters, but in the middle of chapters, from paragraph to paragraph. My personal feelings on the matter aside, I was hoping to hear your opinions. I know there is an ongoing debate about when this is okay, I was hoping to have a few new voices chime in on the debate.

matt

waylander · Mar 7, 2006

As a reader and critiquer I personally hate this. I think it a sign of weak writing. Choose the POV of whoever has most at stake in the scene and tell it how they see it. I think the reader will get much closer to the characters if this rule is adhered to.

Jamesaritchie · Mar 7, 2006

POV

knightrunnermatt said:
I beta read for several people in addition to my own writing. One of the woman who I read for employs an omniscient third person voice, constantly changing the view point of the story. She does not do this in between chapters, but in the middle of chapters, from paragraph to paragraph. My personal feelings on the matter aside, I was hoping to hear your opinions. I know there is an ongoing debate about when this is okay, I was hoping to have a few new voices chime in on the debate.

matt

I don't think it's ever okay, and omniscient does not mean you can head-hop with abandon. That's an excuse. "Oh, I don't head-hop, I write in the omniscient." Or "Head-hopping is fine in omniscient POV." Many seem to believe that omniscient and head-hopping are the same thing, and they aren't.

Head-hopping doesn't read any better in the omniscient POV than it does in third person limited. It reads exactly like head-hopping in any POV because that's what it is.

Omniscient means the narrator knows everything, but it shouldn't mean the narrator is constantly jumping out of one head and into another.

Having said this, some very well known writers get away with it, though the better ones try to stay in one head as long as possible, so I think you just have to ask yourself whether or not it works in the particular book.

Is it too much, too often? Is it confusing? Does it take away from the story? If these questions come off well, then let it stand. If they come off poorly, then it needs fixed.

Garpy · Mar 7, 2006

'Head-hopping' is something I've been told is a little tiresome if you over indulge in it. In my humble opinion, it really depends from scene to scene how much of that you can get away with. And it also depends to some degree on the genre you are writing in. With big-story thrillers, where the storyline shoots around all over the world, from character to character, then you're going to get a lot of that. With more intimate character-driven stuff, I should think the POV would remain predominantly with the main character. Good example of that, that I'm sure we've all read, is Catcher in the Rye....which if I recall correctly never once leaves Holden Caulfield's POV.

bugger...just noticed Mr Ritchie got in there first, with basically the same advice. Me and my slow-typing monkey hands

blacbird · Mar 7, 2006

Jamesaritchie said:
I don't think it's ever okay, and omniscient does not mean you can head-hop with abandon. That's an excuse.

Ditto, James, with emphasis. It's never okay.

caw.

Jamesaritchie · Mar 7, 2006

Garpy said:
'Head-hopping' is something I've been told is a little tiresome if you over indulge in it. In my humble opinion, it really depends from scene to scene how much of that you can get away with. And it also depends to some degree on the genre you are writing in. With big-story thrillers, where the storyline shoots around all over the world, from character to character, then you're going to get a lot of that. With more intimate character-driven stuff, I should think the POV would remain predominantly with the main character. Good example of that, that I'm sure we've all read, is Catcher in the Rye....which if I recall correctly never once leaves Holden Caulfield's POV.

bugger...just noticed Mr Ritchie got in there first, with basically the same advice. Me and my slow-typing monkey hands

Leaving a character's head for another character is fine, as long as you don't do so within the same scene. Changing character POV when the scene changes isn't head-hopping. When yu change POV from scene to scene, of from chapter to chapter, you're still in third person limited, just not with the same character. Novels that jump all over the world, that change setting often, usually should change POV with each location change., but as I said, this isn't head-hopping.

It's when the POV changes within a scene that head-hopping occurs. "Catcher in the Rye" was written in first person, so you really can't head-hop, though some few first person novels do have chapters written in third person limited.

Stew21 · Mar 7, 2006

I ran quickly through my MS just looking for this, and found two glaring examples of it. I found I had something I wanted to say and it was a POV change that got it said. One of them was about a "motive" behind a particular character. It was easier to say it from his head, but not effective writing.
However, a quick little rewrite of those sentences and suddenly it is all clear and the head hopping is gone.
I am suggesting that if it is a distraction and it is within a scene that the POV changes that it is fixable. And as you are providing feedback to this work, I would make a suggestion that POV isn't consistent, and work with her to get them fixed.
I do agree that changing POV is ok from chapter to chapter, or even scene to scene, but not within a scene.

blacbird · Mar 7, 2006

One of the principal reasons for the bad reaction to "head-hopping" on the part of a reader is that it isn't the way real life works. We don't know what thoughts are in other people's heads, except as interpreted (often incorrectly or imperfectly) from what they do. The effectiveness and verisimilitude of a story is, to me, reduced considerably when I'm fed information from various characters' heads. I like a sharper point of focus than that, and the overall present popularity of limited 3rd- and 1st-person POV narrative techniques over omniscient 3rd suggests to me that I'm not alone in feeling that way. (Of course, 1st-person carries with it some other potential problems to be avoided, notably head-entrenchment).

caw.

banjo · Mar 7, 2006

Jamesaritchie said:
Leaving a character's head for another character is fine, as long as you don't do so within the same scene. Changing character POV when the scene changes isn't head-hopping. When yu change POV from scene to scene, of from chapter to chapter, you're still in third person limited, just not with the same character. Novels that jump all over the world, that change setting often, usually should change POV with each location change., but as I said, this isn't head-hopping.

It's when the POV changes within a scene that head-hopping occurs. "Catcher in the Rye" was written in first person, so you really can't head-hop, though some few first person novels do have chapters written in third person limited.

Question.

Say I'm writing a thriller and in a particular scene a theif is cracking a safe full of diamonds. He gets the jewels and leaves the premises. All the time the writer is describing this it is from the point of view of the thief, who believes he is alone.

At the very end of the scene, the POV moves to a detective, who unknow to the thief or the reader, has been filming this from a false ceiling.

Isn't that still the same scene? And isn't it necessary for the POV to move from the thief to the detective to accomplish the effect? Further, isn't that the omnicient narrator shape shifting (as it were) from one head to another? If it is skillfully done, what's wrong with that?

Bufty · Mar 7, 2006

In the circumstances you describe I don't see any particular problem if the transition to the Detective's POV is smooth and logical.

Prosthetic Foreheads · Mar 7, 2006

banjo said:
Question.

Say I'm writing a thriller and in a particular scene a theif is cracking a safe full of diamonds. He gets the jewels and leaves the premises. All the time the writer is describing this it is from the point of view of the thief, who believes he is alone.

At the very end of the scene, the POV moves to a detective, who unknow to the thief or the reader, has been filming this from a false ceiling.

Isn't that still the same scene? And isn't it necessary for the POV to move from the thief to the detective to accomplish the effect? Further, isn't that the omnicient narrator shape shifting (as it were) from one head to another? If it is skillfully done, what's wrong with that?

Rather than just abruptly switching POV with a new paragraph, I like to see a break, whether it's just a couple of lines of white space or a line of ************. I don't mean start a whole new chapter. Something like:

....He closed the safe back and was out the door without making a sound.

*****************************

Jones watched from above as the thief (or a name if the detective knows the thief's name) emptied the safe (or as he entered the room or fled the room or wherever you want to pick it up).

blacbird · Mar 7, 2006

Bufty said:
In the circumstances you describe I don't see any particular problem if the transition to the Detective's POV is smooth and logical.

The key word in the original question is "lapses", which implies lack of control. Lack of control over POV is never acceptable. If you know what you're doing and handle it well, it isn't a lapse. But I've never seen an example of rapid drifting from one person's inner thoughts to another's to another's to another's and back to the first without having the feeling that the writer either doesn't know what he's doing, or doesn't care enough to pay attention to it. And without being convinced there would be a better way to handle the POV.

caw.

Jamesaritchie · Mar 7, 2006

banjo said:
Question.

Say I'm writing a thriller and in a particular scene a theif is cracking a safe full of diamonds. He gets the jewels and leaves the premises. All the time the writer is describing this it is from the point of view of the thief, who believes he is alone.

At the very end of the scene, the POV moves to a detective, who unknow to the thief or the reader, has been filming this from a false ceiling.

Isn't that still the same scene? And isn't it necessary for the POV to move from the thief to the detective to accomplish the effect? Further, isn't that the omnicient narrator shape shifting (as it were) from one head to another? If it is skillfully done, what's wrong with that?

I don;t think it is ever skillfully done. It's just that sometimes the rest of the scene is powerful enough to overcome the poor choice of head-hopping.

I think this is one area where readers might benefit from watching more movies. In a movie, the omniscient narrator knows the detective is there, and at the end of the scene he shows us the detective. But he doesn't have to do into the detective's head. He doesn't have to make the detective the POV character for the scene to work extremely well.

An omniscient narrator knows everything, and can show everything, but showing does not mean jumping out of one head and into another. Fine, show me the detective standing there, if you must. There are better ways of writing it, but fine, go ahead and show me. This can work well, under the right circumstances. But you don't have to go inside his head. You don't have to tell me what he;s thinking and feeling, you just have to let me see him standing there, let me watch what he does.

Writers head-hop because they don't know how not to head-hop. They thing they have to show what every character in a scene is feeling and thinking, and it just isn't so. When was the last time you were in a crowd and knew what anyone else was thinking and feeling?

Head-hopping is always lazy writing. Which doen't mean you can't get away with it, but getting away with it is exactly what you're doing.

KAP · Mar 7, 2006

I'm known as the pov police in certain groups. Ah well. Got to be known for something, I guess. I hate head-hopping, and, like others, I don't think writing in omni is an excuse for it. And yes, I notice head-hopping in novels by successful authors. I still hate it.

But I have seen artful (my opinion) pov switches within a scene. I wish I could remember specifics, but something like when a pov character leaves the scene but the discussion among other characters continues. I've tried to do it myself, once having a character hand a central item to another, and, with it, the pov. Wasn't bad, but I still rewrote the scene to eliminate the pov switch.

So I find it interesting when switching pov within a scene works, and I feel there are times when it can be a good choice to do just that, but I wouldn't like it often.

blacbird · Mar 7, 2006

Jamesaritchie said:
I think this is one area where readers might benefit from watching more movies.

I wholeheartedly agree. And for anyone writing thriller/mystery/detective fiction, or something similar, a really instructive film to watch and rewatch is Chinatown. Not to mention that it is a dang entertaining film to watch and rewatch.

It was the second or third time I saw it before I caught on to what Polanski was doing so well: The audience never knows more than Jack Nicholson's detective Jake Gittes knows. There's a great, quiet scene about a third of the way into the movie, when the mystery is beginning to unfold, and Gittes goes out into the desert to look at a big dry water pipe. He doesn't really have a clue what's going on, except that it's big and bad, and he stands there in the setting sunlight wondering about it, and at that moment, you are wondering right along with him (about then he gets flushed by a sudden big outflow of water, all of it happening right before the famous nose-cutting scene).

Polanski is an absolute genius at directing a movie, and his ability to control POV is legendary. I've seen this movie probably eight times, and every time I never fail to see something I missed before. Now I suppose I'll need to look at it again.

caw.

reph · Mar 7, 2006

I find omni most credible when the narrator goes into no one's head or, at most, one person's. You don't need to say "Lydia decided not to introduce herself" to show that she decided not to introduce herself.

SomelBalance · Mar 7, 2006

I'm rereading Lonesome Dove right now and Mcmurty does quite a bit of head hopping. He usually doesn't dive very deep though, and never headhops between main characters, but he will duck into a minor character for a paragraph or two.

just wanted to contribute

Euan H. · Mar 7, 2006

blacbird said:
1st-person carries with it some other potential problems to be avoided, notably head-entrenchment

Just curious: What's this? Mentioning 'I' in every sentence?

blacbird · Mar 7, 2006

Euan H. said:
Just curious: What's this? Mentioning 'I' in every sentence?

That, and excessive introspection in general. Thinking stuff, instead of doing stuff.

caw.

scarletpeaches · Mar 8, 2006

I'm with JAR and blacbird on this.

Never, never, never. It's as lazy as deus ex machina.

Ken Schneider · Mar 8, 2006

Agree with CAW! and Jim. Never.

You have to have a POV character in every scene. If your Protag is not in the scene then I consider the scene a sub-plot. Someone else must carry the scene. Then, one person in that scene would have POV.

Take for example when a group, or as in Tolkiens books trilogy, the fellowship, is split up. One person in each of those groups takes the lead roll. We know that Frodo in the second and third was the main character, the focus of the book. Though, during scene shifts and chapters if that main character is not present, then someone else must fill the roll.

Then you could use their thoughts, which is POV, (point of view), to show the world through their eyes.

Jane watched Bob walk away.
Bob turned around to see the angry look on Jane's face.

Do you think this is pov change?

blacbird · Mar 8, 2006

Ken Schneider said:
Jane watched Bob walk away.
Bob turned around to see the angry look on Jane's face.

Do you think this is pov change?

Yes. Jane watched. Bob saw (and interpreted).

caw.

scarletpeaches · Mar 8, 2006

Ken Schneider said:
Agree with CAW! and Jim. Never.

You have to have a POV character in every scene. If your Protag is not in the scene then I consider the scene a sub-plot. Someone else must carry the scene. Then, one person in that scene would have POV.

Take for example when a group, or as in Tolkiens books trilogy, the fellowship, is split up. One person in each of those groups takes the lead roll. We know that Frodo in the second and third was the main character, the focus of the book. Though, during scene shifts and chapters if that main character is not present, then someone else must fill the roll.

Then you could use their thoughts, which is POV, (point of view), to show the world through their eyes.

Jane watched Bob walk away.
Bob turned around to see the angry look on Jane's face.

Do you think this is pov change?

The operative words here. You MUST show a scene or chapter break to jump heads.

blacbird · Mar 8, 2006

It's worth reminding here, POV stands for point-of-view. It's not necessarily just a case of relating thought. It's often, perhaps usually, a case of whose eyes are we seeing through. Moving from one set of eyes to another to another to another, in rapid succession, is like watching a movie where the camera cuts are way too quick.

caw.

banjo · Mar 8, 2006

Jamesaritchie said:
I don;t think it is ever skillfully done. It's just that sometimes the rest of the scene is powerful enough to overcome the poor choice of head-hopping.

I think this is one area where readers might benefit from watching more movies. In a movie, the omniscient narrator knows the detective is there, and at the end of the scene he shows us the detective. But he doesn't have to do into the detective's head. He doesn't have to make the detective the POV character for the scene to work extremely well.

An omniscient narrator knows everything, and can show everything, but showing does not mean jumping out of one head and into another. Fine, show me the detective standing there, if you must. There are better ways of writing it, but fine, go ahead and show me. This can work well, under the right circumstances. But you don't have to go inside his head. You don't have to tell me what he;s thinking and feeling, you just have to let me see him standing there, let me watch what he does.

Writers head-hop because they don't know how not to head-hop. They thing they have to show what every character in a scene is feeling and thinking, and it just isn't so. When was the last time you were in a crowd and knew what anyone else was thinking and feeling?

Head-hopping is always lazy writing. Which doen't mean you can't get away with it, but getting away with it is exactly what you're doing.

Actually I see point of view as positioning of the camera, as if it were a film. This may or may not necessitate going inside someones head.

What I envisioned in my example is: The camera might be fixed on the safe before the thief arrives. It may move to follow the thief into the room and to the safe. It watches over his shoulder throughout the safe cracking and the theft of its contents.

When the thief leaves the camera remains fixxed on the now open and empty safe. After a time the camera slowly zooms out to a position in the false ceiling, such that now a video camera and the hands holding it are visible. You may or may not see more of the detective, but you hear a voice speaking slightly above a whisper. "He's leaving the building, and he has the goods."

Isn't that proper?

Point of View Lapses... When is it okay?

knightrunnermatt

waylander

Who's going for a beer?

Jamesaritchie

Garpy

keyboard monkey

blacbird

Jamesaritchie

Stew21

blacbird

banjo

Bufty

Where have the last ten years gone?

Prosthetic Foreheads

blacbird

Jamesaritchie

KAP

Hangin' with the gargies

blacbird

reph

Fig of authority

SomelBalance

General Armpit

Euan H.

Unspeakable

blacbird

scarletpeaches

Ken Schneider

Absolute sagebrush

blacbird

scarletpeaches

blacbird

banjo