Dominant point of views

Jo Zebedee

Aliens vs Belfast.
Supporter
Joined
Oct 5, 2011
Messages
19,384
Location
blah - flags. So many flags.
Got some interesting information about point of views today and how, in most scenes, your dominant pov should be the pov for shared scenes.

In my earlier work I have a lot of scenes with the mc and his wife. Technically he is the main pov and she is one of two very strong secondary point of views. Often, in a scene with the main protagonist, i might use one of these two secondaries as they may give something different to the scene/ it may be more integral to their character development. If i was to change all their shared pov scenes to his pov, she would lose a lot in terms of voice, but I can see the logic of it.

How do you choose point of view when you have two valid for the same scene?
 
Usually I can 'feel' who is the right one to use. There was only one scene in TBM that I flapped about and wrote three different times, using each of the three present POV characters, until I decided I was right first time and went with that. (Which was Jenn, as both Ambrose and Merc knew more about what was going, and her POV gave the scene more uh... intrigue/confusion.)
 
Agree with Mouse. I just do what feels right. Though if you're going for rules, maybe the character who the scene has the most effect on should be the POV character?
 
How do you choose point of view when you have two valid for the same scene?

The quick answer: instinct. And sometimes the instinct turns out to be wrong, so I rewrite it from the other one. (In other words, trial and error.)
 
Hmm so far mine has been easy - I trade them off chapter for chapter. If they are a POV character then they are a main character.

This info has given me some direction for my urban fantasy so thanks. If I make Gus the dominant POV character... the rest may just flow better.
 
What I've done (and it's up for debate as to whether it was a good idea) was use a dominant PoV for some shared scenes, but use switching third-person for scenes in which each character has their own individual thoughts on matters - thoughts the reader ought to hear from the characters' minds rather than have it told to them in narrative. However, if a scene of two or more characters should have third-person PoVs, switching between each character when necessary, then I think it's important that the reader has already been introduced to said characters before. That way, a reader can tell immediately when the PoV has switched from one character to another.

Dominant PoV for multi-character scenes, especially if there are many characters involved whom we've never seen before. Third-person PoV for multi-character scenes featuring characters we've met before, or for scenes in which each character's thoughts are important and should be showcased.

Can't say for sure whether this take on things is best, though. :eek:
 
It all depends on what insight that character can contribute to the scene.

In my original WIP I had a chapter where all the characters were travelling together. It was split into three PoVs because I had to provide insight into the conversation they were having at the time which would only be available to a character other than the protagonist. So it started off as the protagonist, switched to her love interest, then switched to her sister, before going back to her. Each contributed something that wouldn't have been available had I stuck with the protagonist for the entire scene.

I do try to stay in the protagonist's PoV as much as possible though.
 
If you're unpublished, I say you stick with the conventional wisdom. It will be easier for new readers to follow the story. I'm sure there are interesting ways to develop your secondary characters though his POV. Better dialogue?
 
If you're unpublished, I say you stick with the conventional wisdom. It will be easier for new readers to follow the story. I'm sure there are interesting ways to develop your secondary characters though his POV. Better dialogue?

Well, shifting third point of view is an established approach to telling a story.

The problem with this particular mc is that he is, essentially, going to disappear from the plot for about 10000 words. There are plot reasons for this, and he is still the centre of the story for those 10000 words. On top of that, at the end of the book he essentially bows out as a pov character, and at the start of book two the other two pov have to carry the can for a while, and I think they need to be strong enough to carry things for a while, and established enough that readers will pick up book two and find it flowing on nicely.

I also wonder... I tend to write interconnecting stuff, so this is happening to the mc and this is a secondary plot line, and often the secondary povs are the ones carrying the second lines, and maybe I need to think about which dominant plot line I am following at a given time.

Instinct, as HB has pointed out (and others here) is generally how I've done it, but I might go back and have a muse and see if that instinct was right.
 
I'm not knocking multiple POVs really. If you're using a secondary POV to re-introduce the MC after a long break, I can see how that might work. Although, I wouldn't suggest switching POVs at multiple shared scenes. That sounds confusing; thought that's what you meant.
 
Got some interesting information about point of views today and how, in most scenes, your dominant pov should be the pov for shared scenes.

Not sure what you mean by "shared scenes" - I presume you mean where you have multiple potential POV characters present?

My own system I decided on for third person limited is that the POV character has to be the most dynamic one in that scene, ie, the one who is going to develop most through that section.

If a scene is written from a POV, and it appears that character is mostly serving as an observer, it means I need to write in some form of internal conflict, or else rewrite from the POV of a character who is going to experience the most conflict according to the context and information in the scene.

I'm unpublished, though so don;t quote as an expert opinion. :)
 
There's another reason not to be in the main character's PoV in a particular scene: because you don't want the reader to have access to that character's thoughts, and to omit them in their own PoV might be seen to be being deceitful.


As an aside, I know that there are unreliable narrators, but I see those narrators being more omniscient ones, i.e. they are (possibly unnamed) characters in the book, ones who are, in effect, relating the story to the reader, and they happen to tell lies in the process. I think I would feel a bit cheated if the book's close third person "narrators" were being misleading**. In close third person, the PoV character is not usually breaking the fourth wall; the reader (at least as far as thought are concerned) is eavesdropping.


** - Misleading about the plot. I accept that a PoV character - say a child (or a simple woodcutter's son (;)) - might not have the vocabulary to give us a totally accurate picture of events and locations. But even then, the child would be being truthful to themselves (and so to us). (I won't go into the unfortunate folk who can't help lying to themselves.)
 
There's another reason not to be in the main character's PoV in a particular scene: because you don't want the reader to have access to that character's thoughts

This is an excellent point to remember when it comes to PoV's, and is perhaps one of advantages of having quite a few PoV characters in your work.

I've found myself relegating a character I thought of as a 'main' at the start of writing to a 'support' (in terms of # of chapters dedicated to them) because by a certain point I realised she needed to keep a secret from the reader - so no viewpoints internally from her till the reveal. To then describe what's happening I therefore had to promote a 'support' to a more central role.

close third person "narrators" were being misleading

A unreliable narrator or first person perspective I can see, but I'm intrigued if it's possible to truly have an unreliable close third person PoV (perhaps I'm up far too late, and need to get to bed. It's twisting my head, trying to think it...:rolleyes:)

As an aside aside - I'd always write close third person reliably, but when it comes to internal monologue I think it's fine for them to not think about absolutely everything i.e. you can omit information pertinent to the plot further on if it's not natural for them to be thinking about issues relevant to this information in the scene. Or would you classify that as misleading as well?
 
A unreliable narrator or first person perspective I can see, but I'm intrigued if it's possible to truly have an unreliable close third person PoV (perhaps I'm up far too late, and need to get to bed. It's twisting my head, trying to think it...:rolleyes:)
Mine too. I've quoted someone saying that really close third person is first person written in with third person verbs, but this issue is, I believe, an exception to that, if only because I accept a first person narrative can be deceitful, but don't think a close third person narrative ought to be. (I'm not sure, but I think I'd accept it more if the first person narrative was conversational, with asides and the like, possibly because I'd treat the narrative as a form of (obviously one-way) dialogue. If a first person narrative was full of supposedly unmediated thoughts, I'm not sure how I'd feel about being misled. I suppose, as with all these things, it partly depends on how well it's done.)

As an aside aside - I'd always write close third person reliably, but when it comes to internal monologue I think it's fine for them to not think about absolutely everything i.e. you can omit information pertinent to the plot further on if it's not natural for them to be thinking about issues relevant to this information in the scene. Or would you classify that as misleading as well?
You've hit on the key word there: natural. If thoughts seem to have been unnaturally left out, I wouldn't be pleased. Of course, this is a matter of the reader's opinion, but if something important was never being thought about, even when aspects of it were playing out in front of that character's eyes, I'd say that was being deceitful.
 
Switch POV when the plot demands, and only you can decide when.

I’d stick to the main characters as much as possible but sometimes events occur away from the main characters and a POV jump to a secondary character may be needed, but I’d have introduced this character at some point prior in an attempt not to confuse the reader. Trying not to lose the reader as you jump about is the most important thing.

I have had one scene repeated from two POV’s, but I thought it was important for the plot. Two main characters meet for the first time, an alien and human; so I did it from each character to highlight differences. Is this the right thing to do, who knows, but it felt right to me.
 
Mine too. I've quoted someone saying that really close third person is first person written in with third person verbs, but this issue is, I believe, an exception to that, if only because I accept a first person narrative can be deceitful, but don't think a close third person narrative ought to be.

This has been doing my head in all morning! At first I was struggling to try and think how a close third person narrative could be made unreliable... :confused:

...then I thought I had a short story which is almost* written in third person, with an unreliable narrative from the character (duh!, deduct 10 points, shot myself in the foot there)... :)

...but now I'm thinking that, what is happening with this story, is that I - the writer - am reporting what the character is experiencing - but leaving it to the reader to decide whether it's real or hallucinatory**. i.e. the character doesn't know he's unreliable, so does this really count as being deceitful... :confused:

...then I came across this in the Wikipedia entry on unreliable narrators: "It also still remains a matter of debate whether and how a non first-person narrator can be unreliable." Which is where I'm going to leave it, I think! ;)


-----------------------------


* Almost - as in it's in a sloppy omnisicent third person at the moment, but could be re-written as close third quite easily.

** It should be clear at the end which interpretation is the correct one - but I leave it open-ended, and view the story as a fantasy, so it could be a very dark urban fairy tale...
 
My biggest struggle with POV was a fight scene. I started with the mc, but he couldn't give an overall assessment of the situation because he was too busy fighting for his life. So I changed the POV to a subsidiary character, but brought in some of the mc's thoughts in a later flashback. (The mc had no idea how the fight ended, because he was unconscious.)
 
(The mc had no idea how the fight ended, because he was unconscious.)

oh, done that a few times without thinking, for example the PoV character dozes off near the end of the chapter, but the description of things around about continues none-the-less. Sort of 'astral' third person :p

That's what next drafts and editing are there to sort out!
 
As an aside, I know that there are unreliable narrators, but I see those narrators being more omniscient ones, i.e. they are (possibly unnamed) characters in the book, ones who are, in effect, relating the story to the reader, and they happen to tell lies in the process. I think I would feel a bit cheated if the book's close third person "narrators" were being misleading.

I know unreliable narrator is usually in 1st POV, but is there any reason why it can't be 3rd close? In my current wip I have slipped into 1st person at intervals (otherwise it's close 3rd) to share the thoughts of one of the mcs. At this point, the POV character doesn't tell the whole truth. But don't people lie to themselves/suppress the truth all the time? Couldn't this work in 3rd POV?

Sorry, I'm going off subject a bit.
 

Back
Top