POV's and whatnot

[Carnifex:Pacifex]

So, im still touching up on my short story (Uuzarus) and as I go through, I begin to question my method.
In all of my writing, in all of my stories, I always write in first-person from the perspective of the protagonist. It comes naturally to me and writing in 3rd person has always felt awkard as it oozed out my brian.
 What I did for my short story, is swap whose perspective we view the story from in each chapter. ( it goes from Char. A to Char B then Char A then Char. B every other chapter)
As I read through it I find that I like how the "language"/"voice" of the writing contrasts eachother from the two viewpoints (one view from an ancient entity who wants to be left alone, while the other view is from a bounty hunter desperate for his next meal), But I am concerned how other writers would feel about it.
have any of you read stories that have done something similar? and did you find it irritating, or enhancing?

[Galvatron]

Now this only my personal opinion, but I do not like books with more than one POV if its first person.

Also, even with third person,  I enjoy either one POV or a few, 3-4 generally feels good to me.

My issue with two POVs is if I end up liking one more than the other, I end up dreading the start of a new chapter when I have to switch from the character I like more and it can lead to me putting the book down at chapter breaks more often.

Now if you can do both charcters and keep both equally interesting it could work, and just because its not my cup of tea doesn't mean others wouldn't enjoy it.

[Carnifex:Pacifex]

Now this only my personal opinion, but I do not like books with more than one POV if its first person.

Also, even with third person,  I enjoy either one POV or a few, 3-4 generally feels good to me.

My issue with two POVs is if I end up liking one more than the other, I end up dreading the start of a new chapter when I have to switch from the character I like more and it can lead to me putting the book down at chapter breaks more often.

Now if you can do both charcters and keep both equally interesting it could work, and just because its not my cup of tea doesn't mean others wouldn't enjoy it.

Ah, thank you for the feedback and for your reasoning, its understandable. Being a short story though, do you think that it would be less of an issue?

[LeeringCorpse]

I’m not much of a writer --though I am trying to remedy that of late-- but being someone with a strong background in the visual arts I would say don’t bother asking such a question as to whether a style is good or bad. It is much better to develop the style you want to work with rather then feel you need to conform to what others want or think is good. Imagine if someone came up to Picasso and said, “Interesting, but I think you should paint in the Bob Ross method, it is more traditional,” and he stopped cubism to grow a fro and beard and started painting with a brush one normally uses to slather paint onto a picket fence.

It might not be everyone’s cup-of-tea, but it will be your distinct voice. And if you do it skillfully, people will enjoy it even if it is not the kind of thing they usually go for. Case in point, like Galvatron, I too like books with a smaller number of POVs, but I thoroughly enjoyed a book where the author wrote from 5 or 6 1st person points of view. The author made the experience fun and engaging and it more then made up for the fact that it wasn’t something I usually enjoy reading.

In short, write what you want to write. And if you do it well, people will read.

Just my thoughts on the matter.   

[Carnifex:Pacifex]

I’m not much of a writer --though I am trying to remedy that of late-- but being someone with a strong background in the visual arts I would say don’t bother asking such a question as to whether a style is good or bad. It is much better to develop the style you want to work with rather then feel you need to conform to what others want or think is good. Imagine if someone came up to Picasso and said, “Interesting, but I think you should paint in the Bob Ross method, it is more traditional,” and he stopped cubism to grow a fro and beard and started painting with a brush one normally uses to slather paint onto a picket fence.

It might not be everyone’s cup-of-tea, but it will be your distinct voice. And if you do it skillfully, people will enjoy it even if it is not the kind of thing they usually go for. Case in point, like Galvatron, I too like books with a smaller number of POVs, but I thoroughly enjoyed a book where the author wrote from 5 or 6 1st person points of view. The author made the experience fun and engaging and it more then made up for the fact that it wasn’t something I usually enjoy reading.

In short, write what you want to write. And if you do it well, people will read.

Just my thoughts on the matter.

Many thanks for the feedback, and that thing with the "fro and beard" was clever ^_^

[The Deposed King]

I would advise against POV shifting, especially in a short story.  Its hard enough to connect with a character, when you are stuck with such a small canvas the problem compounds.  A novel on the other hand is much better for multiple POV's however I have to warn you that most people prefer to have one 'main' character.  You can get away with multiple points of views or (POV) but you should be very careful.

That said don't listen to me, write it out and then show it to people.  The audience will let you know.  And the first members of your audience are your beta readers.




The Deposed King

[Wordmaker]

I'm with Deposed King. For a short story, you're usually best to keep to a single POV character. There's just not enough space in a short story to give each POV the time and attention it deserves.

As others have said, for 1st-person, it can be hard on a reader if you switch POV characters, even briefly. With 1st-person, the goal is to get the reader really into the head of the character. Its intimacy is part of the appeal and strength of the style.

If you find yourself wanting to write from other POVs, but still keep a strong level of intimacy, I'd suggest experimenting with 3rd-person limited, and starting with either two equal POVs, or one primary POV and maybe two minor ones, kept for scenes where the primary POV isn't present but there's still something you want the reader to see.

[Quantus]

Im with LeeringCorpse on this one, it may not be a standard method, but anythign can be good of you do it right, and the preferences of any sampling of your audience (here or elsewhere) shouldnt matter too much.  Write what interests you, the rest will fall in.

If you are looking for an example of something similar, check out the Kane Chronicles by Rick Riordan (author of the Percy Jackson series).  Its his egyptian mythology series, and is a 1st POV account that switches between two siblings.  It's written as if it were an audio recording that the characters mailed to an author to be published to "get their story out" and whatnot, so it takes it a step further than most in that you occasionally get the Narrator responding to something the other sibling is saying "off-screen"

[The Deposed King]

Im with LeeringCorpse on this one, it may not be a standard method, but anythign can be good of you do it right, and the preferences of any sampling of your audience (here or elsewhere) shouldnt matter too much.  Write what interests you, the rest will fall in.

If you are looking for an example of something similar, check out the Kane Chronicles by Rick Riordan (author of the Percy Jackson series).  Its his egyptian mythology series, and is a 1st POV account that switches between two siblings.  It's written as if it were an audio recording that the characters mailed to an author to be published to "get their story out" and whatnot, so it takes it a step further than most in that you occasionally get the Narrator responding to something the other sibling is saying "off-screen"

If its the only thing you can write go for it and don't be discouraged.  But if you can write something without the POV switching 'do it'.

Its not that you can't make POV switching work its just that, much like a land war in asia, it is listed as one of the classic blunders for a reason.  Not many can invade asia and come out a head and for those that fail they tend to be spectacular.

A paragraph of two in third person with the bad guy at some particularly critical planning juncture might work.  but with a short story your canvas has to be focused or, at least my readers, tend to bail.  Now I did succeed in a fair amount of POV shifting in my 3rd book.  About 2/3rds of it was carried by the secondary characters.  But it was a risk, but a logical one, a natural progression in the story and at the same time built on the backs of characters the reader had come to experiences over the course of the previous 2 books and short novella.

If you're heart is set on it, go for it man.  You could be the first Tolkien.  And hey if at first you don't succeed always try try again.  Just realize you've chosen the uphill battle on this one and expect some early failures and critisism.  If it was me and I was able to take the good bits to hear I bet I could get a POV switching short story to work.  I wont try it because it wouldn't be cost effective time wise for me.  However different strokes for different folks.


don't let anyone discourage you, not even yourself and remember to always follow the dream,


The Deposed King

[Wordmaker]

What he said.

The other thing to consider is that many readers are becoming more savvy and aware of red flags regarding an author's skill. Publishers and agents look for these when deciding what submissions to accept, and I feel readers are starting to watch for them too. Too much POV-hopping is one of these red flags, and regardless of how good an author actually is, if readers, publishers or agents see too many of them, they may pass on the story.

Like Deposed King said, this is just something to be aware of. Go for it if you really want, but be aware that you may have to work that much harder to pull it off.

[LeeringCorpse]

Too much POV-hopping is one of these red flags...

How so? As a novice I'm wondering what this and other red flags say about an author, and why.

[Wordmaker]

Basically there are certain plot elements and writing techniques that have become so over-used that they're regarded as signs that a writer either hasn't had the time to develop their own writing voice, or is too lazy to put real work into their writing. Since agents and publishers have such a limited amount of time to decide whether or not a given submission is going to be a good investment of their resources, they have to make a judgement call based on what they see early on.

POV-hopping, if done messily, confuses the reader, and makes the writer look like they can't keep their story clear and concise. Even if you keep the distinction between characters clear, if you're just doing it for the sake of it, or there isn't a strong reason for it, it can seem that you're taking a quick way out of detailing the story properly from a single POV.

Depending on how busy a particular submissions editor is, they might allow a few such red flags to pass by, or they may have to bin your submission at the first sign if it's a particularly egregious case.

Examples of such red flags include:

• Prologues
• The first chapter beginning with the protagonist waking up
• Having the protagonist look in a mirror as an excuse to launch into a physical description
• Starting a book with a description of the weather
• Starting a book with description of the countryside or landscape
• Starting a book with the protagonist introducing themselves

There are countless writing blogs that offer more detailed advice on what to avoid when trying to get published.

It's important to note that using any of these doesn't mean your writing is bad. It just means that you're falling in line with the vast majority of aspiring writers out there who haven't put real effort into their writing. No matter how good you are, allowing a red flag to show up is a mark against you.

Yes, you might be able to make it work. But agents and publishers don't have the time to wait and see. There are some publishers who'll bin a submission as soon as they see the word "Prologue" on the first page. That's how busy and competitive the traditional publishing industry is. It's not that they're trying to make it difficult on writers; it's that they have to be sure their investment is going to pay off.

As readers become more aware of cliches, and as self-publishing continues to grow, I believe readers, too, will start to watch for these red flags, and while they'll never need to be as discerning as an agent or a publisher, they will become less inclined to pick up a book by a self-published author who puts out too many red flags.

[The Deposed King]

How so? As a novice I'm wondering what this and other red flags say about an author, and why.

I shall answer this in three separate ways.

1) POV shifting is not only off putting to a certain segment of readers (I gain this knowledge both from personal and professional opinions and the professional part has nothing to do with me).

It is considered kind of like a lack of focus that's common to new writers.  A writer has all sides of the conflict in his head and wants to fully express them.  This often causes clunky, attention splitting scenes that confuse the readers unless done well.  There's other things, duplication of effort (things seen twice from two different views), or the readers don't want to invest in anyone but character A and get frustrated that they're forced to follow, B, C, and/or D.

Older writers can and have gotten away with it but if you look multiple POV's are less and less common since the 80's and 90's books.  You still get the occasional game of thrones massively multi-POV out there which is why workmaker and I aren't exactly poopooing the idea.  But even among the professional authors its becoming more and more of rare beast.

2) What does it say about the novice?:  a few years back I was tooling around on the Baen Slush Magazine section. the one that helped feed the online magazin eric flint used to help produce.  I uploaded a short story about some... well it really doesn't matter what it was about.  Anyway I spiffed it up as best I could at the time and uploaded it for the group that's hanging out there to take a look at.  I got basically got a 'come back when your worthy response'.  Your story needs work, your character development isn't quite rich enough and what was up with this flicking the marble in his hand couldn't even follow it after three reads, on top of that if you don't care enough about your story to fix your grammar etc, why should an editor.  Despite my initial hot headed reaction to this response to my little masterpiece, I managed to throttle myself down to a gruff but not surly, 'well that's your opinion.'  To which the person responded 'I don't know why I bother sometimes'.  A day or so later I was tooling around the site and what to my wondering eyes did appear?  The person that had thrown her verbal hands in the air at my current lack of skill coupled by a defensive response was none other than the top editor of Baen, Toni Weispkoff.  Suddenly I was no longer upset I was instead instantly grateful I hadn't gone with my initially desires (thin skinned writer) response and kicking myself that I hadn't recognized this person and solicited their advice further and uploaded a revised version as rapidly as I possibly could.

Now I'm not saying this applies to anyone here (that was part of my learning curve as a writer that I just happen to share because it was related to a red flag incident).  What I am saying that with a red flag situation you'll tend to get a 'come back when you're worthy' response from the professional editor.  Your job with a red flag is to sell your story past this speed bump, to have such awesome coolness that people are saying 'he broke the mold with this one' instead of 'what another tired old trope' and one that off puts most readers to boot, so here's another for the round file system (click).

Alternately in the world of direct publishing, instead of editor rejection you get the old vote with their feet response.

When I first started writing I was told to fight the urge to POV shift with all the strength in my body.  Now in part that was because my first few stories had this component and I clearly wasn't able to do my story justice when I was doing it.  Maybe someone else is much better at it.  I know I'm not only head and shoulders better than my younger self at different POV's, I've climbed a whole dang hill.  Just because I wasn't able to do it justice early on doesn't mean you shouldn't try it out.  I'm just saying its a common pitfall for new authors for a reason.  Almost everyone who tries it falls into the pit, just be warned and hone your craft young padawan.




The Deposed King

P.S. -  I think wordmaker may have said this better than me but it sure seemed like a waste to just toss 20 minutes worth of work.

[Carnifex:Pacifex]

I would advise against POV shifting, especially in a short story.  Its hard enough to connect with a character, when you are stuck with such a small canvas the problem compounds.  A novel on the other hand is much better for multiple POV's however I have to warn you that most people prefer to have one 'main' character.  You can get away with multiple points of views or (POV) but you should be very careful.

That said don't listen to me, write it out and then show it to people.  The audience will let you know.  And the first members of your audience are your beta readers.




The Deposed King

True, Im hgetting my beta readers on it now that ive touched it up. Like you said, who knows. Either way, it was kinda fun trying a bit of a different style. Though I don't think I would shift POV's for a full length novel

[Carnifex:Pacifex]

I'm with Deposed King. For a short story, you're usually best to keep to a single POV character. There's just not enough space in a short story to give each POV the time and attention it deserves.

As others have said, for 1st-person, it can be hard on a reader if you switch POV characters, even briefly. With 1st-person, the goal is to get the reader really into the head of the character. Its intimacy is part of the appeal and strength of the style.

If you find yourself wanting to write from other POVs, but still keep a strong level of intimacy, I'd suggest experimenting with 3rd-person limited, and starting with either two equal POVs, or one primary POV and maybe two minor ones, kept for scenes where the primary POV isn't present but there's still something you want the reader to see.

true true. When I read through it it does lack that intimacy.