posted
Good writing is generally cast in one of two styles, as far as I can tell,
PoV: Point of View, through the eyes of a given character
and
Narrative writing: -Usually the omniscient, right?
Well, which do you use and why?
I was hoping we could give examples of each and discuss and define the difference. As well as help each other do our "style" more effectively. You know--some of the betterw riters like EJS and Survivor help some of the newer ones like me, and others I see usually on the Frag-N-Feedback.
But actually, that POV has to be done well. I just finished reading a murder mystery that was told from a variety of third person limited characters, hopping around between chaptes, which is fine. But she was in the head of the killer and the accesory and neither one ever mentioned that they had been responsible, though both reflected on the murder. In general, the story was told well and without cheats, but she cheated POV in a big way. That story needed to be told in a narrative voice (omniscient) so that it would have been perfectly reasonable that the narrator would have chosen to said one thing or another for effect.
But in general, I prefer POV. I like the intimacy of being in the head of a character one at a time. I like the ability it gives me to hide things from the reader, ironically. While I can hide nothing that the POV character knows without cheating (see aforementioned example) I can fail to mention anything the POV character doesn't know. In this respect, I find it fairly easy to write the murder mystery I am working on from third person limited POV...even switching between the two sleuths, because neither one knows who the killer is so I don't have to tell the reader until they know.
On the other hand, there is a time and place for a GOOD use of narrative voice (omniscient). If you have dozens of POV characters constantly coming in and out of focus, it might be better to just go omni. Also, if you have to hide something that a POV character knows, definitely go omni. And finally, fi you just don't want a deep, character based story, go ahead and go omni. Sometimes stories aren't actually about getting intimate with the character.
I think POV and narrative voice are really the same thing. Most how-to-write books I've read and classes/workshops I've attended have taught the following:
POV can be 1st person (which is what I think you're referring to as POV, Alias) or 3rd person.
Third person POV can be divided into 3rd person omniscient (what you call Narrative writing), or 3rd person limited. Limited POV can either mean the 3rd person story is always in the head of one character, usually the protagonist, or it can mean the POV jumps from character to character, but only follows one character at a time (like in Christine's murder mystery). True 3rd person omniscient allows the narrator to know any character's thoughts at any time, and can easily get confusing for the reader. Most authors stick w/ 3rd person limited.
So, to sum up:
When you say POV, I think the more precise term is 1st person POV.
When you say Narrative writing, I think the more precise term is 3rd person POV (either omniscient or limited).
Additionally, (and slightly OT) most literary critics that I've read, as well as ALL my college professors, will approach a story story told in the 3rd person POV as though the narrator is a character in the story. In that sense, as well, 3rd person is still a POV, just not the POV of one of your "flesh and blood" characters. From the words used, tone of voice, style, etc., one may learn about the personality of the narrator and how (s)he feels about the story being told.
When you approach the narrator (whether in 1st person or in 3rd) as a character, you can also ask "Why is this character telling this story? What, if anything, is (s)he trying to hide or influence?" In Christine's example, the 1st person "cheat" may have been the writer's attempt to create an unreliable narrator (i.e. they were trying to manipulate the reader, and it was an intentional device), and the author just didn't pull it off that well.
In my own writing, I tend to favor the 1st person POV like Christine. When I've gotten stuck on a story, I've found it helpful to attempt to rewrite from a different POV (Changing 1st to 3rd, 3rd to 1st, letting my narrator be more or less omniscient, etc.) The story I'm most proud of, although it still needs at least one major rewrite before it'll be as good as I want it to be, is in 3rd person, and follows two characters in alternating story lines.
Edited for grammar
[This message has been edited by danquixote (edited April 26, 2004).]
posted
Well I'm not sure on the technical aspect, but, what I am referring to is more like this:
PoV: the text is written how a single character sees and interperates (sp?) what is going on. But not necessarily 1st person.
Narrative: The reader is seeing the characters, like on a stage, from a distance. Knows whatever the writers wants him to about the characters, maybe everything, but isn't inside them.
[This message has been edited by Alias (edited April 26, 2004).]
posted
Your PoV would be either first person or third person limited. Narrative would be third person omniscient. PoV is a generic descriptor used when talking about whose Point of View your are using.
Third person limited and first person are WAY more popular and more commonly used. There is little omniscient, but it is out there, and some of it is really good. It is A LOT harder to do well, however.
Starship Troopers has examples of first person omniscient (accidental, I think, as the perspective changes almosts mid-sentence) though I don't know if anyone else has used it. It is definately weird.
posted
Just to clarify the technical aspects of this discussion:
Narrative writing, or omniscient is a Point of View.
I think, and correct me if I'm wrong, although I'm never wrong, that you want to know which POV we use. Is it omniscient, first person, or the many shades of third person.
posted
Well, to throw another argument into the forum... I think which PoV you write best (and should write in) depends a lot on who you are. Some people have trouble maintaining deep penetration inside a character but love to head hop or describe the flow of a battle from above. Some people see the story from inside one person and one person only. Case(s) in point: a writer I know well writes seeing all the characters and everything that goes on, and the writing is very cinematic because of that. I didn't understand that-- asked why it wasn't easier to just describe it as you-being-the-character saw it. Took a few years, but we worked it down to the fact that when we're describing a scene, we have a very different view of what we're looking at, and the differences go right down to dissimilar types of thought. I see stories very differently, from inside one or possibly two characters, and I have an exceedingly difficult time writing anything but first person or third person limited because of that.
So a little more complicated than it depends, taking it from it-depends-on-the-story to it-also-depends-on-the-writer, and maybe even obeying the book and the characters as you get 'em.
posted
Omniscient POV has its uses, and when done effectively can be great. It hasn't been very popular for a long time, though. Writers of the 19th century were big fans of it. If you want to see Omniscient POV done well, read "David Copperfield" or almost anything else by Dickens.
An advantage of omniscient POV, it allows the narrator to interject more personal comments. The narrator can take a step back from the story and have a little conversation with just the reader, leaving the characters out of it. Dickens does it often. He'll stop telling the story for a sentence or two and make fun of a character or something.
There is a price to pay, though. It pulls you right out of the character's head, which is why it hasn't been very popular for a long time. The easiest POV for me to write well is 3rd person limited, which I would guess is probably true of a lot of people here since that's mostly what we read now.
posted
Starship Troopers has first person omniscient? The closest thing I noticed to that was the old (respectable and perfectly logical) "later I found out" clauses.
As Gen says, which choice is better depends on which you can write well. POV (3PLO) is easier to write and to read, but well done narrative voice has certain marked advantages.
I consistantly choose 3PLO because it is currently the more standard form, and is easier to read. Besides which, my narrative voices are rather distressing to most readers. Of course, my brother encourages people to listen to their voices...that was his campaign slogan.
posted
When someone mentions narrative writing as opposed to POV, I associate NW with description, description, and more description. No story, only background. I'm sure that's not what they mean, but that's what it sounds like to me. I think it's more correct to label what I believe is being called narrative writing as a third person omniscient category, limited or full.
The trick when writing a limited anything, including first person, is ever being aware that you're looking at your made-up world through POV character binoculars. Your operating theater is limited to one set of senses throughout the entire story or simply at a time, scene by scene or chapter by chapter or even part by part, depending which POV you choose. Or, you can choose to play God and explain your world to us completely from a distance or by mixing that distance with a bit of unrestrained mind-hopping.
quote:PoV: the text is written how a single character sees and interperates (sp?) what is going on. But not necessarily 1st person.
Narrative: The reader is seeing the characters, like on a stage, from a distance. Knows whatever the writers wants him to about the characters, maybe everything, but isn't inside them.
and I think what you're describing is not so much point of view or narrative voice as it is what is called in theater, representational and presentational (respectively).
Representational theater is when the audience is more or less supposed to be spying on the characters, experiencing the story with them--the characters supposedly do not know the audience is there.
Presentational theater is when everyone, including the characters, knows that they are in a production (presentation) and they are showing a story to the audience.
At least, that's what your distinction sounds like to me.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
