It seems that more and more often these days I see readers complaining about what they call "point of view hopping." I can see why they might object to shifting points of view in a paragraph or mayb even a chapter, but what the heck is wrong with telling a story from the points of view of several different characters. When did this become a sin? About the time that adverbs were outlawed? I can think of one story that I used to teach in my American lit classes, "The Bride Comes to Yellow Sky," in which we even get the point of view of a dog for a sentence or so. Was Stephen Crane wrong to write it like that?
My problem, and I realize it, is that I'm a geezer. I grew up reading people who didn't know the rules. I love the opening paragraph of "The Fall of the House of Usher," but no editor today would let it pass. Too many adjectives. I'm just going to keep on enjoying stories written in all kinds of styles, and if the author wants to switch the point of view now and then, that's fine with me.
Or maybe I'm wrong about this and I've misinterpreted what I've read. I'm sure someone will let me know if that's the case.
19 comments:
I agree with you Bill. One problem I saw a while back, however, did throw me. The author switches narrative from third person to first person in the same paragraph; something like this - We're following the MC: He climbed to the top of the roof. There I looked out over the city.
That would bother me, a lot. I remember when I was doing some house name work for Lyle Kenyon Engel, I was told not to change PoV within a chapter. That was fine, and they didn't mind if I switched from chapter to chapter.
One editor who once looked at one of my books wanted one POV through the whole thing. Switching within chapters or alternating scenes with different characters was a no-no. He was quite insistent. Needless to say I didn't do a deal with him.
My mystery novels are usually from a single PoV, whereas my westerns aren't. I have no idea why I do it that way.
I don't have a problem with multiple viewpoints, but each character needs a distinct voice. I recently read a well-received mystery narrated in turns by four different women of varying backgrounds and social levels and yet every one of them spoke in an interchangeable way with similar syntax and word choices. It was interesting, but it could have been so much more had the characters been more distinct.
Deb, I'm reminded a bit of the thing that I found most frightening about Henry James' "The Turn of the Screw." The governess whose account we're reading writes exactly like Henry James.
As long as the writer doesn't switch POVs during a sentence or paragraph I don't mind different POVs at all. That's assuming, of course, like others have mentioned, that they actually write the POVs with different voices.
In my experience writers shouldn't change viewpoint without reason. That said it's not a hard and fast rule. Robert Crais's L.A. Requiem was a good example where he broke with the first person narrative of his previous novels and introduced multiple narratives in both 1st and 3rd person. Crais does this between chapters with indication of whose viewpoint it is at the beginning.
That said some very good novels can be written from the old omniscient viewpoint. Actually, most of the classics wore.
You make some good points. I try to follow the rule of sticking to one viewpoint per scene but there are writers who violate it and do well doing it. On the other hand there are writers who do it and really irritate me. I've never heard of not being able to change POV for an entire book if the story requires it.
When readers complain about POV, they are really questioning the place of POV changes in a story's logic. I was going to say POV change within scenes jars me, but I think any POV change that seems unnecessary or illogical, that kills suspense instead of building it, jars readers.
As a reader, I ask to be allowed to follow a story. Illogical POV changes usually lose me, but I might go along with them if chaotic storytelling were the point.
What Deb said and also the writer needs to make it clear who's speaking (or thinking). And I think there can only be one first person POV. Or maybe I just get confused more easily than most.
Who's been complaining and what critical leg do they have to stand on?
Jim Thompson did marvelous shifting POV in THE KILL OFF, and there are places in SOMETIMES A GREAT NOTION where the POV shifts within a single sentence.
I'm with you, Bill. I try to stick with the same POV within a scene, but I generally write books with a large cast and a lot going on and there's no way I could stick with one POV for the entire book. I do try to make them all sound a little different.
I love me some adverbs, too, but that's because I grew up reading the pulps. I try to tone it down, but I still use them.
I do prefer books with a single POV, but more than one is okay if it's clear whose eyes we're looking through and there is a reason (usually to show us things the main character couldn't see/hear).
What drives me right up the wall is tense. Present tense: "I look out the window, then I walk to the door, open the door. I hear a loud noise." Uck! Give me past tense third person or first person, please. Present tense causes me to stop reading, period.
I learned strict POV by reading Richard Stark. I am a strong believer in one POV per scene, preferably per chapter. It's very distracting to jump around in a scene, and is obviously disruptive of focus. To me this is not a rule but a strategy -- but a good one. The only time I've knowingly violated this approach is in movie novelizations where the short scenes and the exterior approach made it difficult to impossible to maintain POV.
I am an adjective and adverb man where they add something. Most of the people who announce this so-called rule don't follow it (Stephen King) or are screenwriters turned novelist (Elmore Leonard).
You and I are in agreement on all points. I think one PoV is essential in a scene, and probably in a chapter. Not in a whole book, though. And I violate the chapter rule occasionally, too.
I think my brain allows me to read things that other folks freak out about these days.
Although I have written books from various POVs, my Commando series uses multiple POVs extensively. They always stick to one per chapter, but because I like telling the story not only from both sides - Brits and Germans - I often cut back and forth so the reader can see the conflict developing from both sides. I also will move from one character to another if the Brits are separated, in order to give different viewpoints on the action and how each character reacts to what is happening.
So far, no one has complained with this method, and it seems to serve the series pretty well, allowing me to get into the heads of various main characters, as well as reoccurring villains.
When I switch to a new POV in a chapter, I generally do a double carriage return.
Post a Comment