P.O.V. issues

darkkazier said:

so how can i get out of that "Cameraman/director mode and write in a real frst person mode? It just seems more natural to descrbe it like a movie, ... but i am having a hard time making the change.

Click to expand...

Do you want to write any of it in 1st person? It sounds to me like you're comfortable in 3rd - in your "cameraman" mode. If that's where you're comfortable, why change it at all? Trust me, you don't want to change something because "numerous people" think it's a good idea. If it makes it harder for you to write, it's probably not a good thing.

darkkazier said:

Also i am having another problem. When i write the scenes play out like a movie bascally, i see everything from that perspective, (as my WIP in the SYW section probably shows) but i have been told by numerous people to switch to first person and stick with that view through the entire scene, so how can i get out of that "Cameraman/director mode and write in a real frst person mode? It just seems more natural to descrbe it like a movie, it could be because i'm young, i don't know, but i am having a hard time making the change. Thanks.

Click to expand...

If I'm thinking of the same comments you are, I don't think people were telling you to use first person so much as to use a more intimate version of 3rd. Third person comes in lots of different shades (which I am definitely not qualified to explain - maybe someone else can do a better job), which are basically how "tightly" you are inside the POV character's head. Try thinking of a camera on your POV character's shoulder. Don't describe things if the character has his/her back turned (unless he's hearing them) and so on. You can get tightly inside a character's thoughts without using first person, so don't let anyone try to tell you to switch your writing to first person.

I hope someone else can come along and explain better what I'm trying to say.

KiwiChick

DK, Nobody suggested you use first person.

You, in Third Person Limited, sit on Arthur's shoulder and say what happens as Arthur sees it happen. Arthur is not telling the reader what is happening or what he is thinking - YOU are, as the narrator, but you are restricted to what Arthur himself is able to see, hear, feel, etc., through his senses. Just say what he sees or hears etc, preferably by simply stating whatever it is he sees or hears without always saying 'he felt' or 'he saw' etc. Then state his reaction to that.

You can visualise everything as playing out on a screen if you wish - I do - but you can't for instance, say 'somebody crept up closely behind Arthur'. You have to find a way of getting the information across from Arthur's Point-of View. He may hear a sound, and turn around, but he hasn't got eyes in the back of his head so you can't relate what is behind him except to the extent that he is aware of it or alerted through one or more of his senses. In the following I've used his hearing and then his sight.

This is simple and far from perfect, but ...

A soft footfall sounded behind him. Arthur spun round, sword already half-way out of its scabbard. A dark shape stood in the doorway. Arthur advanced, sword extended.

The figure spoke. "I'm a friend. And unarmed."

"Then step into the light."

Any help?

darkkazier said:

I have an issue. I have been reading several books and all seem to give varying advice on P.O.V. Some say to build tenson go from third and gradually move into first while others say stay in first all the time. So, in 1st person P.O.V. how would i say "Mary" hugged the narrator," joe"? would just say, "She hugged me."? That just doesnt sound, i dont know, it just doesnt sound like something an author would write seriously, doesnt it need ot be more descriptive, at least a bit, or is that simplistic line good enough in some instances.

Also i am having another problem. When i write the scenes play out like a movie bascally, i see everything from that perspective, (as my WIP in the SYW section probably shows) but i have been told by numerous people to switch to first person and stick with that view through the entire scene, so how can i get out of that "Cameraman/director mode and write in a real frst person mode? It just seems more natural to descrbe it like a movie, it could be because i'm young, i don't know, but i am having a hard time making the change. Thanks.

Click to expand...

Good explanation and example, Bufty.

darkkazier, what I think was really meant by this:

Some say to build tenson go from third and gradually move into first

Click to expand...

...is the idea of being a bit distant at the beginning of a scene (3rd person omniscient), then moving in until you are looking entirely through your character's senses (3rd person limited). To use your movie analogy; you start with a long shot (wide open spaces, mountains on the horizon, sunlight slanting across the scrubby landscape) and then start to zoom in (dust rising into the air from a canyon, a man on a horse appears) until you are finally right there with the character (he scratches days of stubble on his chin, it feels as rough and dry as his throat) and away you go with the rest of the scene from his tight POV.

Never, ever, ever shift from third POV to first during the course of your book.

Stick with one. Pick one, and stick to it.

You write sf/f, so go find three (or more) of your favorite books in your genre, books that were published within the last three to five years (and NOT JK Rowling, which isn't anything against her, but just that she breaks some rules that you'd be better off not breaking; and if you want a suggestion of really excellent writing in your genre, check out pretty much anything by Lois Mcmaster Bujold). Read the first scene of each book and see if you can identify the POV they're told from. Is it limited (only what the POV character can experience directly) or omniscient (told by someone outside the characters, someone who knows everything about everyone in the book, across all time)? See if there's a pattern across your favorite books. For instance, first person is fairly common in mystery and fairly uncommon in romance (other than chick lit), so, depending on genre, you may find that all your favorite books are told in first person. Or, what's more likely in sf/f, you may find that they're all third person, limited POV, with a few in omniscient. That pattern, if there is one, is a big clue to what you will like best in your own writing.

The books you read and admire are probably the ones that have the structure (which includes choice of POV) you will want to use as a writer yourself.

If you figure out which POV is the one you will be using, then turn to your favorite books again, and analyze how the author gets inside the head, heart and soul of the POV character (or narrator if it's omniscient), describing the experience so that the reader can also get inside the head, heart and soul of the POV character. You'll probably want to think of the process as more like being the actor inhabiting one of the characters (third limited) or an off-screen actor who's telling the story (omniscient), rather than the director controlling the action.

JD

badducky said:

Never, ever, ever shift from third POV to first during the course of your book.

Stick with one. Pick one, and stick to it.

Click to expand...

Nonsense. A lot of really good writers have done this very successfully. The main point, however, is to know what you're doing, to be very conscious of it, and why you're doing it, and what effects/potentional for confusion it may have. Don't do it just to be cool and different. Do it for a reason inherent to the story, without which the story doesn't work as well as it should. If you don't have to do it, don't. The major rule, often violated unconsciously by less experienced writers, is this: Don't be random.

caw.

Roger Zelazny shifted from third-person to first-person several times throughout his Chronicles of Amber books, and in that fine masterpiece of his, Lord of Light. Each time he did it, though, he did the literary equivalent of giving a good run up to it, so you weren't surprised and it felt comfortable. Some of the times, things were told in the forms of stories (and then, the next chapter would be first person because someone was telling a story). That was the best, I thought.

If you do it accidentally, or poorly (halfway through the scene, "he" becomes "I") then you're going to have readers tossing your book across the room, which is a serious problem if they're hardcover and have a lot of pages.

Writers have used that successfully?

If "they" exist, who are they and what do they write?

We are talking about starting a book in "He said, she said" and moving into "I said, she said" right?

Zelazny did, like I said, but that's not quite the same thing...and I can't think of anyone else who's done it.

Er. Actually, I can. Gene Wolfe. You find out, at the end of the Book of the Long Sun, that it's actually being written by someone who then talks in the first person. It slips from the one to the other. I think he does the same thing in his Wizard-Knight duology.

Did Stephen King do it in "From A Buick 8?" I can't remember that, either.

Ummm....hm. Can't think of anyone else immediately.

JanDarby said:

NOT JK Rowling, which isn't anything against her, but just that she breaks some rules that you'd be better off not breaking
JD

Click to expand...

Sorry if this is going off on a tangent, but do you have any samples of rules that she breaks? I'd really be interested to see examples of it, I read most of the books a few years ago and I guess I didn't pick up on those things. (not challenging you on it at all, genuinely interested).

badducky said:

Writers have used that successfully?

If "they" exist, who are they and what do they write?

We are talking about starting a book in "He said, she said" and moving into "I said, she said" right?

Click to expand...

Zelazny, as mentioned. John Irving, also. I'm sure others know of more.

caw.

badducky said:

Never, ever, ever shift from third POV to first during the course of your book.

Stick with one. Pick one, and stick to it.

Click to expand...

I'll have to disagree with this, too. I've done it myself. My characters are seperated but involved in a linked story. When they meet, two take turns telling another the story of what happened to them. As a person would in reality, they do so in first person.

DK,

Among other good replies, I think you had a great reply back there from Chunky. That's one way of getting your opening setting across and then quickly settling yourself - and the reader - comfortably down on your chosen character's shoulder.

What you say below is a wee bit of a muddle, but you're getting closer. Once you have settled on your chosen POV character's shoulder in Third Person - you stay there as long as you can and preferably right through to the End. It's not a question of 'even though it is third person'. You always relate things through your chosen POV character's viewpoint.

One proviso to the above: You can change to another character's viewpoint BUT, unless you know what you are doing, have good reason to do so and know HOW to do it, you run the serious risk of head-hopping and/or losing the reader by jarring him out of his comfortable reading position in the existing viewpoint character.

DK, like others, I've been where you are now and someone helped me. If you feel I could help you with getting a firmer handle on this and getting, say the opening paragraphs or chapter up and running, don't hesitate to PM me. A few weeks of e-mails and trial and error and maybe you'll feel happier with this particular aspect. Feel free, anyway.

darkkazier said:

thanks alot everyone who responded! i see my problem now. I was swtchng between multiple POvs and between multiple characters , which is wrong, now i understand what i need to do. Its not first person is what i should use, but i need to relate things from the characters POV even if it is third person to make more intimate scenes with the reader right? that's how i am interpeting everything said so far. I just need to go work on my writing some more.

Click to expand...

badducky said:

Writers have used that successfully?

If "they" exist, who are they and what do they write?

We are talking about starting a book in "He said, she said" and moving into "I said, she said" right?

Click to expand...

Trader by Charles de Lint switches between the POVs of several characters. One guy gets all his sections in first person, the others use third.

I tried that in my WIP too until a friend persuaded me not to. She was right. My MC isn't open enough with himself to be a good first person narrator, but he does okay in third where I can say what he's feeling rather than what he'll admit that he's feeling - if that makes any sense. So I switch between three characters on a scene by scene basis, but they're all in third person.

Another book that does the same as Trader - I think - is Perdido Street Station by China Mieville.

JanDarby said:

You write sf/f, so go find three (or more) of your favorite books in your genre, books that were published within the last three to five years (and NOT JK Rowling, which isn't anything against her, but just that she breaks some rules that you'd be better off not breaking; and if you want a suggestion of really excellent writing in your genre, check out pretty much anything by Lois Mcmaster Bujold).

Click to expand...

I agree about Bujold, but as far as I'm aware she always writes in strictly limited third (though she does switch characters at defined breaks). Which is great if you want to learn to do that, but if you want to learn something else you'll have to read other authors.

I think it's revealing to look at authors' mistakes. One of Bujold's worse ones (not bad in the grand scheme of things, but it's one of her first books) is Falling Free, where there are a lot of POV switches and it's sometimes hard to tell whose POV you're in. A Civil Campaign uses the same kind of structure but does it better.

For a real omniscient POV (where the author can tell you what any character is thinking or feeling at any given moment) I rather like Mary Doria Russell's The Sparrow. It's a bit uncomfortable when you're used to reading in a different way but for what it is, it works.

Whatever J.K. Rowling's defects, the opening of Goblet of Fire isn't a bad example of starting omniscient and moving into limited third, which I think is what darkkazier was talking about in the first place.

I hope all that helps.

Selcaby said:

Another book that does the same as Trader - I think - is Perdido Street Station by China Mieville.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I just finished Perdido, and the POV stuff was expertly handled. Too bad he had to muck it up in other areas. (I loved the book until the big climax at the crime boss's house- and hell, I even loved the very ending. But that climax left such a sour taste in my mouth.)

I can't remember how King worked it in From a Buick 8, but I know he switched POVs in Christine- it starts in first, moves to third, and then ends back in first. It's an interesting way to work, and while the novel itself isn't one of his best, I don't think the POV stuff is what makes it clunky.

The basic rule, I think, is if you feel like you have to do something in your story to tell it properly, you should do it. You might turn a few readers off, but most of us are willing to go along with whatever gets thrown at us, provided the author doesn't show any signs of weakness or confusion. If you can't find another way, don't half-*** it; do what you have to get what you need on the page.

As a caveat, though, don't just start switching around POVs for the hell of it. Like anything else in writing, if its not essential, it doesn't belong.

badducky said:

We are talking about starting a book in "He said, she said" and moving into "I said, she said" right?

Click to expand...

Selcaby said:

Trader by Charles de Lint switches between the POVs of several characters. One guy gets all his sections in first person, the others use third.

Click to expand...

I'm sure he'll correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you guys are misinterpreting what badducky meant. I've read books that narrate some sections in first and some in third (although I tend to stop reading books like that, it's just a personal preference).

To me, his advice warned writers against doing this:

Don backed off the porch and stepped down the creaky steps. He followed the stone path around to the side of the house. A white plank fence blocked off any view of the backyard from the front and the stone path went straight under it. He felt along the smooth wood for some sort of gate, a latch or lever. His fingers finally caught just below a knot.

I felt a slender thread of metal and pushed upward. Something clicked and the wall of slats moved back a few inches. I pushed and the hidden gate opened further. I slipped through, leaving it open just in case I had to make a speedy exit.

Click to expand...

Pick one POV per scene and stick with it.

do you have any samples of rules that [Rowling] breaks?

Click to expand...

I don't have any major problems with her writing personally, but my recollection of the beginning of the first book was that it was pretty mundane, with the story picking up speed later, and I know a number of authors have more serious issues with her craft. With POV, my recollection is that she wavers a bit between omniscient and third limited, so she wouldn't be a good example of either. For someone studying POV, you'd want to look at someone who's clearly and proficiently in one camp or the other (limited or omniscient).

Beyond that, it's more a general observation that her strength is more in her imagination and storytelling (big picture, plot, etc.) rather than in the craft of writing itself, and after the first book she was able to count on readers following her, even if she wandered a bit in the beginning (which, as I understand, without having read it, happened in the last book released). It's sort of like how I'd recommend NOT studying Nora Roberts for writing craft issues in the romance genre, but I would recommend studying her for storytelling elements that obviously appeal to a huge number of readers, enough that they overlook the writing craft issues.

Sorry I don't have more specific examples for you. I really do admire Rowling a lot, just wouldn't recommend studying her for issues of writing craft, like POV, but would recommend studying her for other storytelling aspects.

JD

Chaostitan is right. That is what I meant.

Even more so, when it comes to the books themselves, and the scene-by-scene construction, doing such a thing as being inside one characters head all of a sudden halfway through the book with no logical order behind it is jarring at best, and terrible at worst.

Tess Gerritsen is another who has done the 1st/3rd switch. In The Surgeon I believe it was, she wrote the majority of the book in 3rd person limited from her protag's pov, but a few times she appended a chapter with a 1st person section from her villian's pov. These were set off in a different typeface as well.

It was well executed and gave the reader a glimpse into the mind of the lunatic the protag was facing, akin to a moviegoer knowing the killer is behind the door, but the character on screen does not. And so the audience/reader is wound up even tighter with anticipation for what is to come than the protag themselves.

As others have put so well above, know what you're doing and why before committing to it.

JanDarby said:

I don't have any major problems with her writing personally, but my recollection of the beginning of the first book was that it was pretty mundane, with the story picking up speed later, and I know a number of authors have more serious issues with her craft. With POV, my recollection is that she wavers a bit between omniscient and third limited, so she wouldn't be a good example of either. For someone studying POV, you'd want to look at someone who's clearly and proficiently in one camp or the other (limited or omniscient).

Click to expand...

I watched a show which had a number of authors on it picking apart Tolkien's Lord of the Rings. They pointed out all the things he did wrong (you go most of The Two Towers without seeing Frodo or Sam, then go backward in time to follow them -- you don't see Sauron, not even once, and he' the main bad guy). In the end, they concluded that LotR was completely unpublishable by today's standards, if only it hadn't been making eleven trillion dollars a year.

....I'm not jabbing at you or anything, Jan, just commenting. I've seen shows that poke at J.K. Rowling too, but since that was recently published, what I mostly get out of that is not, "This is unpublishable," but rather "no matter how you write your story, if it's good, it'll sell, if people read it, then it's okay."

Write your story in iambic pentameter, if you can be 100% certain that it will work and it will be readable. Otherwise, the rules of writing are sort of a set of "Thou Probably Shouldst Not" instead of "Thou Art Not." It's like swimming. You really probably shouldn't swim after eating...but I've done it many times, without a single death on my part. Doesn't mean it's a good idea.

So, use it away...but be aware of what your readers say about it when you're editing, and be aware from the start that this is one of your darlings that are first-up for the axe if there's a hint of confusion. No need to puzzle a reader who may already be trying to figure out the world you're writing about by giving them abrupt style-changes to deal with too.