Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion

Would you, as a reader, be put off by a novel that has multiple points of view (say about 4 or 5)?

I prefer one point of view, but I don't mind multiple POV's as long as they are done right. For instance, if each character has his or her own chapter, that's fine, but if the POV switches from one character to the next within paragraphs or even sentences of the same chapter, it tends to annoy me somewhat.

Not at all. Whether you have 60 points of view or 1 doesn't make any difference - it's whether it works. You can have a singular point of view but if it doesn't work then the writer needs to rethink. I'm writing one at present that has many more than 5 POV's, whether it works or not is down to the quality of the writing. Personally I like writers who are prepared to take a risk and try something different.

No, many writers successfully use multiple points of view-- Terry Pratchett, Stephen King to name two.

Often it helps keep a story rolling, and interesting.

In my novel, I used multiple POV where the select POV characters were broken down by either chapter or section. So that way the point of view wasn't switching too often to make it jarring for the reader. It also allowed me to let the reader know information my main character did not have. So it retained suspense while not creating an overly explanatory Scooby-Doo style ending. :)

George R.R. Martin's "A Game of Thrones" is another example of what I consider a successful use of multiple POV's. Each character has his or her own chapter and it works.

I like following one character through a story, but, sometimes, it is helpful to find out what's going on through another's perspective.

Thank you all for your replies. It's good to see that we have a consensus here. I agree that each character should have his own chapter and that the shift between POVs should be smooth and keep the story rolling. In many ways, I think, it can enrich the plot.

The reason I posted this comment is because some readers/editors/publishers tend to ask: "But whose story is it?" or "Who are we supposed to identify with?"

Dana K. wrote: "Thank you all for your replies. It's good to see that we have a consensus here. I agree that each character should have his own chapter and that the shift between POVs should be smooth and keep the..."

Usually that's related to the overarching theme. You can have multiple points of view and still have one or two main characters that the story affects most strongly. They're the ones who experience character change and who have the most at stake.

Jenn wrote: "Dana K. wrote: "Thank you all for your replies. It's good to see that we have a consensus here. I agree that each character should have his own chapter and that the shift between POVs should be smo..."

Quite right. Thanks Jenn.

I have one novel where I utterly break the rules of common sense and have both first and third-person, which from a narrative perspective makes no sense at all.

Eh... it worked at the time.

It depends on what the novel is about. "Andersonville" is about the inhumane existence of Civl War prisoners of war in a Southern prison camp. The fascination was learning of the various back stories of the prisoners as well as how they coped with their imprisonment. My own novel is a story about the Battles of Lexington and Concord as experienced by a variety of people. With certain stories the use of multiple viewpoints is essential.

Only if it's handled so that I don't get confused. In my novel, TERROR ON THE BEACH, I believe I handled it beautifully, if I may brag a little.

Dana K. wrote: "Would you, as a reader, be put off by a novel that has multiple points of view (say about 4 or 5)?"

I just finished one that was so badly done you couldn't keep track of who is who. I read another where the author wrote the scene through 'her' eyes and the next was a replay through 'his'...at one point it became too much. Good inner dialogue from one side with stronge observations and dexcriptives are great.
Using one or two whould be the best to avooid confuson.
When writing for children to YA, you would normally keep to one POV.

As others have written, it depends on how it is handled and if it is clear. I like well written stories, no matter the POV, from a single person to the jumping from head to head to first person (which is a little awkward at first but ultimately rewarding if done well.)

Friends,

I think I know what you're discussing, but your thinking might be helped by thinking about "voice" (first person or third person) and "protagonist(s)." These are related concepts but not the same thing, and I think it is not helpful to roll them up in a concept called "point of view." I think Dana K's initial questions could have been: how many protagonists should a book have?" and "should the protagonist's voice be in the first person or third?"

It is possible to effectively mix voices in a book, but I find too many protagonists make for a lack of focus in a book.

Lee wrote: "Friends,

I think I know what you're discussing, but your thinking might be helped by thinking about "voice" (first person or third person) and "protagonist(s)." These are related concepts but not ..."

Hi Lee,

To me the term "voice" refers to the tone/unique style a writer brings to the work--a recognizable way of putting words together.

"Protagonist" is the hero character.
"Antagonist" is the person/event that is in conflict with the hero's goal (not necessarily evil, but often the "bad guy.")

Point of view (POV) is 1st person, 3rd person, omniscient, etc. ANY character can be used to deliver the story (tell it in that character's POV), and when in a specific character's viewpoint the reader experiences the work only through that character's eyes/senses/emotions.

You're right that rolling all these things together into one concept can become confusing. *s* I agree that multiple POV characters can be effective, but that a single protagonist works best with secondary characters perhaps sharing POV in their own sections/chapters.

Great discussion! I've even got a dog POV in my current thriller.

I think Dana worries about too much head-hopping, also known as omniscient narrator - very popular in the 19th and early 20th centuries, but a no-no today... although I have read a fantasy novel with omniscient narrator and it was sort of refreshing! ;-)
Readers are now used to a more "single" POV, either first or third person limited, meaning many POVs, but not all in the same scene, like in the omniscient narrator.
Orson Scott Card's book is excellent to understand the differences: http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/79... Highly recommended for all writers! :-)

As long as we're clear whose POV we're in, I'm fine with it. I hate having to backtrack and try to figure it out esp. in the middle of an action scene! Bad POV switches is the writing equivalent of a shaky-cam in the movies, and just as annoying.

Amy wrote: "Lee wrote: "Friends,

I think I know what you're discussing, but your thinking might be helped by thinking about "voice" (first person or third person) and "protagonist(s)." These are related conce..."

Yes! Excellent point--and excellent book.

Barbara wrote: "I think Dana worries about too much head-hopping, also known as omniscient narrator - very popular in the 19th and early 20th centuries, but a no-no today... although I have read a fantasy novel wi..."

Thanks Barbara. The point is, as you said, to avoid omniscient pov because it's a no-no. And that would have to be done with multiple POV. Even if the writer avoids head-hopping, and the transition between characters is clear and smooth, some readers still seem to prefer a single POV or at the most a dual POV.

Dana wrote: "Barbara wrote: "I think Dana worries about too much head-hopping, also known as omniscient narrator - very popular in the 19th and early 20th centuries, but a no-no today... although I have read a ..."

Uhm, actually multiple POV in a book is not necessarily omniscient POV (which is being in everyone's head at once, LOL!). While "cozy" mysteries tend to be first person and only one viewpoint character, thrillers more commonly feature three or more POV characters in alternating chapters. *shrug*

Yes, it's a matter of taste who likes what style.

Using the third person, it is often useful, even critical, to telling a story to get inside the head of more than one character in the same passage let alone the same chapter. With skillful writing this can seem normal to the reader.

Historical fiction that attempts to portray a major event by narrating the experiences of a number of the participants requires multiple POV.

I like multiple points of view and have used in in several works. I like that the reader has access to all points of view but the individual characters have access only to their own. John and Mary and Joe, for example, can only know what each of them knows. The reader knows what all of them know and that adds, I think, to reader interest. However, James Gunn, the sci fi writer, said in a class onetime that I took that the first person POV was the most difficult to do, but when achieved was the most effective. I've only done a few first person POVs. Very difficult.

Gotta agree with most folks here. Multiple POVs can enhance a book a great deal. It helps to create an epic feeling. A Song of Ice and Fire is a good example of this.

Now, where it falls apart, for me, is when a writer just decides to go in and out of people's heads at random within the same scene. I'm sure some authors can do it well, but I find it very annoying. As a reader, I want to identify with a character. If I'm constantly jumping from character to character in the span of five seconds, it's difficult to create that connection.

It's important to consider that once a reader is in a character's head, they can become invested in that person/storyline. Having a VP character die can be jarring...and not wrapping up a VP character's storyline also can be less than satisfying, even if they're a minor character. I've heard editors/agents suggest that you shouldn't necessarily name every "spear holder" character in the book, either--the guy who delivers the flowers and appears once can just be the deliveryman. By naming them, it signals the reader that the character has some importance. It's sort of that old adage re: theater/screenwriting...if you show a sword on the wall in the opening scene, you better use it somewhere in the plot.

I would only use multiple POVs if each POV is from a character who is actually important. I just read a book that had so many POVs but none of the characters were fully developed so it was hard to connect with them.

Laekan wrote: "I would only use multiple POVs if each POV is from a character who is actually important. I just read a book that had so many POVs but none of the characters were fully developed so it was hard to..."

This! *s*

Amy wrote: "It's important to consider that once a reader is in a character's head, they can become invested in that person/storyline. Having a VP character die can be jarring...and not wrapping up a VP charac..."

What if the main storyline is one, a common thread, but you have several characters involved? A family saga let's say, or for example The Poisonwood Bible where we get the daughters' and the mother's different views on the Belgian Congo.

Dana wrote: "What if the main storyline is one, a common thread..."

Hi Dana, I think that's perfectly fine. Many authors use that technique with great success, and each character brings a new perspective (layer) to the common storyline that adds depth. Maybe the story isn't complete with only one viewpoint because a single character's perception is skewed--like the blind person who only feels the elephant's trunk and so describes the "elephant" as a snake, while another only experiences the legs, and so forth.

I love multiple POVs as long as the voices are distinct enough that I know which one I'm in w/o having to be told by the author.

I've always been told that if you do it well enough, any rule of writing can be broken. :)

I love multiple POVs if done right. If the author establishes the POV immediately -- and I do mean immediately -- then it is easy to follow. It gives you insight into the character's head, into his: where he's at, where he's comiong from, his inner self. I recall a great novel I read many many many moons ago where the author occasionally slipped inside the mind of the killer and didn't reveal the killer until the satisfying shocking denoument. If handled well, the multiple POV can be very thrilling.

Multiple points of view are fine, as long as each character has a distinct voice and the reader can tell from whose point of view a section/chapter/whatever is being narrated.

With my writer's hat, I've been engaged in short stories for a long time now, where there's not really enough space to convey more than one point of view adequately. In Something Nice - 10 Stories I have three points of view in Jake the Pig, which is probably the most I've ever used, and it feels heavy-handed. But I'm my own worst critic and others disagree.

I just had my first objective review on goodreads that I think demonstrated the work in my book. I have many POV's in my novel and I think so long as it all fits together, it makes for better reading for the reader.

Here is what she said about my 400 page novel, THE POND:

There were several aspects I liked about it. Michelle did a great job of describing the characters and the setting. I was able to create pictures in my mind based on what she wrote. Almost all the stories I have read before have taken place in America, so it was nice to read about a different location and its culture. The descriptions really made the book come to life for me. Also, I enjoyed the unique storyline. The different complications in the plot made me want to figure out what was going to happen next. Just when I thought I had figured out something, a new twist came into play. I found myself rooting for the characters to get everything they wanted, though not all of them did. The story especially came alive for me when Marilyn's storyline was introduced.

Overall, the book has some areas of improvement, but did keep my interest throughout the whole novel. I do think it would make quite an interesting movie if ever made into one. I hope Michelle's dreams of her novel being made into a big screen box office hit come true!

My first novel was first person, present tense - and although I loved that for that novel, I learned through the years of writing/editing it just how limited one is when writing exclusively from that POV.

In my next two novels I loved exploring multiple POVs. I especially love (in both writing novels and reading those written by others) when different pieces of the story fall into place when different characters add their perspectives.

It is, I think, harder to do well, but for me the richness of all those layers of perspective are well worth a little work as a reader keeping track of the narrative.

I agree Billie, but it is up to the Author to make sure they don't confuse the reader, and as long as there is a connection from one POV to the next, it will come out a winner. But for me, in order to get all my POV's and ducks in row, I threw out more pages than I wrote. But I am happy I took the time and effort.

Billie wrote: "My first novel was first person, present tense - and although I loved that for that novel, I learned through the years of writing/editing it just how limited one is when writing exclusively from th..."

Billie, I've so far shied away from first person and opted for third person. It just seems to come more naturally to me. As I'm working on my novel now, I'm heading each chapter with the character's name, and I'm not finding the shift between them too difficult as they're tied in by the storyline and they're quite vivid in my mind as characters. But it's early days yet, I'm only half way through and many drafts away from completion. When I'm finished, I'll have more than one person read it and see if it flows. Then, INEVITABLY as we all know, it'll be back to the drawing board.

And Michelle, congratulations on your review. Very positive. Good luck

This is a great discussion. Some of the viewpoint questions (and answers) may be influenced by genre. Cozy mysteries tend to be in first person--that way the reader stays in the hero's head and gets to puzzle out the answers along the way, too. Some readers truly expect/want this experience. For thrillers it seems more common to have multiple VP characters (including the bad guy!) and the reader's thrills escalate in part because they KNOW what's on different character's minds...and least when the technique is used well. That's the operative situation--"used well." All bets are off if the VP isn't clear, of course, whether using first person or multiple, etc.

I'm having a ball with my debut thriller including "dog viewpoint." Terrific challenge to write a character who can't talk and doesn't think/experience the world in the same way as the other characters.

Might I recommend:The Power of Point of View: Make Your Story Come to Life

Examples, tips, etc and worth reading.
I can see from the responses that readers and writers are all over the map on this.

It does seem very individual - there was a nice discussion of this on Murderati on Friday, which reminded me that I'd forgotten to check back in here! Agree - great discussion and thanks to all who have weighed in!

Ken wrote: "Might I recommend:The Power of Point of View: Make Your Story Come to Life"

Good advice, Ken. I checked out the sample, and this one's on my buy list. It's a "must read" right along with Plot & Structure by James Scott Bell.

Ken wrote: "Might I recommend:The Power of Point of View: Make Your Story Come to Life

Examples, tips, etc and worth reading.
I can see from the responses that readers and writers are all over the map on this."

Thanks for the heads up, Ken. Have added it as well.

I found Sol Stein's Solutions For Novelists very useful. My book, The Perpetual Astonishment of Jonathon Fairfax has lots of points of view (each in a separate chapter) but a single central character, and I found it helped to keep the story moving.

Dana wrote: "Would you, as a reader, be put off by a novel that has multiple points of view (say about 4 or 5)?"

I think multiple points of view add interest to a story, if done properly. I have never used more than four POV as I think that can become become confusing for readers, but it adds to the tension for readers if they know something that is not known to the central character. However, there needs to be a definite break between any two POV, if not a separate chapter, then at least a different scene, or an obvious shift between characters, marked by pargraphs. I would not 'head hop' backwards and forwards between characters - too confusing and stops the flow of the story.

Multiple POV allows the reader to learn more about how a certain character is perceived by others. It has the potential to add layers of dimension that are often ignored when just reading the book from one set of eyes. In addition, it can also inject partiality and remove possible bias.

A lot of writers have trouble expressing how someone is viewed by his or her peers, particularly when the book is written in first person. As a result, you'll often (as someone pointed out above) encounter excess dialogue or prose in order to compensate for any ambiguity. It then becomes a case of almost holding a reader's hand in order to make them view someone a certain way. I think in most cases, this decreases the overall strength of a novel since saying more isn't always the best option.

Done right, multiple POV can really make a difference.

M. Reed

Hey, i have a paln for a book and its gonna be from multiple POV like... idk how many.
I wanna know if like...haveing one or two chapters from one person's POV then have anotehr person's who is like.. on the other side of teh world.
And how do you know wich characters should go next? Do you like wrote the same chapters in differnt POVs until you've found the one that sounds right?

L.H. wrote: "I have one novel where I utterly break the rules of common sense and have both first and third-person, which from a narrative perspective makes no sense at all.

Eh... it worked at the time."

I read a book where the main character had the majority of chapters in first person, then when it was in the POV of anotehr chararcter it was in third person and i didn't even notice, lol but i was an amazing book

Coolkidrox123 { i am 15,000 years old} wrote: "Hey, i have a paln for a book and its gonna be from multiple POV like... idk how many.
I wanna know if like...haveing one or two chapters from one person's POV then have anotehr person's who is lik..."

take your plot & do a timeline, then, the character who is most important at a particular plot point is the POV you should use.

I do multiple POV and I vary the vocabulary of the narrative voice to fit that POV character. So if my cop sees the sky, it's blue. If my artist sees the sky, it's celadon. I do this in addition to changing the dialoge vocabulary for the characters.

I think each story probably has a best way to be told - the key is to find the voice and find the way of telling it that works best.

Ultimately, as my agent told me years ago, you can break all the rules if you write really well!

True... but that's an extremely big "if".