POV Conundrum

[datruf26]

I pose a question in regard to my POV characters in a sci-fi dystopian epic series.

I have a small mix of multiple character perspectives that serve as voices/viewpoints throughout my series, but there is one character in specific: the "Protagonist Villain" who I'd prefer not to reveal his inner perspective. While I like both, I typically prefer 3rd person sci-fi over 1st but my main Protagonist character (not to be confused with the Protagonist Villain) in the first novel's voice is so rich I couldn't help but continue on with the development of his voice I have (in 1st). So I'm developing the first novel in a manner similar to The Bone Shard Daughter and Outlander with a mix of 1st & 3rd perspectives.

If Protagonist A (who is written in 1st pov) were to die (ie. think Ned Stark GOT season 1) in the first novel of a series, that is written in multiple perspectives. Do you think you could transition easier to the 2nd novel/rest of series, if:

A) all the other characters POVs were written in 3rd person (in that first novel) and the following sequel(s) entirely written in 3rd, abandoning that 1st person pov with that Protagonist "A" character?

Or

B) if the first novel were to have all characters in the 1st pov outside the "Protagonist Villain" (who would be in 3rd pov). And the following sequels written with the same approach as that first novel, the [new main] Protagonist "B" in 1st pov along with all other main characters outside of the (3rd person) "Protagonist Villain"?

For context, Protagonist B, along with the next closest supporting protagonist in the series are main characters in the first novel, so we're not absent of their voice or viewpoint in the First novel.

The series is a split dual line following Protagonist A and a small mix of perspectives in the first novel and Protagonist B & the Protagonist Villain, with a small mix of supporting perspectives through the remaining series.

In each novel there would be about 1 - 3 crucial characters outside the Protagonist & Protagonist Villain that can serve a voice in 1st pov or help serve a perspective in 3rd.

 

[Wayne Mack]

I would avoid having multiple characters all using first person point of view; it is difficult to show shifts in perspective and becomes confusing to the reader. I would not let worries about follow on novels influence the decisions about the current novel, do what makes sense for it. The follow on novels may be a mix of first person and third person or go strictly third person as appropriate.

I feel that first person is most appropriate when the primary character spends most of his or her time alone. This eliminates exposition via dialog with another character and requires heavier reliance on internal thoughts. When mixing first person and third person perspective, I suggest that whenever the first person is present, then the first person point of view can be used. Perspectives from the third person characters should only be used when the first person character is out of the scene.

 

[datruf26]

Thank you, yes the first person character in the first installment is more of a lonewolf. An idea i got from another thread to have some sort of consistency throughout the series would be to use option A but instead of abandoning the 1st person, have Protagonist B pick up that first person responsibility in the sequels as they will be taking on the main protagonist role. Carrying the torch scenario.

 

[WSDuffy]

I would try to make the second book structurally similar to the second. If you have one First Person and many 3rd person POVs in book 1, do something similar in Book 2. That way, people who liked book one because of the structure will find a continuation in book 2, with potentially a new compelling 1st person voice

 

[Christine Wheelwright]

Interesting. I think multiple first person can work well. Typically the narratives are rigidly split from chapter to chapter (each titled with the name of the narrator). I would suggest Success, by Martin Amis, and The Book of Skulls, by Robert Silverberg as good examples (although two very different novels). You can have a lot of fun with the fact that we see ourselves very differently to how others see us. Or that the same encounter can be seen very differently by the individuals involved. I would be less interested if multiple first person was being used as a crude mechanism to have the story take place in many times/locations. In that case I would stick to third person.

As for swapping between first and third - I think that would be quite experimental. I don't think I've ever seen that.

 

[Wayne Mack]

I would not worry about shifting POV between books. Lee Child's Jack Reacher series included both first person and third person books. I didn't even realize the difference until I saw it noted in a comment somewhere. Tell a good story and the reader won't notice anything but the most egregious technical flaws.

 

[Biskit]

You can have a lot of fun with the fact that we see ourselves very differently to how others see us. Or that the same encounter can be seen very differently by the individuals involved.

I would second that. I've been playing with multiple 1st POV in my current wip and presenting the same things from different perspectives is great fun.

I would be less interested if multiple first person was being used as a crude mechanism to have the story take place in many times/locations.

OK, guilty of that as well, but then it's a time-travel story so I get to have my characters meet each other out of any simple chronological order.

Overall, I adore writing 1st POV, getting under the skin of the character, being the foul-mouthed time-travel guru once again stranded in a totalitarian era where they want his skills, and being the ruthless assassin who sees those same authoritarian thugs as targets, or collateral damage between her and the target.