Changing POV and main character half way through the book?

Not much information to go on here, but it's your book and ultimately your choice.

Not sure what 'his friends follow him on a journey' means. Not sure what POV you were using - either third person limited or first person from the main character's perspective I assume.What was his original objective or what was he trying to overcome? Did he achieve the objective(s)? What was the point of the journey?

Why switch perspectives at all? Even though he changes he still has objectives - no?

The fact he becomes the antagonist or 'changes his mindset' doesn't automatically mean he is no longer the main character or the POV has to shift.

As always, it's all in the execution.


Good luck.

Original posted byBajungadustin: I am struggling with how to handle a major transitional period in my book.

Basically.
Main character is the focus of the book and his friends follow him on a journey.

Main character get corrupted by a lust for power half way through the book and becomes the antagonist.

His friends then have to try and save him /stop him / kill him / whatever.

what is the best way to handle this?

some thoughts I have had are...

1. Switch POV perspectives to the "best friend" who has been in the book the whole time.
2. Divide the book into a "part 1 part 2" so the switched perspective doesn't seem abrupt.
3. Make the book longer and have the transition be the turning point-cliffhanger-ending and then start a second book with the new perspective.
4. Keep following the main character regardless of his new evil mindset.

I know there are not really any rules for this kind of thing but im just looking for thoughts on what others think of this and maybe it will lead me to feel better about the option i am leaning toward which is option 1.

any input would be great thanks.

Click to expand...

I would make the plot about his transition. he's still the protagonist, he's still driving the story, just his protagonist journey is from heroic to villainess, and his friends would become antagonists.

Run with it and see how it plays out.

Yes, you would need to. But if you're not comfortable with it, then perhaps leave it for another day.

I have a solution for you that could work.

What if you write part 1 from the guy-who turns-bad's POV, but sprinkle some of the best friend's POV in there, so the reader gets used to him. Then after the guy turns bad, you write from the best friend's POV, but sprinkle some of the guy-who-turned's POV in there, so the reader's don't loose contact with him completely.

Just an idea. Good luck.

To me, I like option #2. I think it could work.

I think the you can combine 1 and 4. try to continue with the POV of the MC but when he turn to "The dark side" add the POV of the best friend.

not an easy task.

Harlequin said:

I would make the plot about his transition. he's still the protagonist, he's still driving the story, just his protagonist journey is from heroic to villainess, and his friends would become antagonists.

Click to expand...

I think this is the best description of what's going on in your story. I think it's important to remove the good/evil definitions from your protagonist/antagonist.

As a reader, it can be difficult to shift gears. Some people will root for your original protagonist the entire way, no matter how evil you think he's being.

Is there a clear antagonist before you make transition? What happens to them?

Perhaps the transition could be made easier by not committing either side (good or evil) to their expected/projected alignments in the first 'phase' of the story? Characterise their goodness or evilness purely by their actions and allow the readers to slot them into place. Allow it to be somewhat obscure without implying that the reader is wrong or right. Then it's more of a flip on the readers as opposed to the characters when they come to realise the protagonist is actually more villainous than heroic.

A little combination of 2 and 4 I think should work. Allow the readers to root for the character that you know will be the antagonist. If you make it a part 1 and part 2 within the book, it implies to the reader beforehand that there is a major change of events - some readers will begin to realise what happens. That stops it being so sudden or unexpected. It doesn't hinder the story in my opinion; if I was reading the book I would probably read it quicker and with more intensity.

The readers will begin to imagine what the other characters, such as the best friend, are thinking. If you make sure you characterise them well and allow the readers to bond and empathise with them as much as the main character then this major shift in the MC should work quite well - positioning the reader as a third person attached to the main character. They can see the journey and perhaps sympathise with the MC, but they haven't lost touch of context like the MC may have done. They might end up feeling somewhat self-reflective after reading it!

Alternatively, Option 5: avoid the dilemma by not using this character as your main POV even at the start, but centering the narrative on one of his friends.

He can still be the main character without your ever putting the readers in his head -- just as Sherlock Holmes is the main character but Dr. Watson is a first person narrator. Writers do this all the time, it's certainly not breaking any "rules."

It can sometimes be more interesting for a reader to observe this kind of character transformation from the outside rather than having to slog through all the self-justification and internal twists inside the character's head. And it's certainly less jolting than a complete change-of-POV would be, and less artificial in effect than forcing a part 1/part 2 break (or vol.1/vol.2) if the rest of the story structure doesn't naturally fall into distinct sections that way.

As a reader, I prefer not to be drawn out of the book by obvious shifts in writing... like I was reading a GREAT book the other day (bestselling trade published author), and they switch POV frequently, which is fine... but also they kept switching from 3rd to 1st every 4-5 pages because they wanted MC in 1st but everyone else in 3rd, which every time it happened, jarred me out of the text and made me think of writing technique rather than keeping me in the story.

And so my vote would be that you start how you intend to finish. That could look multiple ways. You could have multiple POV characters, shifting between original MC and best friend from the get go, so readers are already used to his perspective. Or you could keep it only the original MC all the way through and just have him dark when he's dark. Shrugs. But personally, I wouldn't switch to a new narrator halfway through.

Bajungadustin said:

1. Switch POV perspectives to the "best friend" who has been in the book the whole time.
2. Divide the book into a "part 1 part 2" so the switched perspective doesn't seem abrupt.
3. Make the book longer and have the transition be the turning point-cliffhanger-ending and then start a second book with the new perspective.
4. Keep following the main character regardless of his new evil mindset.

Click to expand...

When I try to imagine reading a book like that, what I think would make it work best for me would be to have both POVs from the start. It would annoy me to suddenly be shut out of the MC's head in the second half of the book. Or for the narrative to be conveniently taken up by the best friend. For greater psychological depth and as a study in contrasts, as well as for the sake of continuity, use both viewpoints throughout.