posted
I need two different POVs in my WIP and am not sure of the best way to handle them. If I were a pro, I know I could get away with "head hopping" and anything else I please. It would be artistic. But I'm a mere beginner and know the POV Police are on the lookout and will want to force my story into a box. Is there a POV jail for beginners?
My WIP short story alternates scenes between the Main Character's location and another location with other characters, but not the MC. The MC POV is limited omniscient. But for the scenes away from the MC, I'm trying the camera eye POV (where the narrator is not in anyone's head, but merely records events like a camera.) Is this legal, or do I need to pick another character in the remote location scenes and also use the limited omniscient there? .... Thanks
posted
One of the benefits of using a full omniscient narrator is that it gives you the freedom to head-hop. To do so, setting up your omni narrator right away at the beginning is crucial.
Say, for instance, you start with what looks like 3rd-person POV and suddenly head-hop, then it's jarring. But if the narrator is clearly omniscient, there won't be any jarring when we bounce from character to character, even in the same scene.
I'm wondering why the camera viewpoint is necessary? Is it a device to withhold information from the reader that a different POV would reveal? If so, you might consider avoiding it. Alternatively, you can start the story with the camera POV and then zoom in for deeper penetration as necessary -- perfectly legitmate, but not used very often. Then, when you do switch, it won't be nearly as jarring. But a camera POV is very distant, and modern narratives tend to be deep penetration. Camera POV narratives seem to work best with screenplays, too. One of the best things about reading a short story or novel is simply the depth of penetration that can be acheived, much deeper than a movie screenplay. Seems a shame to pass that opportunity up, in my opinion.
Regardless of what you choose, you won't be able to please everyone. All of us have our preconceived notions as to how a story works best. We might be right, or we might be wrong. It's only opinion. Don't sweat the POV police.
A quote from OSC: "The only real rule is: You can break any rule, as long as you're willing to pay the price."
I'm not too familiar with the correct names and official 'rules' for different POVs, so I won't try to follow up on HSO's comments in that regard.
I'm curious as to why you have chosen these POVs. Can you tell a little more about your motivation for this choice? It would help me to have more context with which to consider your question.
posted
HSO, Thanks for your very helpful insights. Your explanation makes clear why I like the book version better than the movie version. I never thought about it in those terms.
HSO and sojoyful, the reason I'm experimenting with these two POV's is because I need to really get into the head of the MC to show the intense panic and anxiety he's experiencing for not being able to be at a certain place at a certain time. When I switch to the location where he is supposed to be, I'm trying to just show what is happening in the MC's absence at that place, but not get inside those secondary characters because I don't want to take away from the intensity of the MC's state of mind. Maybe I'm going about this the wrong way. But I thought I'd experiment.
posted
My immediate reaction is that the very fact that you have moved away from the MC to a different place will leave behind some of the intensity of the MC, by the simple fact that the MC is not there! That's ok, though. Seeing the absence of that intensity will only make it stand out more strongly to us when we are back with the MC, which is a good thing.
Personally, I think it would be great to see what's going on in the minds of the other characters. Perhaps they are waiting for the MC, and wonder where he/she is? Or perhaps hoping that he/she will not be present, as he was ordered to be or threatening to be. You can use their view to give us more context for the MC's intensity, and a better understanding of his/her motivations.
Just a thought. If your story line doesn't accomodate this, then forget I said it.
posted
The way to keep the POV police off your case regarding swapping POV's is to put them in different scenes, clearly separated by a blank line (in MS format, a "#").
I didn't get the way you intended to do the 2 POV's. One was "limited omniscient" -- I think you mean limited -- omniscient means you know what he's thinking AND what everyone else is thinking. 3rd-person limited is the default and is cool. There's nothing to apologize for.
The other one, you wanted to do as a camera, cinematic style. But why? I don't think it will detract at all from one character's scenes, if another character's scenes are also in 3rd-person limited.
posted
wbriggs, thanks. I meant 3rd-person limited, as you said. I incorrectly called it limited omniscient. I am using the *** separator for the scenes. (Is the single pound sign # the correct separator?) I'll try writing a few alternate location scenes both as camera eye and as 3rd-person limited from a secondary character's POV, as a learning experience. The tension is building and I want to finish this story soon. If the characters would only resolve their problem in a fantastic, outlandish way so I can live my own life once again and not theirs!
[This message has been edited by Calligrapher (edited November 26, 2005).]
posted
According to OSC, and 2 other sources on MS format, a single # centered on its own line means "blank line." That's my best info.
Posts: 2830 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
That's ok, though. Seeing the absence of that intensity will only make it stand out more strongly to us when we are back with the MC, which is a good thing.
