Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion

I varied the vocabulary of the narrative voices of my POV characters as well. I had the owner of a small publishing company in the town where I live criticize me for writing "convoluted" sentences and one goodreads reviewer wrote that in places my narration was "ponderous." Doing this has its risks.

:/

I could not tell the stories in my books without using multiple points of view. I make it very clear who's point of view it is, usually using a single point of view for each situation. I think it's important to get the motives and drives of different sides across and to make the story more immersive and believable.

I also use a narrator POV for summaries or descriptions of events which do not feature suitable protagonist style characters, but I keep this mostly separate too. Most often I use the narrator voice for overviews of wide-events or summing up things which happened in the past.

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

That is excellent advice and almost precisely how I do it.

I'm really not, but then again I read literally anything. Sometimes it is interesting to see how other characters are thinking and when it's done well, it's so wonderful to read. I haven't seen it done really super poorly except in fan fiction. Generally speaking, I think that it can be really good depending on the story. I just don't see myself limiting what I read based on artistic style, which is what POV falls under. You read for the sake absorbing art/vision/story and I think part of being a good reviewer and a well-rounded reader is being able to appreciate different forms of storytelling.

This is an older thread, but since it's a question I've often asked myself to...

Multiple POVs (more than 2-3, at least) don't bother me at all, provided the difference between them is clearly marked enough. If the various 'voices' all sound the same, if you can't tell whose POV is the current one, then it's just confusing.

I also believe that POVs shouldn't change in the middle of a sentence or a paragraph—perhaps even not in the middle of a scene either. If chapter 1 is told from the POV of character 1, chapter 2 from the POV of character C, and chapter 3 from character B, it works better, because the boundaries are defined from the start.

In any case, multiple POVs are something I tend to like. I think they allow better perspective on more aspects of a story, feeding the reader with information that could otherwise not be had, except by resorting to the omniscient narrator technique. But, once again, it has to be done in a right way, and won't necessarily work with every kind of story.

Certain genres tend to "usually" have specific styles, too. Mysteries often use first person viewpoint, which makes the story very immediate and puts the reader in the middle of the action. It's also limiting--because the reader only gets to know what that single viewpoint character knows.

Thrillers tend to use multiple third person viewpoint, with different chapters or scenes written from important characters' viewpoint: the protagonist, antagonist, sometimes secondary "helper" characters for either the good guys or bad guys, and sometimes the victim. Sometimes I've read books that alternated between 3rd person viewpoint and 1st person viewpoint...that also can be a trick to do well!

In my thriller, I even include "dog viewpoint" in certain chapters since the service dog is so important to the story. He's able to perceive and offer information the "human" characters couldn't.

So the story typically dictates what information the reader needs next, and that tells the author which character is in the best position to reveal that portion of the plot.

I write mystery novels in the first person because it draws the reader into the action, as Amy mentioned. It's not to say I won't attempt writing from multiple POVs one day.

I'll read stories told from multiple POVs, as long as each POV change is defined by a physical boundary, like a new section or chapter, so my mind can pause to make the change. I've read a few books where the POV changed with every paragraph -- very confusing, especially when six or more characters were involved!

Sandra wrote: "I write mystery novels in the first person because it draws the reader into the action, as Amy mentioned. It's not to say I won't attempt writing from multiple POVs one day.

I'll read stories told..."

Exactly! As a reader I want to become immersed in the story. If I have to stop and try to figure out whose head I'm in, that jars me out of the experience.

I'm reading a story now that's told in many many points of view. It's clear who's head I'm in, but the first nonMC POV came in halfway through the story! I was like... Huh? Who is this guy?

Abigail wrote: "I'm reading a story now that's told in many many points of view. It's clear who's head I'm in, but the first nonMC POV came in halfway through the story! I was like... Huh? Who is this guy?"

Abigail, that bothers me, too. I want to know what to expect and have the pattern of the story established pretty early. If it's all MC to the halfway point, that would be disconcerting to have a new POV introduced so late. It could be done, and done well...but if it jarred you, then I suspect it wasn't a smooth, believable transition, and that does take the reader out of that suspension of disbelief.

However many POVs there are, I do think it's important to establish the rules as soon as possible. In my novel DRAWN, there are four protagonists whose stories converge as the novel goes on, but their stories are separate throughout much of the book, set off in their own chapters. So I kept the first few chapters short so that the reader would met them all as soon as possible, and I tried to include their names in the first sentence of each chapter throughout to make it easy on the reader. What's difficult, as Abigail just said, is if you're too far into a book before the author springs on you that there are other POVs you'll be following. Jarring indeed.

James wrote: "However many POVs there are, I do think it's important to establish the rules as soon as possible. In my novel DRAWN, there are four protagonists whose stories converge as the novel goes on, but t..."

James, I do the same with "naming" the POV character in the first sentence of the given chapter. It helps me as a reader. And I've studied the thrillers/authors that I love to read to figure out some of the WHYs of how it works so well. The style today seems to be shorter chapters, at least for thrillers/mysteries. Don't know about others--since I don't read them. *s* But I suspect some other genres such as Women's Fiction and "literary" may use longer chapters.

I have always loved the first person POV ever since I got addicted to Victoria Holt's books in the 1960s. I have since moved on to heavier stuff like Nelson DeMille, and Robert Ludlum, but when I write it's usually in the first person. It's just more comfortable for me. Maybe I'm trying to be the next Victoria Holt, haha!

Peggy wrote: "I have always loved the first person POV ever since I got addicted to Victoria Holt's books in the 1960s. I have since moved on to heavier stuff like Nelson DeMille, and Robert Ludlum, but when I ..."

Oh I LOVED Victoria Holt gothics!

I tried a gothic when I wrote Southern Greed. It turned out everyone likes it the best. I wanted to write more like my favorite author, Nelson DeMille.

Peggy. As good as I'm sure U R, nobody writes like the fab DeMille

I know, but it doesn't hurt to dream!

And I bet Nelson doesn't write like Peggy, either!!!

I mix first and third person and seem to do it handily in most cases. If you're doing multiple POV's make sure you transition well. I've read a couple of books where they really biffed it and it can be really jolting.

I'm not an author, but I would think that the closer the action stays to the main character, the more the scale tips toward going with 1st person, because I think it feels more personal when there's agony or joy for the character. You can get away with mixing if there are only a few scenes away from the main character, like you see in Patterson novels, but more than a few, and the author has to go to 3rd, no?

Joe wrote: "I'm not an author, but I would think that the closer the action stays to the main character, the more the scale tips toward going with 1st person, because I think it feels more personal when there'..."

Hi Joe, good point. Yes, it *can* be a good choice to go with 1st person and a single VP character in such cases, but it can be limiting. The only thing the reader can see/hear is what that character sees/hears/feels, etc. So it can be more liberating for an author to use 3rd person and multiple VPs even to build more characterization for the main character.

Rather than 1st person and having the main character look in the mirror to reveal what s/he looks like, another character can reveal not just looks but also perceptions if s/he isn't liked (and why).

Pros and cons to each choice. That's the beauty, challenge and art of writing. *s*

Abigail wrote: "And I bet Nelson doesn't write like Peggy, either!!!" You're right. We shouldn't compare ourselves but just write the way we write. We all have our own unique way to write.

Fiction that attempts to portray a complex historical event rather than focus on one character's conflicts during that particular event requires multiple points of view. Two historical novels that I read when I was in my twenties that do this extremely well are MacKinlay Kantor's "Andersonville" and Michael Shaara's "Killer Angels."

Thank you all for your comments. James and Amy, you've brought in another aspect of MPV which is also relevant: the length of the chapters. I would imagine that the shorter the chapter the less time the reader has with one particular character and the whole (even when each POV is offered in a separate chapter) may end up somewhat choppy. In this particular case, I'm referring to women's fiction rather than thrillers. Achieving a balance can be quite tricky as it affects the pace of the novel.

Hi Dana, Chapters should be as long as they need to be. *shrug* I don't find the shorter chapters to be choppy in well written thrillers, but recognize that some readers prefer to have a less "cliff hanger" ending to scenes. The cliff hanger, though, can be an emotional question or something more subtle than the train running off a cliff, LOL! Yes, it does affect the pace of the novel. And as an author, I don't want the reader to find an "easy" place to put down the book; I want the reader to become so engrossed in the story that they keep turning those pages long after bedtime.

All of James Patterson's novels have very short chapters. Some of his chapters are one or two paragraphs long. It's one of the reasons I liked his books. Now, of course, I only read Indies. But I put short chapters in my novels sometimes.

I'm currently writing a novel using a first person POV. However, I'm blending in a second main character. When I'm in her head I use italics. It gets a little dicey when the two characters are together but once they begin speaking the italics disappear and the POV reverts to the main character. I use the second character italics as kind of intros to some of the chapters, primarily to see how the second character is perceiving changes in the primary character, her husband.

Faulkner used the italics in The Sound and the Fury but he would change POV and time in the same paragraph sometimes. Great if you can pull it off.

As for chapter length, I think it depends largely on the pace and genre of the story. The current one I'm working on is a thriller so short chapters seem to be needed. The trick is not to conclude a chapter with the resolution of a scene but to make the reader want to turn the page and read the next chapter.

My current release, The Platte River Waltz, is a conventional narrative and the chapters were fairly long, maybe 15 up to 30 pages. I looked for natural breaks in the story but again tried to leave something on the page to let the reader know there was more ahead.

Just a peeve, I am getting tired of chapters that begin with the location and time. Yeah, it works for Vince Flynn and Tom Clancy (sometimes) but when I see a chapter start that way, I begin to picture a movie scene where the time and location '0716 hours, Zulu, Vienna' come up on screen with a background of teletype noise as accompaniment.

Ken wrote: "Just a peeve, I am getting tired of chapters that begin with the location and time...."

I used this in my LOST AND FOUND (dog viewpoint) thriller, because everything happens in 28 hours. It was HARD to schedule everything in a believable way--I don't use place but do use time. FWIW my editor said not to worry too much about it, that most readers skip over it and don't pay close attention to it. I didn't agree...

But currently I'm reading James Rollins THE BLOOD GOSPEL where he also does this and...I really don't pay much attention to it. So I'm not sure if it's all that effective, either. Interesting.

Is that 28 dog hours?

Ken wrote: "I'm currently writing a novel using a first person POV. However, I'm blending in a second main character. When I'm in her head I use italics. It gets a little dicey when the two characters are t..." I used italics in my novel, Terror on the Beach. Every time the serial killer spoke it was in italics. That was my most fun book to write.

Ken wrote: "Is that 28 dog hours?"

LOL! He's an autism service dog not a "watch" dog. (sorry, couldn't resist...)

The human main character has the deadline to meet.

Just to recap here. We all agree that the length of chapters does not matter so long as they end with a cliffhanger; that chapters headed with time and place peeve Ken; that using italics for another POV works and can be fun; and that Amy's book does not span 24 dog hours...:) LOVE IT!

Great summary, Dana! *laugh*

*giggle* and BOL (that's "barking out loud")

I am so glad I saw this thread because I was just pondering the same thing. I prefer to write as two POV if I have two central characters so this has helped me a lot to realise I am not the only person who does this. Back to finishing my story then.

M.C. wrote: "I am so glad I saw this thread because I was just pondering the same thing. I prefer to write as two POV if I have two central characters so this has helped me a lot to realise I am not the only pe..."
Oh absolutely, MC! Two POVs is quite common and not too difficult to handle for the writer. Good luck with your book.

Dana wrote: "M.C. wrote: "I am so glad I saw this thread because I was just pondering the same thing. I prefer to write as two POV if I have two central characters so this has helped me a lot to realise I am n..."

For me it's much more difficult to write only one VP character. *shrug*

Andrew wrote: "True... but that's an extremely big "if"."

Different writers have different toolboxes with different tools. Some people can't pull off the character mimicry necessary for multiple-points-of-view. Others just prefer not to because it feels overcomplicated to them, and many readers have the same feeling. Despite what Billie said earlier, it's not even "breaking" a rule. The "rules" are against things like head-hopping within a a chapter, and even that rule (like all rules) can be broken though I can't think of too many cases where it would work. That's not the same as shifting POV in sections or chapters which is an acceptable practice.
What disturbs me about your "if" is that it should be a given that anyone who is self-publishing should know what he or she is doing. If you are going to put your work up for sale, then you have to have confidence in your skills, and that confidence should be based on something real -- previous publication, encouragement by other writers, an award, etc. There should always be other people's eyes (beta readers, peers, editors, etc) to back that up. If it turns out you can't pull off different voices, then someone should tell you before you put the for sale sign on your work.

Dana wrote: "Just to recap here. We all agree that the length of chapters does not matter so long as they end with a cliffhanger; that chapters headed with time and place peeve Ken; that using italics for anoth..."

Missed the first part of this discussion, so I'm not sure if I'm missing irony. Not all chapters need to end with a "cliffhanger," but all chapters need to end on something that is going to get the reader to want to keep going. Maybe I missed something. Is this limited to thrillers?

I think time stamps on chapter headings can be useful and wouldn't rule them out. But as a reader I dislike the italics thing. It's harder to read italics, and the writer should be handling both voices in such a way that it should be very obvious who is "speaking." Also as long as this is done in different chapters and not within the same one it shouldn't be a problem.

Yep, this has been a long discussion and Dana's "recap" was to a degree tongue in cheek. *s* I think the cliffhanger note was a shorthand way to suggest what you've outlined--keep the pages turning. Different genres do this using a variety of techniques. Some of us who have posted in the discussion write thrillers, so those examples are included. For women's fiction, romances, mainstream, and many others, the "hook" to keep reading at chapters' end might be more subtle and include an emotional question raised that readers want answered.

Perhaps rather than saying one should end chapters with a "cliffhanger" it might be better to suggest leaving the reader with a question they can't wait to get answered. And so...turn the page.

Make sense?

Thank you for your input, Marion. As Amy said, my recap was only made in jest and "cliffhanger" is a loose term to mean lack of resolution, an incentive for the reader to turn the page. We're not dealing strictly with thrillers here, but all genres. I agree that Italics are not easy on the eye and should be kept to a minimum, to express a character's inner thoughts for example.

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..."

I agree with you so much! You said it perfectly. I never really thought why I liked some novels better than others, but I think I am drawn to authors that have mulitiple points of view.

Both my first novel and my second (soon to be released) engage multiple points of view. I alternate chapters between my two main characters in both cases. There are some events that are told from both POVs, and there is some overlap, but I think it works well for me. Others have told me the same thing. You just have to be careful that if you tell the same event from both sides, it's never as interesting the second time.

Amy wrote: "Certain genres tend to "usually" have specific styles, too. Mysteries often use first person viewpoint, which makes the story very immediate and puts the reader in the middle of the action. It's al..."

Amy - excellent point regarding genre. I write romantic suspense so I have to have at least two points of view. I do like to throw in the antagonists point of view but sometime only limited in the early part of the story . . . really the opening chapters need to tie the heroine and hero together soundly in heart and sole. One mentor said the POV for any section should be from the character who has the MOST to loose in that scene or is under in the WORST conflict. Rory

I went crazy and have 26 different POVs in my novel, which were counted by a reviewer and came as a complete surprise.

I chose this method both for pacing (it's a fast moving action story) and because it was important to see the half dozen main characters through the eyes of others. It felt like a good way to help develop all the characters while maintaining the pace.

My WIP only has three POVs, as I need a rest...

Multiple points of view do not put me off at all. When we'll done multiple pov's can provide a great effect. There are two things which DO put me off when reading multiple pov's. I consider they both can be chalked up to lazy and/or uninspired writing.
1. Head jumping to fill you in - often done when there is a primary pov, but the author wants to fill the reader in on something the primary pov isn't privy to. It's actually a good thing if the reader doesn't know everything in 1+2=3 format.
2. Choppy action scenes - often used to "speed up" an action scene. I've seen authors write only one or two paragraphs per pov character before moving to the next. It jumps you all over place. It's fast paced but creates the pace artificially and doesn't give the reader time establish a flow in any of the scenes.

Jonathan wrote: "It's not a deal-breaker as far as I'm concerned, but my gut tells me that confining the narrative to three points of view at most will minimize the possibility of any confusion on the reader's part..."

I agree about ensuring the reader is not confused (that's a killer!), but it's also very important to find the best way to tell a particular story rather than limiting any options.

Some of my favorite books have more than one voice. As long as the writing carefully distinguishes between the character's PoV with tone, style and language I find it an enjoyable way to read a story. So many interesting things can be done with it.

But I also find it particularly distracting when the PoV changes mid chapter. I have read a few books where each chapter alternated to a different character and that worked. Others where the voice changes in sets of chapters worked for me as well. But changing it mid chapter just snaps me out of the story. Kind of like a road bump...

Jonathan wrote: "Steve wrote: "...but it's also very important to find the best way to tell a particular story rather than limiting any options."

Absolutely--no narrative technique should be off-limits. (Personall..."

Very true, Jonathan.

I'm not put off by books with multiple POV. If done right, it can be a great way to demonstrate an author's skill. Plus, as a reader, It gives me the opportunity to learn more about the characters.