Multiple POV's from a readers perspective

[MsK]

There are often questions around here regarding the use of Multiple POV’s- Well, let me tell you about the book I just finished reading…

First off, I’m speaking from a reader’s perspective as I’m certainly not in a position to offer criticism from a writer’s perspective.

The story starts off in First Person/Past Tense with an MC and 3-4 (SC) Secondary Characters. The MC tells us about herself and about the Secondary Characters for the first 30 pages or so.

From this point forward, the MC separates from the SC’s and the story bounces back and forth from being First Person through the eyes of the MC to Third Person from the viewpoint of the different SC’s (One SC at a time though). Sometimes the SC’s are on their own and sometimes the SC’s are together as one of them has her story told through a scene. A good thing is that the viewpoints remained constant to the chapter.

To try and make this example more clear:
The MC and the SC’s are all friends. The MC’s story is a story on its own. The SC’s stories are smaller stories on their own. The only thing connecting all of these stories is the friendship and that they are all going through similar crisis.

That being said, here’s what happened to this reader…

I stayed with the MC from the beginning, enjoyed her story throughout the entire book, wished I could have heard more of her story.

After about three chapters of the SC’s stories, interspersed throughout the MC’s chapters (Around page 60 of this 300+ page book),I began flipping past the SC’s chapters as I didn’t really care what they were doing and I didn’t want to lose my focus on what I had invested in the MC. (Meaning I read about 60% of this book)

Apparently, the SC’s did have stories as the MC and SC’s all get together at the end and the loose ends of the stories are wrapped up, but still, I didn’t care enough to go back and see why the SC’s were wrapping up the things they were.

I’m going to say, in this case, multiple POV’s did not work. Why? I’m guessing it was because the real story was the MC’s story. And the SC’s stories didn’t have much of an effect on the MC’s story. Her story would have been basically the same, with or without the SC’s. The author could have kept the entire book in First Person, kept the SC's around as the MC's friends, and it would have been a much better and more fluid story. Also, I loved the authors voice in the First Person, not so much in the Third.

Now- I have read another book that used a similar format and it worked beautifully. The story was told mainly in First Person through the eyes of the MC. Every so often, there was a short chapter told from Third Person/ Omniscient POV about the goings on of a character who would later change the MC’s life in a very dramatic way. (About 85% of this story was the MC’s)

I’ve also read other stories that worked with multiple POV’s and as I recall, those stories seemed to keep all of the characters mingled together even as each of their stories was being told- And, in those stories, the main story really was the story of all of the characters.

What this shows me , from my readers perspective, is that multiple POV’s can work well if the characters stories are all equally weighted or if the additional POV’s have/will have a major impact on the MC.

Well, just wanted to share this information as this topic seems to come up often around here and I figured it may be beneficial to someone. Again, I’m not speaking as an experienced writer- this is my view as a reader, so, take it for what it’s worth. :)

ETA: OMG! Formatting issues... and then some...

[Carmy]

I agree. Multiple POVs can work, if the story is told well and the author has control of all the characters.

There is an Irish writer, Maeve Binchy, who does this well. Check out her Circle of Friends.

[Phaeal]

Interesting analysis. Seems my core rule applies: If it works, it works. If it doesn't work, don't argue, change it.

The problem is: What doesn't work for you may work for other readers, and the converse. I guess the novel in question worked for its agent and editors, but that doesn't mean you're wrong, alas. ;)

[zegota]

This discussion always makes me chuckle a little. I'm a big reader of fantasy, and pretty much all modern fantasy uses multiple points of view, so I'm always a tad confused when people try to decide whether or not it can work.

Answer: Yes, it is a pretty standard way to write a book, with the main caveat being that each character with a POV either has to be important enough to carry a storyline, or it has to be very important that we see whatever event is occurring through their eyes.

[maestrowork]

Excellent discussion: I wish you had told us what the book was. ;)

But yes, multiple view points can work wonderfully if they add to the story from various -- em -- points of view! But if the non-MC's POVs do not add to the story, or if their stories are not even interesting to pull you along, that you find yourself skipping... then the writer hasn't done his job. But when done well, multiple POVs let us see and relate to the characters, which adds to the experience.

[Cato]

I like the multiple viewpoints where the 2 sides are so different and seemingly random from eachother, but then in the middle of the book they meet together and merge into one. It's like... Flintstones meet the Jetsons!

[Deccydiva]

The novel I have most enjoyed reading re-told the same tale four times in succession, from the highly differing viewpoints and characters of the mother, father and two teenage kids. At the end it all came together in a most satisfying way and I found it witty and clever all the way through. I am deeply frustrated that I cannot recall the author or the title, when I moved to Ireland I lost a lot of possessions including many books. I do remember that it was set in Britain though, the mother had a high-power job and thought the boss regarded her highly, but he actually couldn't stand her and was desperately trying to get rid of her! She was equally self-confident at home and totally oblivious to her husband's needs and her children's issues.
The point I am getting to slowly is that if something is well-written with cleverly crafted characters and plot then almost anything will work.
Multiple rep points to anyone who can identify it...;)

[FennelGiraffe]

I used to think I didn't like mixing first and third person in the same novel. Then I read Jo Walton's Farthing and Ha'penny. It works. Very well indeed.

[Lady Esther]

KrystalR is this one of Ann Brashares' Books?

[MsK]

KrystalR is this one of Ann Brashares' Books?

No. I've only read one of her books, The Last Summer (of You and Me)

I didn't disclose the title of the book or the name of the author because I don't feel I'm in a position to slam another writer. (Actually, it's not my style to slam anyone unless they practically beg for me to do it :))
And, truthfully, this writer did a great job with the First Person part, I just didn't think the Third Person parts served the story well.

[Feidb]

My icky bug and action/adventure stories were written through multiple POV's and I was pretty much crucified for that in my writer's group, and one of the five agents that gave me feedback. So, I went the other extreme and have been writing the past three novels in one POV for the entire book, excpept for maybe the prologue or epilogue. In either case, it is solidly 3rd person past tense. As I've stated elsewhere on this form, I don't like first person, either to read or write it. And even worse, is first person, present tense, ala Patricia Cornwell.

I've seen multiple POV's work plenty of times, but apparently if you are a first time writer, the fewer the better until you are famous enough to do whatever you want.

Feidb

[FennelGiraffe]

I've seen multiple POV's work plenty of times, but apparently if you are a first time writer, the fewer the better until you are famous enough to do whatever you want.

Or skilled enough to handle it well.

[SPMiller]

I just want to say: for those of you who are fantasy fans, GRR Martin does a fantastic job in his series. He captures the voice and personality of each character.

Other writers... well, few of them are anywhere near that skilled.

[Cato]

I just want to say: for those of you who are fantasy fans, GRR Martin does a fantastic job in his series. He captures the voice and personality of each character.

Other writers... well, few of them are anywhere near that skilled.

I read the first 5 or so chapters of "A Game of Thrones", and while done well, it did little to bring me into the story right away. I'm sure if I got past the first 15 chapters it'd be awesome but I just didn't have time.

[Duncan J Macdonald]

I just want to say: for those of you who are fantasy fans, GRR Martin does a fantastic job in his series. He captures the voice and personality of each character.

Other writers... well, few of them are anywhere near that skilled.
And to each their own. I couldn't get more than a quarter through the first book. It was a case of the Seven Deadly Words: I do not care about these characters.

Yet, on the other hand, I completely enjoyed Robert Jordan's Wheel Of Time, and I'm looking forward to the 12th book (posthumous).

[Cato]

Yet, on the other hand, I completely enjoyed Robert Jordan's Wheel Of Time, and I'm looking forward to the 12th book (posthumous).

Damn, I absolutely trudged through the first book of the series. Hint: Never name your character a one word syllable that ends in -and, only encourages people to refer to him as bland, i.e. Bland/Rand Al'Thor.

[Wolvel]

MPOV's can work but when you do this each POV becomes the MC for that segment and you have to treat it that way.

If you don't then all you have created is toilet paper for in emergencies.

[Mad Queen]

I kiss the ground beneath GRR Martin's feet and I intend to write my story from more than one character's point of view. At least two, up to four. With less than two POVs, it's no fun.

[Dawnstorm]

Yes, it is a pretty standard way to write a book, with the main caveat being that each character with a POV either has to be important enough to carry a storyline, or it has to be very important that we see whatever event is occurring through their eyes.

Or it "merely" adds flavour to the setting. One example is two street kids that have nothing whatsoever to do with the plot watching a religious leader parade into town. (in Scott Bakker's Prince of Nothing trilogy - I wish he had more of these little pearls - he's utterly brilliant at those.)

I, personally, am more interested in watching character networks unfold than following a "main character's" adventures. So, to me, the multiple PoV approach is almost by default a plus, while it's the single PoV that needs persuading me. (This is novels, of course - not short stories. ;) )

[Cato]

Is there any examples of MPov all written in 1st person that work well?

[Emily Winslow]

Is there any examples of MPov all written in 1st person that work well?

Hopefully, mine! (Six first person narrators; the "hopefully" is for the "works well" ;-) But it doesn't come out until next year, so I suppose it doesn't count...

I think Faulkner did a bang-up job with this sort of thing. Jodi Picoult does this too ("My Sister's Keeper," etc.)

[maestrowork]

Is there any examples of MPov all written in 1st person that work well?

Off the top of my head: The Time Traveler's Wife and The House of Sand and Fog. And both have male/female POV switches. I think they're very well done.

[MsK]

Is there any examples of MPov all written in 1st person that work well?

Not your style, I'm sure, but I have read some chick lit books with multiple POV's written in 1st Person that work great. (Unfortunately, when I just checked Amazon to confirm the title of one I was going to use as an example, the reviews all said the book was too confusing, had too many POV's, one person even commented they tried to work out a cheat sheet to keep track of the characters) Again, another example of it worked for me, but not for them.

You can please some of the people some of the time...

[willietheshakes]

Is there any examples of MPov all written in 1st person that work well?

*cough* Before I Wake *cough*

Well, that's what people tell me, anyway...

[Mark Van Spall]

Is there any examples of MPov all written in 1st person that work well?

The Business of Dying by Simon Kernick (or at least I think it was that one) had 2 main characters, both in 1st person. The chapeter/chapter section has a heading so you know who you're reading, and although I liked the book, it took quite a few chapters to get used to.

[Raphee]

Is there any examples of MPov all written in 1st person that work well?

Orhan Pamuk's My Name is Red.

[Telstar]

I just want to say: for those of you who are fantasy fans, GRR Martin does a fantastic job in his series. He captures the voice and personality of each character.

Other writers... well, few of them are anywhere near that skilled.

This is true. Still, I hate some of his characters that I skipped a few chapters.

[Telstar]

I stayed with the MC from the beginning, enjoyed her story throughout the entire book, wished I could have heard more of her story.

After about three chapters of the SC’s stories, interspersed throughout the MC’s chapters (Around page 60 of this 300+ page book),I began flipping past the SC’s chapters as I didn’t really care what they were doing and I didn’t want to lose my focus on what I had invested in the MC. (Meaning I read about 60% of this book)



This is what I do in 99% of the cases. I dont like multiple POVs, period.
The only ones that wouldnt let me flip would be two (and only two) equally interesting characters with switching POVs until their stories meet. Romance or Hero-villain could work.

In the remaining 1%, the SCs stories are short, interesting and have a clear purpose to the MC plot.

[IdiotsRUs]

Originally Posted by SPMiller http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2679948#post2679948)
I just want to say: for those of you who are fantasy fans, GRR Martin does a fantastic job in his series. He captures the voice and personality of each character.

Other writers... well, few of them are anywhere near that skilled.
This is true. Still, I hate some of his characters that I skipped a few chapters.

I had the same problem - just as I was getting interested in one character, the chapter ends and I have to go read about someone else now *sulk*. The story could have been just as easily told from much less POV's - giving your more time to really get your teeth into them. As it was I didn't feel I really knew any of them that well, or even find all of them interesting - and there were one or two ( Tyrion and Dany) that I kept skipping ahead to.

It's not that I dislike multiple POVs ( hell I have three in mine, though about 75% is from the MC) but swapping POV so often - well if you swap to a POV the reader doesn't like, you might well have lost them.

Less is more

[Enraptured]

I think it depends a lot on the reader, and on the book. I prefer books with a single main character, but I know a lot of readers who prefer multiple POVs.

[Dawnstorm]

I think this thread mixes up two topics:

1. Multiple PoVs

2. Multiple (Main) Characters

"PoV-character" is about "Who focuses"; "story-character" is about "on who the focus rests".

The PoV-character's story could be entirely irrelevant. We don't get Watson's PoV because we're supposed to be interested in Watson; we're getting Watson's PoV, so that Holmes sounds like more of a genius than he really is. ;) Watson himself is a rather non-descript character for most of the short stories I read (there are exceptions, but they're far and few between).

[Mad Queen]

I like Dr Watson a lot, OK? :P

[FennelGiraffe]

The PoV-character's story could be entirely irrelevant. We don't get Watson's PoV because we're supposed to be interested in Watson; we're getting Watson's PoV, so that Holmes sounds like more of a genius than he really is. ;) Watson himself is a rather non-descript character for most of the short stories I read (there are exceptions, but they're far and few between).

Yes, but...

That's a specific type of structure, and I've never seen it done with multiple POVs (although I'm sure someone has tried it sometime). In fact, every example I know of is first person, as well.

It's useful when the protagonist is larger-than-life in some inexplicable way. Holmes wouldn't come across nearly as much the Great Detective™ if we knew what he was thinking. The distance created by viewing him through Watson's eyes increases his stature.

The same detective/sidekick structure occurs again with Nero Wolfe and Archie Goodwin. Just like Holmes', Wolfe's deductions wouldn't be brilliant if we saw how he did it.

The classic example outside of detective stories is The Great Gatsby. Gatsby is the protagonist, but we see him only through Nick Carraway's POV. That allows Gatsby to remain a mysterious, almost mythical figure.

If that's not what you're doing, it generally doesn't work out well to use the POV of anyone who isn't at least a major character.

[Dawnstorm]

I like Dr Watson a lot, OK? :P

So do I. A story, narrated first person by Holmes, about our diligent doctor saving a life would be interesting, don't you think? ;)

That's a specific type of structure, and I've never seen it done with multiple POVs (although I'm sure someone has tried it sometime). In fact, every example I know of is first person, as well.

Yes, it is. I can think of others:

Display important events that don't feature any important characters (e.g. victims in Horror stories...).

Relativise self-conception of major PoV-characters, without playing them off against other major PoV-characters (e.g. waitress eavesdropping on an important fight between two main characters...)

Make political points (e.g. undermine hero status with "peasant" viewpoints)

Flesh out setting (e.g. who cleans away the corpses that the heroes leave in their wake?)

And a thousand others I can't think of right now.

If that's not what you're doing, it generally doesn't work out well to use the POV of anyone who isn't at least a major character.

I think that's flat out wrong. It depends on two things: execution and the specific reader's taste.

But that's, of course, my opinion. However, in order for us to have a discussion about this at all, we need to discriminate between character and PoV. (Hey, I could have three different omniscient narrators quarreling about the story: three points of view and not a single character!)

[Mad Queen]

So do I. A story, narrated first person by Holmes, about our diligent doctor saving a life would be interesting, don't you think? ;)
No, because Holmes is a bad POV character and he'd never write about Watson's adventures. :tongue Seriously, Watson is an interesting character. He never writes about himself, so it's hard to pay attention to him, but, for instance, notice that every time a female character is introduced, she's beautiful, sweet, in need of protection and Watson is immediately on her side. Or how he likes sensational stories and important cases involving famous people. There are all kinds of theories about Watson, ranging from how many times he got married or whether he was a compulsive gambler. Besides, he's so nice and loyal. Holmes is so arrogant. Holmes and Watson need each other.

[Dawnstorm]

No, because Holmes is a bad POV character and he'd never write about Watson's adventures. :tongue

Which is exactly why it would be interesting. :tongue

Seriously, Watson is an interesting character. He never writes about himself, so it's hard to pay attention to him, but, for instance, notice that every time a female character is introduced, she's beautiful, sweet, in need of protection and Watson is immediately on her side. Or how he likes sensational stories and important cases involving famous people.

He even has his moments in the sun. I don't remember which stories they were, but they do exist. I probably shouldn't have said "non-descript"; however, I have troubles finding the term I wish to say.

There are all kinds of theories about Watson, ranging from how many times he got married or whether he was a compulsive gambler.

And that's, to some extent, the point. He's not exactly portrayed as an enigma; that there are so many theories speaks of a lack of traits as much as their presence (as the theories don't come out of thin air, but aren't all that important to the story universe - as conclusions).

A prime example of fandom, really.

Besides, he's so nice and loyal. Holmes is so arrogant. Holmes and Watson need each other.

Perhaps. But story-wise the relationship is assymetric. Spotlight on Holmes; Watson the foil to reflect stray light back. Watson's value lies mostly in his PoV.

That is not to say that Holmes doesn't profit from Watson's social skills.