donutsweeper | Babble on POVs

Just a question, and I'm not sure of the correct terminology here, but when reading (or writing), do you prefer a tight 3rd person POV (where all events are seen and interpreted through one character's eyes) or switching between people's 3rd person POV with obvious page breaks or markers to show the new POV?

For example- my entire Charming the Pants off the Pashahads SGA/Jack crossover is told from Sheppard's POV, there is no scene where we see what Jack thinks about falling into the Pegasus Galaxy. At points there are Sheppard's interpretation of Jack's actions (he notices a hedged answer, an avoided question, but doesn't know why Jack answered that way). If it had been written with switching POV's there could be the scene from Shep's perspective, noticing what he notices and wondering about it, followed by the same scene retold from Jack's, where he explained the reasons for saying what he did. There also could have been scenes left out from the story the way I told it- I never did explain how Jack managed to get his hands on the Pashahads (because Sheppard wasn't there and wouldn't know).

I've been noticing more and more of the latter showing up in stories lately. Presuming this babble actually makes sense to anyone, do you notice the difference between those types of POV styles and do you like one more than the other?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I absolutely notice it, which I think is mostly due to the way I read/write. I'm a visual person, and if the POV changes, I find it disorienting, because I'm literally looking at the scene differently. While I don't mind switching between scenes, within them, I find it immensely distracting. (Important note - that doesn't make it wrong, just not my taste ;))

Personally, I also like tight POVs because they can force the author to really *think* about what's important to the story, what do people need to know? So in yours, I don't think it matters how Jack got the Pashahads, and I like imagining how. It becomes part of Jack's mystery, part of how Sheppard sees him. There's a big thing in the second A-Team episode (stick with me here ;)) where they mention how Chase got a cadillac for a scam in the middle of the Vietman jungle. We never find out how, and I've never read a satisfactory fanfic explanation. We just know that Face is the kind of person who can get a Cadillac in the middle of the Vietnam jungle. *that's* the important bit.

Speculation and observation can be rich tools, and ways of telling us about the narrator as well as what he's watching. You can throw stuff in that the narrator misses but the reader notices, and the narrator's reaction is often just as important as the actual action.

I've read seriously good writing that alternates, and I've done fic where I've played with POV (my best Housefic IMHO is one where I tell the same story from 3 different points of view) but it's been because I want to say something about the characters, not to give the reader more information, if that makes sense. If you're adding to my knowledge of the characters, then I don't mind the alternation, but it can be just as interesting to be limited in what the narrator knows.

Um. As you can probably tell, this is something I'm pretty interested in - I wrote a whole meta on POV here (http://community.livejournal.com/housefic_pens/25690.html) quite a while ago, although I still find it fascinating to talk around.

Ooh, I shall have to read that! I knew you guys had to have some interesting opinions on this.

ahh, the speculation of what the other characters are doing/did, that's a good point. The wandering POV really detracts from that and, in a way, can wind up explaining too much and then there is no mystery.

*nods* I tend to think that it's one of those things where although it's easy to say it's wrong, in the hands of a good writer, it can be awesome (as with so many other writing 'rules'). But you've got to be able to do single POV really well to pull it off properly, and the switching POV needs to push the story on, rather than simply retelling what just happened. Otherwise, it's just taking twice as long to tell the story!

I should probably update that meta *makes note* I probably have more to say now. I usually do ;)

The retelling of the same scene is something I'm seeing with annoying frequency these days and it rarely adds anything to the overall story.

But when the shifting POV has character A doing their thing and character B doing their separate thing and eventually they combine it can work and work well.

YAY for more meta!

This is the only time I've ever seen it used to good effect, though the House story mentioned above sounds fascinating, and I think I'll have to read it. The fact that it was done for the purpose of delving into the characters rather than just authorial laziness (which is what it generally looks like) makes it intriguing and probably puts what's normally a boondoggle to good use. :-)

*cough*it'shereifyouwanttoreadit (http://jadesfire2808.livejournal.com/5933.html)*cough* [/shameless self-promotion]

*g* Trust me, if someone's doing it for the same reason I did, it's not because they're lazy. Trying to figure out how each character would perceive the (very little) action was a total nightmare, especially when I figured out that I'd screwed up the sequence of events and had to rewrite three damn times.

It was a completely fascinating exercise that I highly recommend as a way of learning about characters. Because what one character thought was helpful turned out to be annoying from someone else's POV. And something that happened to one was noticed by the second but irrelevant to the third. It was brain-breaking but great to attempt.

On the 'if it's done right' front, I meant to cite Terry Pratchett yesterday. He's the best exponent of omni-POV that I can think of. In Nightwatch in particular, there's a scene near the beginning where Nobby and Colon are talking, then when Vimes walks into the room, we immediately switch to his POV and stay there, but it's totally seamless. His habit of giving background on minor characters and small digressions also works. But he's the only person I can think of who can really get away with it, and that's mostly because he's just so damn good ;)

Interestingly, my two Big Bangs had POV issues as well. The TARDIS one was meant to be all-Jack, but just wouldn't work unless I shifted between the three main characters, at which point the structure, pacing and plot fell into place. My SGA one was supposed to switch between parts, but then I realised it was a story only John could tell, and I had to stick with him. I think it's definitely about putting the needs of the character first, then the story, and leaving your favourite stuff out if it doesn't serve either of those. Annoying, but necessary.

oh yes- I know what you mean about Terry Pratchett. It's weird though, because sometimes he uses one POV nearly exclusively (like Guards, Guards- nearly all of the scenes Carrot is in it is his POV in the beginning, yet other scenes are told by other people's pov as things progress)

I think it's definitely about putting the needs of the character first, then the story, and leaving your favourite stuff out if it doesn't serve either of those. Annoying, but necessary.

very, very true. It's so annoying to have to cut something that doesn't quite fit the POV you're going for!

Babble on POVs

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject