Tricky POV switch

Can you make it obvious to the reader without the character realising? Certain things that he notices that he doesn't add together but makes it easy for the reader to tell?
Its hard to say without knowing the scene but something like an unexplained sound or object being there that shouldn't be that the reader automatically relates to the spying character but your MC doesn't link it until later.
Like her coat hanging in the room or her pen forgotten on the table.....

Might you be able to do this scene from the POV of the person hiding? It will relay what your characters say and what the person hiding must do to keep quiet and hidden. Rowling did this in Harry Potter, when Harry wore the invisibility cloak. Some antagonist always knew something was there, because they stared directly at Harry hidden. I think this method would add great drama that can lead to conflict later.

The character can smell cologne/perfume / cigarette / pot smoke. They could hear a noise, or the eyes of someone else could give away that someone is there. In the character’s mind he might guess. He could see the car of the other person.

How strict has your POV been up until this point? You mentioned it was a flashback. Would it be possible to do an omnipresent narrator for this one scene?

ETA: Is it in 1st person or 3rd? That won't work for 1st. Haha, I should've asked that first.

Also, I was going to be the black sheep here and say that because it's a flashback...I'd toy with the idea of doing head hopping here. Sometimes the rules can be broken as long as they have very good reasons. If this technique enhances your scene, then use it. If it distracts from your scene, don't use it.

Or (and you mention it's a scene but I'm not sure if that means a chapter, too) if it's a complete chapter in itself- you could switch POV's (or otherwise make it known the listener is there) in the last sentence of the chapter, after the main character has left.

Toto Too said:

Or would a quick sentence or two such as "Sarah was hiding behind the door, listening to the whole thing" be forgiven by readers?

Click to expand...

Well, I'd find it pretty jarring.

Find a way to make this information clear later, or at least to imply it. Or do without it? Because it sounds like it's solely for the reader's benefit, which means, just possibly, that it may not actually be necessary.

Also, since this a flashback, it's entirely derived from the POV character's memories. That's probably the worst place you could choose to violate POV.

Honestly? I'm sure you can brainstorm ways to work this information in some other way. Don't give in to the lazy fix. That rarely works out well.

ETA: Pretend you're writing in first-person POV, where there's no way you could do what you're considering. How would you handle it in that case?

I completely agree with BethS, I would find it jarring too. That one-off head hopping, POV switch sounds like the lazy/easy way out, and that rarely turns out well. Of course, without knowing the scene or the information it is hard to offer solution, but I believe it can either be done another smoother way or is the information actually needed. Sometimes as writer we need to resist the urge to explain, but I can't say if it is one of those occasions.

Surely it's effectiveness will be dependent on the content and manner of execution, but it must be doable. Risky maybe, but doable, surely.

Flashback chapter in POV of relative character - ends with character departing room or wherever she is.

**

Sarah ........A couple of sentences in Sarah's POV to let us know she was there and is hurt, offended, emotional about what she has just witnessed from wherever she is.

End of Chapter

There would have to be an obvious connection to show the setting was the same and that the time frame had continued. JAS - A tosses photographs or crayons on the floor and B emerges and picks up the broken frames or stops a crayon rolling or similar. Maybe turns of the radio- interrupts a tune - anything to immediately register that she's there. Might wait for the sound of footsteps to diminish.

Sage said:

I’m with Bufty. Why can’t your next scene from the POV of the other character address what they overheard?

Since it’s a flashback, the second character may *already* have reacted to what they overheard.

Click to expand...

I've done some overlapping scenes before. One character is doing a thing. A different character is then the focus of the next chapter that is presented to overlap and/or connect with the end of the previous chapter. It's not an impossible thing, it just needs to be put in the right order to emphasize the reveal of the information/character arcs.

Toto Too said:

@Bufty It is self-contained in a chapter. It's kind of amazing in a way that something like this is such a problem. I know third person limited isn't the only POV we can use as authors, but using it really robs us of very simple things like "her friends giggled behind her back, hoping she wouldn't notice" or "she ducked into an alley, but that didn't escape the leering eyes of her stalker, who remained on her trail." There's usually an artful way to do these things, I guess, but it seems like it shouldn't be such a hang-up just because you choose an intimate POV.




@BethS and Elle That's a good point. Blimey! I didn't explain in depth - basically the main character is saying things that are hurtful to the person overhearing, and this goes a long way toward explaining the difficult relationship between the characters leading up to the flashback. This isn't the only thing that explains it, so I could pull it out. It just would have had an emotional impact on the story at that moment. If this was TV or a movie, it would make a nice scene. But I guess those media use a more omniscient POV by default.

Appreciate everyone's help!

Click to expand...

Again just going by what you mention, which is not the whole story but my question would be: why does the reader need to know the reason for their strained relationship and not the main character? Why does the reader need to know before the flashback? Why does the reader need to know before the MC?

A lot of films use omniscient POV but there are some that have a 1st POV, but they usually stick to it and the reader knows only what the MC knows. But talking about novels I personally cannot think of one novel I've read that has been in a close POV, just switch for one scene just to give some kind of info to the reader and then slip back into close again. I'm just giving my personal opinion and at the end of the day it is your story but for me it feels the easy way out.

Posted by Elle Again just going by what you mention, which is not the whole story but my question would be: why does the reader need to know the reason for their strained relationship and not the main character? Why does the reader need to know before the flashback? Why does the reader need to know before the MC?

A lot of films use omniscient POV but there are some that have a 1st POV, but they usually stick to it and the reader knows only what the MC knows. But talking about novels I personally cannot think of one novel I've read that has been in a close POV, just switch for one scene just to give some kind of info to the reader and then slip back into close again. I'm just giving my personal opinion and at the end of the day it is your story but for me it feels the easy way out.

Click to expand...

I've been assuming, maybe wrongly, the OP's 'other' character' has a POV throughout the story, other than just for this wee snippet of information. If it's only for the snippet, yes, I would find another method.

But if the other character has a continuing POV - perfectly possible to switch.

Enlightened said:

Might you be able to do this scene from the POV of the person hiding? It will relay what your characters say and what the person hiding must do to keep quiet and hidden. Rowling did this in Harry Potter, when Harry wore the invisibility cloak. Some antagonist always knew something was there, because they stared directly at Harry hidden. I think this method would add great drama that can lead to conflict later.

Click to expand...

Good suggestion. It's what I do. The first part has three POVs. Two of them are major. The third is there to see what they do not see or hear. I split the POV into numbered sections to keep from head hopping.

Elle. said:

why does the reader need to know the reason for their strained relationship and not the main character? Why does the reader need to know before the flashback? Why does the reader need to know before the MC?

A lot of films use omniscient POV but there are some that have a 1st POV, but they usually stick to it and the reader knows only what the MC knows. But talking about novels I personally cannot think of one novel I've read that has been in a close POV, just switch for one scene just to give some kind of info to the reader and then slip back into close again. I'm just giving my personal opinion and at the end of the day it is your story but for me it feels the easy way out.

Click to expand...

My reaction too. It can be realllllly tempting to drift into a different POV just to explain something to the reader. Resist the temptation if that's your reason for it. It feels convenient, but can really damage the verisimilitude of the story, even if a reader doesn't recognize the reason.

caw

Sometimes, humans can sense there's a person or something moving behind them. Also, I've read some novels, where a character sensed being followed or watched by someone or something. So, perhaps you could write the same thing, without having to change your novel's POV.

If you're interested in a scientific explanation:

http://theconversation.com/a-sixth-sense-how-we-can-tell-that-eyes-are-watching-us-65661

...Some studies have found that up to 94% of people report that they have experienced the feeling of eyes upon them and turned around to find out they were indeed being watched.

Click to expand...

You could write it from the POV of the character who doesn't know what's going on by showing that she doesn't know what's going on. By making her ask questions, perhaps, and provide her own narrative of events; but by having given enough information beforehand so that your reader can fill in the blanks, and know more than your POV character.

Elle. said:

A lot of films use omniscient POV but there are some that have a 1st POV, but they usually stick to it and the reader knows only what the MC knows.

Click to expand...

I can think of only two films that have 1st person POV. Some have what might be better described as close 3rd, but the nature of the format is typically omni. (1st requires the camera to take the place of the main character. Hardcore Henry did that, but is really the only feature length to have taken that approach in decades.)

But talking about novels I personally cannot think of one novel I've read that has been in a close POV, just switch for one scene just to give some kind of info to the reader and then slip back into close again. I'm just giving my personal opinion and at the end of the day it is your story but for me it feels the easy way out.

Click to expand...

I've written several books where certain characters only have a single close 3rd chapter, while the majority of the chapters focus around the main character or secondary characters. But I haven't written one where the *entire* book was the MC and then one chapter with a different character. But it can work to have supporting characters have a chapter or two that focus on them. (The most common and often ignored example of this is chapters from the villain's/antagonist's perspective. That's such a common thing that folks barely notice when it happens. Doing it at the right time with other supporting characters is equally invisible even though it may sound like it would be jarring.)

Aggy B. said:

I can think of only two films that have 1st person POV. Some have what might be better described as close 3rd, but the nature of the format is typically omni. (1st requires the camera to take the place of the main character. Hardcore Henry did that, but is really the only feature length to have taken that approach in decades.)

Click to expand...

You can call it 1st of 3rd POV basically I am talking about films which are seen and experienced through the MC and the audience is only aware what the MC knows. Darren Aronofsky uses it in Black Swan, where Natalie Portman is in every scene of the film and the audience only knows and sees what she does. I think he's done it as well with Mother! I've never seen Hardcore Henry so I can't comment. Personally don't think that the camera replacing the character is the main component for a 1st. Hitchcock uses this trick in Notorious for some of Ingrid Bergman's scenes but the narration is an omniscient one as there are several scenes where her character doesn't appear.

I've written several books where certain characters only have a single close 3rd chapter, while the majority of the chapters focus around the main character or secondary characters. But I haven't written one where the *entire* book was the MC and then one chapter with a different character. But it can work to have supporting characters have a chapter or two that focus on them. (The most common and often ignored example of this is chapters from the villain's/antagonist's perspective. That's such a common thing that folks barely notice when it happens. Doing it at the right time with other supporting characters is equally invisible even though it may sound like it would be jarring.)

Click to expand...

As I told the OP, it's their book and they can do what they want. They just asked for advice and I gave my opinion which is head-hopping out of convenience is not an approach that I believe in. I have no issues with single, dual, multiple POVs or omniscient, basically switches that have a consistency.

Elle. said:

You can call it 1st of 3rd POV basically I am talking about films which are seen and experienced through the MC and the audience is only aware what the MC knows. Darren Aronofsky uses it in Black Swan, where Natalie Portman is in every scene of the film and the audience only knows and sees what she does. I think he's done it as well with Mother! I've never seen Hardcore Henry so I can't comment. Personally don't think that the camera replacing the character is the main component for a 1st. Hitchcock uses this trick in Notorious for some of Ingrid Bergman's scenes but the narration is an omniscient one as there are several scenes where her character doesn't appear.

Click to expand...

No. That's "close 3rd" or "limited 3rd". 1st person requires that the POV be from the narrator's perspective - they do not see themselves from the outside. All films are 3rd person (usually omni - even those that take small dips into a character's perspective usually done with handheld shots for someone following a character, or peeking through a window) with very few exceptions. (Hardcore Henry is the only one I can think of in recent decades where the entire movie is shot from the main character's PoV. Think "first person shooter" video game.)

Films like Black Swan or Memento are close 3rd/limited 3rd. (Memento also has some voiceover from the MC but the film is not, for the most part shown through his eyes, but instead from beside him.)

Head-hopping is a different beast than switching between PoV characters between scenes. And I brought up the issue of a single chapter because it is done with villains fairly regularly without folks complaining, so it's more a question of doing it well than it being more or less common with other characters. But I know folks don't always realize that the instinct to do a certain thing is because they *have* seen that thing done before, they just don't recognize it.

I think you can make an obvious break, shift to the other character's perspective, and put it in italics. Half a page at most, I think, is that enough?

So you are upfront about the jarringness. And very clear about the head hopping.

It's actually cool to write that way. Well, at least for me. You start off with something that isn't the main character. Then when the main character appears in the insert, things become more obvious. So there is a slow reveal. And it's a chance to show a deeper view into that character.

You can put it in the middle of the scene. I always put mine at the end.