|
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:
- The
tone of your writing
must fit with the character of your narrator.
For instance, if your narrator is a rough-edged
character, then all your prose must be rough-edged
too. You wouldn't, in this case, be able to
write sentences like 'Dawn crept up like a gathering
sadness'. (Maybe you wouldn't want to anyway).
Before
you select a first person voice for the book,
make sure that your chosen character will enable
you to write the kind of prose you want to write.
- You
may need to adapt your
plot to handle the single viewpoint.
Because the narrator can't talk about things
he hasn't seen, then you won't be able to talk
about (say) the murder in the security vault
unless the plot allows your narrator to be there.
- If
you have problems handling POVs - this is something
our editors will certainly advise you on - then
first person narration probably offers fewer
pitfalls than the alternatives. And don't
feel patronised if you get given this advice.
Much of the world's great literature has been
written this way./
|
| |
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.
_________________________________________________________________________
The Writers’ Workshop Run by writers for writers
|
