GIDDY CAMERA, STEADY PEN
Our Quick Guide to handling points of view
Novelists
today are as familiar with film
& TV as they are with novels. That's no bad thing. But beware.
Each medium has its grammar, and the rules that work
in one don't always work in another. The problem is
particularly pronounced when it comes to points of view
(POVs, in the jargon). The rules around POVs are so
strong, that getting them wrong is a fatal mistake - one likely to require a total rewrite of your work
That's
the bad news. The good news is that this Quick
Guide tells you what to do and how to do it ...
The
camera is a promiscuous beast. It can have the perspective
of any character or none. Sometimes it might view a
scene from (say) Romeo's perspective; the next
moment,
from Juliet's. One moment, it might have the viewpoint
of a serving maid; the next be positioned at some disembodied,
godlike vantage point. If the camera stopped dancing, viewers
would quickly grow bored.
There's just one thing cameras don't seem to manage very well: celibacy. Though feature films have been made from a first person perspective, there haven't been many. (MGM made one, The Lady in the Lake, in 1947 - the film that supplied the images on this webpage. The camera rolled along as though it was the eyes of the narrator. When the narrator smoked, cigarette smoked curled up round the lens. But the effect was gimmicky and stale. The experiment was seldom repeated)
Novelists (you may be disappointed to learn) are natural celibates. Because novelists deal with the interior worlds of their characters, we simply can't go leaping around in quite the same way. In fact - and this rule is iron hooped in steel for all but the very best novelists - there are only three ways to write a book. They are:
| First person | First person narration is what it sounds like. The entire action is seen through the eyes of the narrator. (' I did this. I saw that. I felt the other.') The narrator can only narrate scenes in which he or she is physically present. You cannot under any circumstances mix first person scenes with third person ones. If the book is being narrated by your central character, then how the heck can (s)he know what's going on if they aren't there to witness it? This is an iron rule. Break it at your peril. Other things to think about with first person narratives:
|
|
| Third person single POV |
Third person narration from a single perspective ('He did this. He saw that. He felt the other.') offers one big area of flexibility compared with the first person method. It allows you as narrator to write prose different from the kind of thing your central character might choose to write. If your protagonist, for instance, is not very introspective, then third person narration allows you to get inside his thoughts and feelings much more than you might be able to if the character himself were describing things. Why might you want to stick to a single POV through the course of a whole book? The answer is that by focusing relentlessly on one single character you will get more deeply into his thoughts, feelings and inner journey than you could if your focus is more scattered. We are often asked if it is possible to use secondary points of view in a book where there is one primary focus. The answer is yes, as long as the use of such POVs is very sparing. Any time away from your main character will tend to create a loss of intensity in your writing. That's OK if you have a crucial plot development to recount, and it is clear to the reader why this development impacts the protagonist. But the more time you spend away from your area of focus, the greater the loss of impetus. As a rough guide, if you spend more than ten short sections/chapters away from your protagonist, you are losing momentum. |
|
| Third person multiple POVs |
Most books we read are written in the third person, with multiple points of view ('Jane did this. John saw that. Jo felt the other.') And many of these become hopelessly unstuck, because the writers haven't understood the difference between written fiction and film. So here's the rule. Fiction is about inner worlds and inner journeys. If you use a particular POV repeatedly, then you must fully characterise that person. That means, a fully developed inner life; a fully developed character arc; a full set of challenges, encounters and personal change. If you work from a POV where the character in question is only partly developed, then this part of your writing will never come to life. if you aren't sure whether a particular character is fully developed, then he/she almost certainly isn't. This rule has one important consequence. Namely, very few books can tolerate more than 3-4 POVs. It's extremely difficult to accommodate more internal worlds than this in a book and do it properly. Very skilled authors writing literary fiction (where narrative drive may be less of an issue) can risk more POVs - but even there it's a risk. If in doubt, don't do it. |
And
finally, here are a handful of other no-nos. All of
these are minor crimes. Commit them at your peril ...
Don't
switch POVs in the middle of a scene. If you start
a scene with Mary, don't end it with Tom.
- Don't
write a scene from the POV of somebody who is killed
in the course of it. If you really want the last minute
on tape, as it were, then you can end a scene with
a final sentence like 'He looked up. The gun barrel
was pointing straight at him. He felt nothing, only
emptiness ...' But not much of this, please.
- If
you are writing a scene from Jo-Jo's perspective then
don't relate information that only Ki-Ki could have
seen. Choose a POV and stick to it.
- If
you are writing a scene from Roger's perspective,
then you can't relate emotional information about
Fanny. If you want to tell us something about Fanny,
you have to do it via information which Roger could
plausibly have access to. 'Fanny's lips were tight
and white. He knew the signs of her fury well enough
by now ...'
- If you start a book with a good number of scenes from Laura's perspective, then you can't just ditch her halfway through - or at the very least, you need a jolly good reason to do this. If you're not sure if your reason is strong enough, then it certainly isn't.
Finally, if in doubt, get in touch. if you get into a muddle with points of view, you will need to rewrite your book almost completely. That's not a risk it makes any sense to take. Better get advice now, than make a pig's ear of it.
