Picking Viewpoint

Linda Adams said:

For example, when some people choose first person, it's because they feel comfortable writing the 'I' character. But that doesn't necessarily mean it's the best choice for the story itself. What elements in the story might suggest using one viewpoint over another?

Click to expand...

I think it's the story that dictates the POV. I don't write in first person, but it's very effective in keeping the reader closely attached to the narrator of the story. The reader can only experience things as the narrator experiences them. This is a good device for mysteries where the narrator is solving the crime and the reader is right over the narrator's shoulder step-by-step.

I like and use close third person (with an occasional Omni observation) and I'll switch POVs among my main characters depending on the scene. The convenient thing about third is I can control what info gets departed to the reader based on who's POV is used. I can reveal, or hold back info that might or might not be known to the other players in my stories.

I don't like 2nd person POV. I've read a few writing samples written in 2nd and found it distracting. Perhaps I've only read "bad" writing examples in 2nd. I'd be interested in what other's think of it.

HTH,
EM

I tend to use omni and have had complaints from a few critiques but it works better for my writing than any other viewpoint. To me, it depends on your story.

I have a story I wrote in first person because it felt like the only choice; during most of the story, the character is alone.

But I found a market that I think will be great for it, and in their guidelines they stress that they strongly prefer third person. So guess what I'm doing? Rewriting into as close of a third-person I can get. Keeping the first-person version, though, just in case.

I actually prefer writing first person unless I am using multiple viewpoints.

I think 1st person POV can be very tricky, particulary if one is recounting what happened at a much younger age. Obviously in that case although the POV character at the given point in the story may be only say 15 or whatever, the narrator is indeed much older.

The narrator must, in my opinion, remember that I am aware of the above and am trying to reconcile the unfolding story with the fact that the narrator really knows more than they perhaps are revealing or wish to reveal.

I hope I am expressing myself clearly here, but the above scenario makes me feel as though I'm being toyed with if I feel information is deliberately being withheld from me purely to create mystery or suspense, because I know the narrator has that information because the story is really one huge flashback.

This doesn't happen in 3rd.

I'd say for maximum dramatic effect, choose the point of view of the character who's most affected by the scene. If that's the same person throughout the whole book, then choose between 1st or close 3rd. I think close 3rd is easier for most people to read, but 1st adds a certain storytelling quality to the prose as Bufty described.

If, however, you want a slightly more detached feel to the prose, choose someone who will be more of an objective observer of events. Anthony Powell does this brilliantly in A Dance to the Music of Time. Here, I'd say that you can choose between omniscient 3rd or close 3rd, depending how 'objective' you want your work to feel. 1st might work too, but you've got to have a very particular kind of character to do this sort of narration.

2nd person rarely works at all for a sustained piece of writing, I think.

Thanks for the credit, but I think you may have read something which isn't there into my post, Girlyswot.

I always have trouble choosing my POV, so I usually try out a few different ones in the first draft. I've found that if I know my narrator really well and if the piece focuses heavily on her internal state (emotions, thoughts, etc.) rather than external action, I use 1st person. If the story is more plot-driven, though, I go with a close 3rd POV. I almost never use omni or 2nd.

Fascinating, Linda. I haven't tried Omni at all, yet.

The story dictates the POV. Although first person has worked well for some writers, I find it too confining.

Generally speaking, first person is good for stories where the narrator is particularly fascinating and has a strong personality, so the focus is on that person and his/her internal life. Examples: cozy mysteries (where it's really all about the sleuth, and only incidentally about the murder itself), and chick lit (it's all about the internal issues of the protagonist) and lit fic (again, with the focus on the internal issues of the protagonist). Personally, I think the claim by many experts that it's more "intimate" for the reader is false; it may be more intimate for the writer, but when a reader reads "I," the person who is "I" is someone other than the reader, like when a friend is talking to you and keeps saying "i did this" and "I did that," and every "I" is a reminder that someone other than you did/said/felt something.

Third person limited (either one POV throughout the entire book or one POV per scene) is particularly good for bonding a reader with the characters, encouraging the reader to experience everything the POV character does without any distance between the character and the reader, and is therefore particularly good for emotional stories. Most romances are told in third limited. Probably thrillers, too, and a good number of sf/f, depending on whether the intent is to present an emotional story or to explore an idea.

Third person omniscient (which is not the same as third limited w/ headhopping; omniscient has a separate narrator, a clear POV that does not belong to one of the characters, and is not simply occasional authorial intrusion, which breaks the bond between reader and character) tends to create a distance between the reader and the characters (although if it's done right, the reader will bond with the omniscient narrator, which is why it's not jarring to know the contents of so many heads, b/c the reader never leaves the bond with the omniscient narrator). As a result, it's particularly good for comedy and satire, where the ideas matter at least as much, if not more than, the characters themselves.

Each POV has its strength and weaknesses. The trick is to know what kind of story you're writing -- one character's journey, an emotional journey, or an idea-based (rather than character-based) story -- and then it becomes relatively simple to figure out which overall POV is best.

JD

I usually choose POV by instinct, not preference. But I think the view point should be determined by how the MC would prefer to tell the story in. And what would be best for the story itself.

I chose POV by who's the most interesting character--which isn't the most powerful, best looking, or wisest character. I usually use a 3rd or multi 3rd/omni combo so I can get different views to show the sdies of the story, to provide information just one character can't know, and to round out the tale.

I typically experiment with POV in the first 20-30 pages of anything I work on, and no matter what I ultimately decide I always feel like that experiment was meaningful. Also, experimenting early can help you avoid massive rewrites later. In the novel I'm currently querying, I wanted the narrative to feel very gritty, sort of rude and unrepentant, so my intuitive choice was first person. Twenty pages in, however, I saw the problem. My MC has a head injury and suffers from perseveration. His thoughts are often repetitive and compulsive. It made for rough reading. So, I ended up with an extremely limited third POV. The narrator doesn't know anything the MC doesn't and the narrative is still gritty, but having a third person POV helps filter the MC, makes it easier for readers to follow.

I'm all for experimenting, but here's what I've found are the big benefits and drawbacks of each pov.

First person gives you a chance to get inside your narrator's head. everything from how they see dialogue to how they describe a scene, to what they notice about the story all paints a vivid picture of their personality. This also gives you the chance to mislead the reader a bit. After all, your MC will not see all or know all so certain reveals (like the true killer in a mystery) will come as a surprise both to your readers and your MC. The best first person narrators are 'unreliable'-they are biased in their view of the world you paint. Basically their viewpoint colors the entire story.

The drawbacks of this pov is that you can't expand as much on your supporting cast. The only character developments for these characters are those that happen in front of the MC or that the MC hears about. You also are limited in your description of the action to what the MC will believably notice. (which also goes for physical descriptions of your MC, but that's another debate entirely)

Third person, on the other hand, gives you the chance to vary from the more intimate close perspective, to the distant view of a scene. You can even vary from chapter to chapter to create certain effects in your narrative. This gives you the chance to be more objective and create tension by showing the readers something that the MC may miss. (example: don't fall in love with him! he's the murderer!) It also gives you the chance to be more realistic in painting the character's flaws, whereas the narrator may not realize/portray their own flaws in the first person.

The drawbacks of third person is that you can't always become one with the character. even in close third, there's still a bit of a distance that isn't there when the character is telling you a story. You also have more of a responsibility to the reader to tell the story as it happens instead of as your characters see it (though you can definitely still hide certain things from readers until the time for the big reveal)


Personally, I feel most comfortable working in third person, but I did have one story that first person was the best choice for it. I struggled with that for awhile but I also enjoyed it. Right now, that project is on hiatus so take my opinion for what it's worth

And there are definitely certain genres that tend to attract one pov or another. YA seems to have a lot of first person (but not soley first person) and mysteries are prone to first person as well. SF/Fantasy tends to be more third person from what I've read.

so, there's my two cents.

I love first person because of its limitations. The character cannot narrate anything he/she does not know or has experienced, and the metaphors and associations are those of the character, not of the narrator. I know you can do the same with close 3rd, and I've done this on occasion, but it is much easier to slip "out of character."

I'm doing multiple 1st POVs in the novel and love it, though it's given me some gray hairs. It is really wonderful to see the ex-POV characters through the eyes of the current POV character.

I find that the more limiting the POV is, the better my writing is. Just a personal quirk.

I don't think it's a personal quirk--I think it's often true that limited POV's produce better writing. The writer doesn't get to take the easy way out and has to truly show things he/she might otherwise tell. The dialog has to be more carefully worked, the narrator's perceptions carefully colored to reveal things. It's exciting to write that way and as a reader, I find it exciting to read those stories, too.

Gray Rose said:

I find that the more limiting the POV is, the better my writing is. Just a personal quirk.

Click to expand...