After many years of writing and teaching novel writing, I firmly believe that perspective or point of view is the number one style problem for most writers. It is also one of the easiest problems to correct with awareness of both the problem and possible solutions. For the sake of simplicity, in this chapter I will stick with the term point of view, although it is interchangeable with perspective.
Here’s a question: What is reality? Ultimately it’s what someone perceives it to be. Thus there is no one, singular reality among people. Thus your choice of the point with which to tell your story taints the story for the reader. The same story told from two different points of view is a very different story.
In real life if three people see an event, you have three different points of view. When writing your novel, the point of view the author chooses to channel the scene through is the point of view the reader gets.
So who is telling the story? You are. But whose voice does the reader ‘hear’ when they read? The point of view through which you relate the story. It could be yours in omniscient voice, or channeled through various characters in third limited, or simply be a narrator telling a story in first person.
When considering how to tell your story, the first thing you have to do is select a point of view. This may be the most critical decision you have to make. Often the type of story you are writing will clearly dictate the point of view, but a good understanding of the various modes of presentation is essential because this is one area where beginning novelists often have problems. They may select the right point of view, but it is often used poorly because of a lack of understanding of the tool itself.
Regardless of which point of view (or points of view) you choose to use, there is one thing you must have: you as the author must have a good feeling about the point of view with which you are telling the story. If you don't have a warm and fuzzy about that, this confusion will most definitely be translated to the reader. Remember, ultimately, point of view is your voice as a writer.
Some people write like a music video: point of view flying all over the place, giving glimpses into each character but never really keeping the reader oriented. I say this because the best analogy I can give for point of view is to look at it as your camera. You as author are the director: you see and know everything in your story. But the reader only sees and knows what the camera records: the point of view you choose. You must always keep that in mind. You see the entire scene, but your lens only records the words you put on the page and you have to keep your lens tightly focused and firmly in hand.
The key term to know, like a director, is the word ‘cut’. A cut in film terminology is when the camera is either a) stopped, then restarted later, or b) stopped and another camera is then used. To a writer, a cut is a change in point of view. In a music video, they go about three seconds before having to ‘cut’. Robert Altman, in the beginning of The Player, uses an extremely long single camera sequence before the first cut—another reason to watch the film.
The most critical thing to remember about point of view is that you have to keep the reader oriented. The reader has got to know from what point of view they are viewing the scene. Lose that and you lose the reader. Thus, as with everything else, there is no wrong point of view to write in, or even mixture of point of views to write in, but it is wrong to confuse the reader as to the point of view through which they are ‘seeing’ the story.
Take the camera point of view a bit further. When directors do a scene, they immediately look into a viewfinder and watch the recording of the take. They do this because, although they saw what happened, they have to know what the camera recorded. As an author, you have to get out of your own point of view as the writer and be able to see what you write as the reader sees it.
1st, 3rd Limited and Omniscient Voice
First person means you use the word "I" quite a bit. It’s giving the camera to one character and letting that character film a documentary while doing a voiceover.
This point of view has its advantage in that the narrator is telling his/her own story. The major disadvantage is that the reader can only see and know what the narrator experiences and knows. You, as the author, are absent in this mode, thus you surrender part of your control in writing. Remember, the first person narrator is not you the author, but rather the character in the story. The narrator can be a witness or a participant in the story.
Note that there are certain types of genre that fit first person very well, most particularly mysteries/detective stories. That's logical if you understand the advantages of first person: by using that mode, the writer can bring the reader along for the ride, disclosing clues as the narrator discovers them.
The major disadvantage of first person is that your narrator has to be present in every scene. Because of this, many writers make their narrator the protagonist. A problem can crop up in that the narrator will then be a critical part of the plot and have many things happen to them and around them. Will the narrator be able to react realistically while still telling the story in a coherent form?
Another problem can be the logistics of getting your narrator to all the key events in order to narrate them. I have seen writers end up with very convoluted, and unrealistic plots in order to do that. If the narrator isn’t present at these important scenes, then they find out about them by other means, which can lessen suspense and definitely lessens the immediacy of the action in the story as you have major action occurring offstage.
Some authors use a narrator who isn’t one of the main characters—what is known as a detached narrator. The narrator is more of an observer. This has some advantages. Think of the Sherlock Holmes stories—who is narrating? Watson. Why? Because this allows the author to withhold what Holmes is thinking from the audience.
Something else to think about—should the reader believe your narrator? If everything your narrator says is fact, then there might not be much suspense. But think about the movie The Usual Suspects. The story is narrated by a character, who it turns out, is the man everyone is searching for. In a book, you can raise suspense if your first person narrator is caught in a small lie early on in the story—the reader will then have to be more judgmental about everything else the narrator says.
Another big issue of first person narration is the issue of tense and time. There are two ways to view time in a first person story:
I remember when. In this case, the narrator is telling the story in past tense, looking backward. This immediately reduces the suspense of whether the narrator survives the story. There is also the issue that the narrator is thus withholding information from the reader—the narrator obviously knows the ending, yet chooses not to reveal it to the reader.
In real time. The narrator is telling the story as it unfolds around him or her. A problem with this is what happens when the narrator is involved in an emotionally overwhelming event? Will he still be able to narrate the story?
The big problem with time sense is that even the best writers tend to mix 1 and 2 above. At times they will be in real time, then every so often slip into past time. Additionally, to give you an even bigger headache, both are usually written in past tense. So how do you write a real time story in past tense?
A further problem with first person is many writers tend to slide from first into second person point of view. Any time you put you in your narrative, addressing the reader, you have moved from first to second person.
There are ways to get around the disadvantages of first person. Examine some first person novels and you will discover them. Interview With A Vampire by Anne Rice is an interesting use of first person and the title tells you why. She has the first person of the reporter start the story but shifts into a first person narrative by the vampire Louis through the medium of the interview. She can go back in time with Louis and then return to the present with the reporter, both in first person. She has two levels of interest and suspense: the present fate of the narrator, and the fate of the vampire in his own tale.
There are other novelists who have come up with novel ideas (pun intended) to tell first person stories while getting around some of the disadvantages. Present tense is an option.
I place great emphasis in my own writing career and when teaching upon reading and also upon watching movies/videos, but I watch videos and read books in a different mode as a "writer." I study them for structure. To see what the author/ screenwriter/ director did with the subject matter. How it was presented. When you pick up a novel, the first thing you should note is what person it is written in. Then ask yourself why the author chooses that point of view. What did the novel gain from that point of view?
When I give examples in a little bit, you will see more clearly the advantages and disadvantages of first person.
One thing about first person to keep in mind. It is the voice most novice writers naturally gravitate to, but it is one of the most difficult voices to do well. Because of that, there is an initial negative impression among agents and editors when confronted with a first person story.
First Person
Most limiting
Narrator is not the author
The narrator always has the camera
Narrator has to be present in every scene or get information second-hand
Works for mysteries
Hard for thrillers
Detached narrator: Sherlock Holmes
Believable narrator: The Usual Suspects
First Person Time Sense
I remember when . . .
Already know what happened and are withholding
No suspense over fate of the narrator
In real time
Come along with me
Emotionally overwhelming events
Both are usually told in past tense. which further confuses things
You usually end up mixing the two modes
Third Person Limited
Is when you give the camera to various characters and they record the scene. Everything in the book is channeled through your point of view characters.
A key concept here is the concept of a ‘cut’. When a film director yells cut, he means one of several things: first, in all cases, he’s stopping the camera that is currently filming. Then he is going to:
Leave the camera with the current point of view character, but is moving that character off-screen to another time and/or place and then restarting the camera.
Take the camera from the current point of view character and give it to another character who will then ‘film’ the scene. This scene could be in the same place or a different place. It could be the same time or a different time. If it’s the same time, then the reader is getting the same scene from different POV characters and you must have a very good reason for doing that because it’s head-hopping.
Regardless, what you must do is make sure the reader knows you, as the author, have done a cut. The reader must know within the first paragraph after a cut which character now has the camera. I recommend against doing a cut in the middle of a scene unless you have a specific purpose for doing so.
Another factor in third limited is that each point of view character is literally going to have a different point of view. Each is going to see the same situation differently. As the author this requires you to shift your perspective as you write to the various POV characters and even write each one slightly different in terms of style.
There are what I call first-third stories, where the book is written in third limited, but there is only one point of view character. An author might choose to do this as an alternative to the problems of first person POV.
How many points of view can you handle? Exactly how schizophrenic are you? It’s a question of your ability as a writer. If you aren’t an expert at POV I’d recommend limiting the number of POV characters as much as possible. One thing I stayed away from in my thrillers was getting into the POV of the antagonist. Because the antagonist knows his dastardly plan and I don’t want to reveal it to the reader. Remember, you can’t cheat your reader by going into the POV of a character and withhold information they know from the reader.
There are several problems with too many POV characters beyond just your ability. If you have too many POVs, you will reveal a lot of information to the reader, but not to the other characters. Thus your reader will end up knowing more than your characters, which could end up being an awkward situation as you try to get some characters up to speed on information they need to know but which the reader already knows. You could end up writing some really boring scenes for the reader.
Another problem with too many POV characters is you diffuse attention from your protagonist. The reader spends so much time in points of view outside of the main character that they lose focus.
Third Person Limited
Everything is channeled through various characters’ points of view
Cuts have to be very clear to readers
Each POV character must be distinct
First, third stories
Cutting in the middle of a scene: is there a purpose
How many points of view can you—and the reader—handle
Too many POV characters: The reader ends up knowing more than any of the characters
Diffuse attention from your protagonist
The line between Third Limited and Omniscient is a thin one
Omniscient point of view. This is also known as authorial narrative. When I first began writing I felt I had to lock in third person on a character for every scene. And that worked. But the more I wrote, the more I wanted to use an omniscient point of view. I also realized that most of my favorite authors wrote in omniscient voice.
I liken authorial point of view to the camera getting pulled back in the hands of the author in order to show the viewer more. There are times you might want to pull back so you can tell the reader more information or show the reader more than the characters who are in the scene might be able to see or know.
For example, a battle scene can be written much better from omniscient point of view if you want the reader to understand the battle. But if you want the reader to see how one specific character is responding to the danger of combat, you might stick with third person from that character’s point of view.
One of the most difficult obstacles for me as a writer was accepting that I could write from the authorial point of view. That I can describe things as they are or were using my own voice as the author of the work. The more I write, the more I find it important to be able to do this. There may be some information that is not going to fit using third person. Also, you may get very tired of writing "he thought" over and over again and the reader may grow weary of seeing it.
Starting sentences with the word THE shifts you up into omniscient quite a bit.
Omniscient
Authorial narrative
Camera is above, all-seeing and all-knowing
Must be the story psychologist
Good for action scenes
Be careful of head-hopping
More authoritative
You have to consider point of view before you begin your book and before you write every scene, much as a movie director has to. You have to determine the best point of view to get across to the reader the story you are trying to tell. Decide where are you going to place the camera to the best advantage of the story.
Say you are going to write a thriller about a female FBI agent tracking down a vicious serial killer. You want to open your book with a scene that will grab the reader and set the stage for the suspense of the novel so you decide to open with a killing. What point of view will you use? Now, remember, no point of view is wrong—you just have to understand the advantages and disadvantages of your possible choices and make a knowledgeable decision. And remember, you will most likely be stuck with that point of view for the entire manuscript.
First person might be a bit difficult. After all, this would most likely mean your narrator actually witnesses the scene. This isn’t impossible, but it could be awkward. Perhaps you use first person from the protagonist’s point of view and she witnesses the murder but is not in a position to take any action? Using first person from the POV of the victim means the book is rather short, unless the victim survives the attack and swears vengeance. First person from the killer would make for a dark book, but it has been done.
You can decide to use third person from the point of view of the victim. This can build tension well, but also means the chapter will end abruptly.
You can use third person from the point of view of the killer, but remember that the killer knows who he or she is and therefore you have to be careful how much insight into the killer’s head you allow. A technique some use to overcome that limitation is to have the killer think of himself in different terms than his reality. The killer is Joe Schmo, but when he’s in killer mode he thinks of himself as Captain Hook, thus hiding his identity from the reader in third person insight.
Or, you could use omniscient, placing your ‘camera’ above the scene. Here, though, you have to be careful not to show too much and give away the killer’s identity. Much like a director might choose a dark basement where the viewer can’t see the killer’s face, you will do the same.
Another example of considering how to write a scene is if you have two characters meeting in a pub for an important exchange of dialogue. They sit across from each other. How are you going to ‘shoot’ this scene? From third person of one of the characters? That means you get that character’s thoughts and you describe the other character’s reactions—i.e. the camera is on your POV character’s shoulder. Is it important that the reader know one character’s thought more than the other’s? Or is it more important to show one character’s reactions than the others?
Or, do you keep switching the camera back and forth across the booth, going from one to the other? If you’re Larry McMurty and won a Pulitzer Prize you might be able to do that, but for most of us, such a constant switching of POV is very disconcerting to the reader. Or do you shoot it omniscient with the camera off to the side and simply show actions and record dialogue?
Consider this scene like a date. If you were out with someone and you knew exactly what they were thinking, and they knew what you were thinking, would there be any suspense to the date? Taking too many points of view can greatly reduce your suspense.
I’ve written in all the above points of view. I tend to go with omniscient now as it’s the voice that works best for me, but it took me almost forty manuscripts to figure that out.
Examples
First: Years ago, I was told that to be an effective sniper, I had to be a man who could shoot another human being on nothing but an order and stop; also on order. The stopping is important. I’d been told I was one of those people.
Third: Years ago, Horace Chase was told that an effective sniper was a man who could shoot another human being on nothing but an order and stop; also on order. The stopping is important. He knew he was one of those people.
Omniscient: An effective sniper is a man who can shoot another human being on nothing but an order and stop; also on order. The stopping is important. Horace Chase was one of those people and that made him dangerous.
Note the subtle differences in each POV for this opening line from Chasing The Ghost. In the first one we’re getting it all through Chase. In the second one, it’s through Chase, but with more distance. In the last, it’s omniscient and the last line part is more definitive with the author telling you he is one of those people. Not that he’d been told or that he knew he was.
A Deeper Look at POV
Here is the difference between an expository scene in third person limited and omniscient:
Third Person
Joe walked up the dirt road leading to the Giza Plateau. As he cleared the rise he saw the Sphinx off to his right and the three massive pyramids ahead. He knew that historians believed the largest of the three had been built by the Pharaoh Khufu, more popularly known as Cheops. He’d read that it was 138 meters high. He was impressed with the magnitude of the construction, noting the massive blocks of aged stone and wondering how they had been moved so long ago.
Omniscient
Joe walked up the dirt road leading to the Giza Plateau. The Sphinx was to his right and the three massive pyramids in front. Historians believe the largest pyramid was built by the Pharaoh Khufu, more popularly known as Cheops. It is 138 meters high, built of massive blocks of aged stone that must have taken a marvel of engineering to move.
The second presents the information directly, without having to be processed through Joe’s head. If you want to break yourself of always using a character's point of view to write, try using the word THE to start sentences. This will help you in writing narrative. Remember that you are the AUTHOR. You can actually write down what you want to say without having to have it come from the point of view of one of your characters.
For more examples of the various points of views try to visualize the following: Your point of view character, Joe, is sitting in a room looking out a window into a courtyard. Two men walk into the courtyard, speaking to each other. They proceed to get into a fight. Notice the various ways I can write this scene:
First Person
I saw the two people walk into the courtyard. They began to argue with each other, and then suddenly, they began to fight.
Note: Because I wasn't out there, I couldn't hear what they said, which is a limitation of first person. However, I could find out what was said later on by talking to one of the two people. (There are always ways to get around disadvantages.) Or, I could change the story and have my first person character in the courtyard in order to be able to relate what happens—but the presence of that character in the courtyard could also change what occurs.
Another issue is identifying the two men. My narrator would have to know them in order to do that.
If I changed the story and made my narrator either of the characters, then the issue would be whether I am telling this as it occurs, or looking back. If I am telling as it occurs, then can my narrator still narrate what is happening coherently while in the middle of participating in a fight?
Third Person, Locked Point Of View
It is as if you are telling the reader what is happening out there from Joe’s point of view and he knows something about what is happening:
Joe saw John walk into the courtyard with Ted. Joe could see that they were arguing and he knew they were still probably upset about their earlier confrontation over Madeline's boyfriend.
He saw John hold up his hands in a placating manner and say something. Then he noticed that Ted was yelling something back and John dropped his hands.
Joe jumped to his feet as he saw John grab the collar of Ted’s windbreaker.
Note that everything that happens is being filtered through Joe’s senses. And we have to ‘trust’ Joe’s assumptions about the scene; for example, that the two are upset over the earlier confrontation. For all Joe knows, it might be something very different.
What many writers do to overcome this is use one of the advantages of third person, which is switch POVs from one character to another who has a better camera angle.
Third Person, Shifting Point Of View
The same scene. We start in Joe’s point of view, and then shift when it is necessary.
Joe looked up from his cup of coffee and saw John and Ted walk into the courtyard. Joe could see that they were arguing. He assumed the two were still upset about their earlier confrontation over Madeline's boyfriend.
In the courtyard, John could see Joe watching them but he could care less. John was still uneasy about their earlier confrontation over Madeline's boyfriend.
"I still don't accept it,” Ted muttered. “It's wrong."
John held up his hands. "I don't want to talk about it any more. We've discussed Philip enough. It's up to Madeline."
"No, it's not up to Madeline. We have a responsibility. He's not good for her and I don't approve of their going out together."
John dropped his hands and glared at Ted; he could never just let anything go. "I said, I don't want to talk about it again. Period."
Ted wasn't to be dissuaded. "We have to. I think--"
John felt something snap inside of him and he grabbed the collar of Ted's windbreaker. "Goddamn it. I told you I didn't want to talk about it again."
Note: here I describe what is happening in the courtyard by getting into one of the two men's heads. Note that I make sure the reader knows I’ve shifted character POV by reversing the camera angle. I let the reader know a little background simply by having one of the character's thinking about it. We can hear what is said and we know what the argument is about. The camera is on John's shoulder with a feed into his brain. We know who the characters are because John, the POV character, knows. We also know that what Joe suspected was true, by having John confirm what they were fighting about. But there is a head hop in this scene which is a bit disconcerting, isn’t it?
How do you let a reader know the POV has shifted in third person? The subject of the sentence identifies the POV.
Omniscient (author as narrator), here the author simply records observations, showing, not telling:
John and Ted walked into the courtyard. Ted's face was tight, his forehead wrinkled in thought, his eyes smoldering. "I still don't accept it. It's wrong."
John held up his hands. "I don't want to talk about it any more. We've discussed Philip enough. It's up to Madeline."
"No, it's not up to Madeline. We have a responsibility. He's not good for her and I don't approve of their going out together."
John dropped his hands and glared at Ted. "I said, I don't want to talk about it again. Period."
Ted wasn't to be dissuaded. "We have to. I think--"
John's hands shot up and his fingers wrapped around the collar of Ted's windbreaker. "Goddamn it. I told you I didn't want to talk about it again."
I manage to impart all the information needed and describe the scene. The best way to describe this point of view is to pretend you, as author, are a movie camera that can move around freely throughout your scenes, you show. Also, and this is difficult for new writers, you can make authorial comments such as Ted not being dissuaded because, as God, you know what everyone is thinking.
You could also write this scene with an omniscient point of view and give both characters’ thoughts and inner reactions.
Note that in first person, because I had the glass between the character, and me I couldn't hear what they said. If I was in the courtyard with them, so I could hear what was being said, I also might affect the action, because of my presence. In third person I am free to either lock onto one of the characters. In omniscient I am floating overhead, and not affecting the scene at all.
The bottom line is: Every time you use a point of view, make sure you look at the advantages and disadvantages. Recognize what information you are imparting and ultimately try to see things from the reader's point of view. In the final analysis, you must make sure your reader is smoothly imparted the information you wish for him or her to have.
More On Point Of View
Staying in a character's head also makes your character inconsistent if the thoughts are not in line with what he/she says or does. And if it is in line, then why have to tell thoughts when the words/actions will speak for them? That isn't to say don't get into thoughts at all, but don't do it exclusively.
When you do have your characters' thoughts, make sure they think differently from each other. Don't write the same way for every one and have them react the same or they appear to be cardboard cutouts.
A word on 2d person. It has been used but is difficult to work with. 2d person is using "you" or "we" in telling the story. This has an advantage in that it can bring the reader into the story more intimately, in fact, making the reader part of the story in the role of participant or close observer. There are occasions where the author might address the reader using 2d person.
TEST: What point of view is this book in?
ANSWER: 2d person.
Why did I choose that point of view? Because I wanted you to be involved when you read it. I wanted you the reader to feel that I was talking directly to you.
How about mixing the various points of views in the same novel? Can it be done?
Remember my premise: there is no wrong way. Yes, it can be done. A certain fellow named William Faulkner did an OK job of it in a novel called The Sound And The Fury. The first three sections of that book were first person (indeed, three different first persons). The last third person. You can do anything that works. It certainly worked for Faulkner, but remember: SMOOTHNESS.
I just finished rereading The Last Picture Show by Larry McMurty and in the forward he presented an interesting angle on point of view. He said that on occasion he has written a story in first person and then rewritten it in third. I've tried it and it's not as hard as you would think. What’s curious though, is that in going from first, the initial rewrite turned out to be omniscient. Then I had to write down from omniscient to third. This indicates that first and omniscient can lend themselves to info-dump, which is not a good thing and something you have to be careful of. In strict third limited, you can never have even a sentence of info-dump.
When you watch TV or film, start paying very close attention how the director filmed the scene. Think about something as simple as two people sitting in a booth at a restaurant. Does the director film it from the side, showing both people? Or does the camera shift back and forth from one side of the table to the other? And if it does, when do the shifts take place? Does the director want to show the person speaking or the person listening and reacting to the other’s words?
Do you see how many different ways a scene can be filmed? You, as the author, can write the same scene many different ways.
Please don't think from all that I have written above that it’s wrong to get in your characters' heads. If you go into the bookstore today and pull the top ten fiction novels off the shelf, I think more than half would have varying degrees of insight into the characters' thoughts and feelings. The key is to do it right. I have emphasized this point because I have found this area to be the number one style problem for new writers. I think as long as you are aware of it and use the tool properly, you will be all right.
Remember: consistency and smoothness.
The most important thing about any point of view you use is that the reader knows where the ‘camera’ is.
What point of view do you think you’ve written your manuscript in?
Point Of View And Character Arc
Pull all your same character POV scenes and look at them separate from the other POV character scenes
Check to make sure the voice is consistent
Check for character arc
Point Of View and Voice
The filter over the camera lens
All voices must be distinctive
In third, the voice must change slightly for each POV character
In omniscient the voice must be knowledgeable
Every writer must find their own voice