Third person limited?

There are SO many; where to start?

But to answer our question, if I'm writing a story from only ONE character's POV, it's probably easier to write 1st person. It'd be more intimate for me. However, if I have multiple POV characters, I would do 3rd limited (switching). It's not omniscient -- there's no omniscient narrator -- but actually 3rd limited, but I switch POV characters either by scenes or by chapters. You might want to try that if you plan on having multiple POVs.

3rd person limited -- the story is told from one character POV, the reader knows only the thoughts and feelings of the MC, and the "action" is where the MC is, right?

If that's what I think it is, then that's how I prefer to write. I don't have any advice, though, because I'm not sure I'm good....

Most of the Young Adult books seem to be written this way. Try the Harry Potter series.

My just-completed and polished novel is in 3rd-person limited, and I think it works well. I'm getting ready to pitch the novel to agents. A novella I recently wrote - which will soon be coming out with an e-publisher - is also in 3rd-person limited. IMO, that POV is great as long as you keep it tight and be careful to avoid slips into the omniscient.

Here's something that helped me with my latest novel: after I wrote the first draft, as part of my editing process I rewrote the whole thing in first person (hey, I'm lucky - I'm a fast typist! ). Then later on in my editing process, I switched it back to 3rd-limited. This technique worked great to eliminate POV oddities.

I have just been reading Sherri Szeman's article "Who's Afraid of Point of View" in The Complete Handbook of Novel Writing, and it's very enlightning on POV versus perspective and focus. If I understand her (and you!) correctly, you are writing in a 3rd person limited point of view, but from different perspectives.

To quote her:
"POV is how the book is written, not who or what it is about. When then author describes different characters or settings but does not change how he is writing about them, then he is changing focus but maintaining the same point of view. (...) When the author gives us different versions of the same events, perhaps all written in first-person POV, for example, then he is giving us different perspectives, but he is not changing point of view."

IThinkICan29 said:

Ok, I hate to ask this....but I just have to...because I may be switching between limited and omniscent....which MAY be my problem.

Is it possible to tell a story in third-person limited while character switching? Or is third-person limited, limited to just ONE character (which isn't what I've been doing)? I actually have two characters. Maybe it's NOT so limited...then huh...grrrr!

Click to expand...

If you are switching between two POV characters, but within each scene/chapter/etc. you are staying with only one character, that's 3rd limited (rotating). Nothing wrong with that. But if you're going in and out of characters' minds at random, that's head-hopping.

Omniscient is different. There is a God-like narrator outside of your characters. The narrator knows everything, but has its own distinct voice.

IThinkICan29 said:

Does anyone know of any books written in this POV? I tried it, failed at it (because, well, it just seemed like first-person flipped inside out), and now I'm opting for omniscent, yet again. So much for trying something new. Have any of you tried it and found it to be a comfortable way of writing? If so, please toss in some pointers for a strugglin' not-so-young-not-so-old-lady...pweeeeze? Thanks

Click to expand...

Wow, just about 91% of all novels out there are written in third person limited. If you pick up a published novel that isn't first person, odds are about twenty to one that it's written in third person limited.

In a real sense, third person limited is first person flipped inside out. This is why it's considered the best form for a new writer. Third person limited is the easiest form for a new writer to do well, and by a wide margin. If you think third person limited is tough to write well, omniscient makes it look like child's play. Even many experienced writers have trouble with omniscient.

Omniscient does not mean you can head hop, it merely means the narrator is standing at a greater distance from the characters and the story, and so can see more. But head-hopping is head-hopping, no matter what POV you use.

Omniscient is extremely tough to write well, and very tough for a new writer to sell.

Another way of looking at it is that the "limited" in "third person limited" refers to the POV in a single scene, not to the number of POVS in the entire book.

JD

Tony Hillerman uses 3rd-limited most if not all the time, often with two or three alternating character viewpoints, but focused only on what his narrative character can experience and think about, confined to a chapter or scene at a time. He does not usually head-hop.

As James has implied, 3rd omniscient appears deceptively easy, and to do it well is anything but. The traps it offers to the unwary new writer are many and subtle and deep. Probably the worst one I've seen in manuscripts (and some published work as well) is spending inordinate amounts of prose inside numerous characters' minds rather than recording narrative action.

Ick.

caw.

IMHO, 3rd person limited is dead easy, easier even than 1st person. http://zornhau.livejournal.com/66346.html

IThinkICan29 said:

Oh my gravy, I think I may be on the right track after all. Thank you maestro.

Click to expand...

Just another example of why he's the Maestro.

I've finished two novels (one agented) and most of my short stories in third person limited.

There is at least one exception about "head-hopping." In most genre's it's a no-no since most "experts" feel it can easily confuse readers. However, in Romance, head-hopping is relatively common, especially during hot steamy love scenes when the writer will hop back and forth between the two lovers, describing their thoughts/emotions.

Bayou Bill

in Romance, head-hopping is relatively common, especially during hot steamy love scenes when the writer will hop back and forth between the two lovers, describing their thoughts/emotions.

Click to expand...

Writing is writing. Headhopping happens in all genres, and, yes, some romance authors do it too. Still not a good technique, and one that a lot of outstanding romance authors refrain from.

And, as an aside, I frequently see the justification that love/sex scenes require headhopping, but I really, really, REALLY don't get why anyone thinks it's particularly useful for a love/sex scene, when headhopping distances a reader, muting the emotion, and one would think that a love/sex scene would be a situation where you really don't want the emotions to be muted.

JD

A little head hopping here and there in a well-written novel doesn't distract me at all. What will confuse me are run-on sentences, lack of proper dialogue tags, and over-show. Some writers think that the reader has no brain and will show to death a perfectly lovely scene.

Some major best sellers take liberty with all the rule breakers for newbies. Some do them well; others ruin their work, but sell anyway because of their name. This is confusing for new authors who are being rejected or harshly critiqued for the very things the big names get away with.

I saw no immediate solution to this little annoyance for me, because I love to read. So I adapted an attitude to absorb what I could then use my own "gut feeling" about head hopping and other rules, without going overboard. And I have to say, that I like my re-write much, much better because of the change.

Patricia said:

A little head hopping here and there in a well-written novel doesn't distract me at all. What will confuse me are run-on sentences, lack of proper dialogue tags, and over-show. Some writers think that the reader has no brain and will show to death a perfectly lovely scene.

Some major best sellers take liberty with all the rule breakers for newbies. Some do them well; others ruin their work, but sell anyway because of their name. This is confusing for new authors who are being rejected or harshly critiqued for the very things the big names get away with.

I saw no immediate solution to this little annoyance for me, because I love to read. So I adapted an attitude to absorb what I could then use my own "gut feeling" about head hopping and other rules, without going overboard. And I have to say, that I like my re-write much, much better because of the change.

Click to expand...

When pro writers break rules, it's usually for the better, and they have solid reasons for doing so. It's fine to break a rule, if you know the rule inside out, and if you break it for a good reason. But breaking it because you don't know how not to break it usually ends with rejection, and rightfully so.

Head-hopping may not bother you, but it bothers most agent and editors, and as a first time noevlist, it pays to avoid head-hopping. Head-hopping is always lazy writing because there's always a better way to write any scene.

Pro writers do not sell because of their names, they sell because teh write things millions of reader want to read.

I don't think writers show because they think readers have no brain, they show because it's generally better writing, and pleases more reader. Shw simply works better than tell in most situations, and too much tell can kill any novel.

There's a place for tell in any novel, but it's pretty darned difficult to use show too much.

IThinkICan29 said:

Ok, I hate to ask this....but I just have to...because I may be switching between limited and omniscent....which MAY be my problem.

Is it possible to tell a story in third-person limited while character switching? Or is third-person limited, limited to just ONE character (which isn't what I've been doing)? I actually have two characters. Maybe it's NOT so limited...then huh...grrrr!

Click to expand...

I believe the "limited" means you're limited to that particular point of view in that particular scene or chapter. You don't switch to any other characters -- for that scene. The reader only sees and hears and feels what the POV character does.

It's perfectly fine to jump into another character's head in the next scene (or sequence or chapter).

A wonderful example of very DEEP POV third person limited is William Goldman's MARATHON MAN or MAGIC. In fact, MAGIC uses the limited POV very effectively to create one whopper of a twist.

I agree that 3rd limited (also called '3rd subjective') is the most common novelistic technique, and this generally means that one must stay in tight POV of a single character for each scene.

HOWEVER, I should note that there are certain ways that convention allows writers to bend the rules of 3rd limited into what is a kind of temporary omniscience. One is in openings (either of chapters, or of the book as a whole), where the scene is set. This is the equivalent of a wide-view shot in film. "For millions of years, the elephant seals had returned to Afton Island to battle and breed, and..." In this kind of scene set-up, the focus moves from an objective narrator and then zooms in, either slowly or rapidly, into the POV of the character--and the POV character may know nothing whasoever of the history of Afton Island or of elephant seals.

The other time one sees 3rd limited violated without any complaints is when there is a brief passage that can't be from any characters point of view. "High on the slopes of K-2, an outcropping had gathered its annual burden of snow, but a freakish warm wind from the valley below had..." or "Deep on the seabed below, the rusted pressure vessel had already begun to leak spewing out a stream of..." A purist may not like such things, but they are widely accepted, especially in thrillers and techno-suspense, that are otherwise strictly 3rd limited.

================
"The third-person-subjective point of view has its uses, but it also has severe limits, so that something is wrong when it becomes the dominant point of view in fiction, as it has been for years in the United States."

John Gardner, "The Art of Fiction," 1983

POV can be tricky; even seasoned writers can slip and editors can miss. I was reading a John Grisham book written entirely in 3rd limited, and was astounded by two POV violations (he head-hopped into another character, mid-paragraph, for no reason at all). They were minor but I was still surprised neither he nor his editor caught them. So be careful out there.

Maestro is right about that--you have to pay attention, and plenty of bestselling authors can't be bothered. (And what editor is going to tell Grisham that his writing sux?)

My own model for 3rd limited is the Roach Motel Rule: you can start wide, from an objective viewpoint, but once you zoom in to the character, You Check In, But You Don't Check Out.

One of the things I see all the time in newbie writers, even very talented ones, is the breaking of POV because they realize that something important can't be perceived by the POV character, or because they have thought of something so clever in another POV that they can't resist it. I find these sorts of brief POV "wobbles" very distracting.

I'm still not sure what the difference between third person limited and 1st person is. I mean, you don't have to have a 1st person POV that delves into the nooks and crannies of what the MC is thinking about at each point - in fact, if I'm not mistaken, this is the mark of bad 1st person POV.

I'm not condoning breaking the rules just to break them. I read the rules broken all the time by pros and new authors--as a rule they are done well. But I've also seen some real boners by the pros that in my way of thinking, was sending mixed signals. I'm reading one now, (out of respect, I won't name), that head hops in mid paragraph, and has done so several times during same scenes--which, of course, was glaring to me only because we have these discussions. With all due respect, to other opinions, her show is overdone.

I may be a new author but I've been an avid reader since age 9 and that's many years of reading. As a reader, I can say that some pros turn out some bad reads.

It (head hopping) may bother some but apparently, some don't mind as much because many books get through with the rules bent.

3rd limited is very close to 1st. Even with 1st, you can rotate the POV characters if you want. So it comes down to narrative distance. With 1st person, you're going for a ride WITH the narrator sitting next to you telling you everything. With 3rd limited, there's a bit more distance and you don't feel like you're tied to the hip with the narrator. Still, you're seeing things and knowing things through one character at a time. Also, in 1st person, the narrative voice is the character's voice, so you get to know about the character through that voice as well, and this narrator can be semi-reliable or unreliable. Some people may argue that you can change narrative voice with 3rd limited, too, depending on the current POV character. I am not sure about that. I belong to the camp of having a separate, impartial, consistent narrator. To me, a 3rd limited narrator must be reliable, while the POV character might not.

Bill, I'm sorry but I have to disagree with you on the headhopping in Romance. THere should be no head hopping in romance and there isnt in good romance. What romance writers do do, however, is write half a scene from one character's POV and then switch at a break in the action to the other character. Each part is really a mini-scene. THe break doesnt come arbitrarily but at a convenient spot where there might be a natural break in the action, for example. And not just Romance writers do this. I've seen it done in lots of so-called "mainstream" novels. If you are reading romance where there is headhopping, then you are reading badly written romance.