3rd person limited novels?

[alyssalynne]

Can anyone suggest some novels written in 3rd person limited with 3 or 4 POV characters? I started writing my novel as 3rd omniscient, but I plan to switch to limited as I continue and in the next draft. I have a fairly large cast (fantasy/adventure), but would like to focus on one main character's viewpoint, plus 2 or 3 other main characters. This is my first novel and the perspective has been my biggest problem so far. Any help is appreciated.

[ideagirl]

Can anyone suggest some novels written in 3rd person limited with 3 or 4 POV characters? I started writing my novel as 3rd omniscient, but I plan to switch to limited as I continue and in the next draft. I have a fairly large cast (fantasy/adventure), but would like to focus on one main character's viewpoint, plus 2 or 3 other main characters. This is my first novel and the perspective has been my biggest problem so far. Any help is appreciated.

Off the top of my head, no, but I can recommend a really excellent 3rd-person omniscient novel that--like your book--has a fairly large cast but focuses on and gets inside the head of a smaller number of characters (I think about six, one of whom is of course the main character). It's Bel Canto by Ann Patchett. It's absolutely brilliant, and easy to find since it came out within the last several years and did well. Bel Canto shows that third-person omniscient can feel like multiple-character third-person limited. In other words, you don't actually have to use third-person limited to get that feeling of being very close to/in the heads of characters.

[PlanetCaravan]

here's one that popped into my head. I'm sure others will chime in

Dean Koontz.
One door away from heaven

I think it has 4 or 5 POVs (one of them in present tense)

[blacbird]

As I recall, Tony Hillerman's southwestern mysteries are narrated in this fashion, with two or three 3rd-limited POV characters. It's been a while since I read one, though.

caw

[nevada]

Odds are if it's a genre book and it's in 3rd it's limited. pretty well all romance novels in 3rd are limited. spy novels and thrillers in third are limited. usually omniscient is used for literary novels.

all suz brockmann books are 3rd limited usually with about 4 or 5 POV's if not more. not confusing because the character voices are different and she makes it clear whose pov it is within the first paragraph usually.

I don't read fantasy so I can't give you examples there and the only sci fi books i remember reading are in first.

[GirlWithPoisonPen]

Dorothy Dunnett's novels are third-person limited with multiple POVs.

[alyssalynne]

Thanks everyone :)

[miles]

BAD MEN John Connolly

THE STAND Stephen King

[alyssalynne]

Thanks.

Is 3 or 4 POV characters in 3rd limited too many?

Right now, I focus most of the time on the MC's POV, but the story involves a long journey and I spend some at various points on the POV of the two people she's traveling with.

[Charlie Horse]

Thanks.

Is 3 or 4 POV characters in 3rd limited too many?

Right now, I focus most of the time on the MC's POV, but the story involves a long journey and I spend some at various points on the POV of the two people she's traveling with.

If it is, then I'm in big trouble.

[nevada]

Thanks.

Is 3 or 4 POV characters in 3rd limited too many?

Right now, I focus most of the time on the MC's POV, but the story involves a long journey and I spend some at various points on the POV of the two people she's traveling with.

No it's not too many but ask yourself if you really need those POV's. do they advance the plot? Do they add to character development. Or are they just there to give us a break from the MC? A POV can be thrown in as comic relief but it always has to advance plot, character development, or both.

You can have 5 or 6 or 7 POV's as long as you keep the voices distinct, you tell the reader immediately whose POV they're in and as long as there's a really good reason to have that POV. Don't give us one chapter in a character's POV and never visit him again, unless you do that for all your characters. When you're thinking about POV switching, also think about the structure and symmetry of the novel as an entity.

Anything can be done if you do it well. :) Like I said, Brockman's books have up to 6 or 7 POV's and it's never jarring or distracting. Good luck.

[FennelGiraffe]

Is 3 or 4 POV characters in 3rd limited too many?

It's usually best to keep the number of POV chars as low as possible, but as long as your story needs all of them, three or four is fine.

[alyssalynne]

No it's not too many but ask yourself if you really need those POV's. do they advance the plot? Do they add to character development. Or are they just there to give us a break from the MC? A POV can be thrown in as comic relief but it always has to advance plot, character development, or both.

You can have 5 or 6 or 7 POV's as long as you keep the voices distinct, you tell the reader immediately whose POV they're in and as long as there's a really good reason to have that POV. Don't give us one chapter in a character's POV and never visit him again, unless you do that for all your characters. When you're thinking about POV switching, also think about the structure and symmetry of the novel as an entity.

Anything can be done if you do it well. :) Like I said, Brockman's books have up to 6 or 7 POV's and it's never jarring or distracting. Good luck.

My story is fairly complex and the other 3 POV characters (besides the MC) have a long history with the villain and have a huge emotional stake in seeing her defeated. I probably could write it only from my MC's POV, but it is a story where the plot/chaos has been going on for 30 years before she arrived on the scene. I feel I need these other character's POV's to show the hell the villian has put them through and make the ending more satisfying. I hope that makes sense. I was initially going to write 3rd omniscient but I realized I really want my readers to connect the most with my MC. This is my first novel and it's adapted from a script, so POV has been my biggest issue.

[eyeblink]

A Game of Thrones is third limited and has eight POV characters (plus another one for the prologue only). So no, 3-4 is not too many, as long as they are all necessary and all distinct from each other.

My own WIP (currently around 102k words pre-revisions), is third limited with three major POVs and two minor ones.

[SirBiatch]

Multiple POVs annoy me.

[nevada]

Multiple POVs annoy me.

why?

[wandergirl]

A Game of Thrones is third limited and has eight POV characters (plus another one for the prologue only).

and doesn't the sequel have about fifteen or twenty?

just make sure they're all equally compelling. I dislike it when I'm fascinated by one or two characters' stories in limited 3rd, but bored by others... I find myself wanting to skim to get to the interesting narrators.

[JimT.]

There seems to be a lot of confusion about POV, probably because there's a lot of conflicting stuff on the Internet, and because writing nerds tend to complicate things.

Third person limited/singular means that the story is told in third person, with a single character's POV. It's like first person, with Jack or Mary taking the place of the "I" character, except that the selected character doesn't talk directly to the reader (at least, not as narrator). So there is no third person limited with three or four (or even two) characters.

When you have several character POVs in a third person story, that's called third person unlimited/multiple. Theoretically, there's no limit to the number of insight characters, but like the practice of switching types of POV in a story, things can get ridiculous.

Third person omniscient is redundant. Omniscient POV doesn't exist in first or second person POV (unless the first person POV is that of God).

Omniscient POV causes the most confusion. Here it's useful to think of POV in terms of permissions. First person gives the writer permission to see into the mind (or through the eyes) of one character, the "I" character. The same is true of third person singular, but with a named character. Third person multiple gives the writer permission to see into the mind of more than one of the characters. Omniscient POV also gives the writer permission to see into the mind of more than one character. In addition, it gives the writer permission to divulge information that the characters are not aware of. The writer can describe scenes when no characters are present.

But here's the critical thing about permissions: Just because you can do something doesn't mean you have to. Just because you've adopted a third person multiple POV doesn't mean you have to provide insight into more than two characters, does it? Permission doesn't equate obligation. So omniscient POV can allow the writer to both tell the story as an all-knowing source, while at the same time revealing the thoughts of the characters. Or not. There are a lot of things to use or abuse. Or confuse, if one loves strict definitions.

So if you decide to utilize omniscient POV to open a story with a description of a valley where no characters are present, a place where none of the story's characters have yet visited, that doesn't mean you have to play the know-it-all throughout the story. There are uses of omniscient POV that do tend to lock the writer in to an aspect of the POV for the duration, such as telling of relationships that your insight characters are unaware of, or considerable revealing of events none of them are witness to, but even so, that doesn't necessarily change the way the writer treats insight into characters. Remember the permissions.

Some confuse objective POV with omniscient. Objective POV can mimic omniscient in scenes such as the valley I mentioned. But with objective POV, there is no permission to employ insight into characters. It's strictly limited to reporting the actions and dialogue of the characters, and the settings that exist in the story. The character's minds are locked up tight, even if their mouths aren't. Just as in real life. Or in most movies.

So the permissions should be observed, but if you want to use an omniscient POV to describe something that requires it--a space station, saturated with radiation and filled with corpses, revolving slowly in space--then do so without feeling the need to work Buck Rogers into the scene. The next scene, where Buck does arrive, will allow you to dip into the heads of our intrepid space cowboy and his sidekick without breaking any rules at all. You can even reveal that both men are wearing the same Wiley Coyote boxer briefs--something that neither knows--if that enhances your story and doesn't stick out as an isolated gimmick.

Happy writing.

[timewaster]

It's usually best to keep the number of POV chars as low as possible, but as long as your story needs all of them, three or four is fine.

Says who? Surely it depends on the story and what you are trying to do with it. All those huge Fantasy things have a cast of thousands and who knows how many POVs - though they are usually all tight( limited) third.

[maestrowork]

Says who? Surely it depends on the story and what you are trying to do with it. All those huge Fantasy things have a cast of thousands and who knows how many POVs - though they are usually all tight( limited) third.

Are they limited? Or are they omniscient?

I can't imagine an epic fantasy with 20 major characters being handled by 3rd limited. In this case, I think most certainly the thing should be written in omniscient.

[timewaster]

[quote=JimT.;3320408]There seems to be a lot of confusion about POV, probably because there's a lot of conflicting stuff on the Internet, and because writing nerds tend to complicate things.

I like your explanation. I just think about POV as being a combination and camera position and intimacy.
First; camera angle - the eye of your fist person narrator. intimacy variable the character can tell the reader everything or nothing, can lie and can move backwards and forwards through time' As in' if I'd have known then what I knew now' or their awareness can follow the chronology of the book.

Third: camera angle follows the eye of the narrator but can be written with various degrees of intimacy so that it describes only externals or gets in there deep and dirty into his/her thoughts.

Omni: the writer can put the camera wherever the hell he likes at any level of initmacy moving in and out of thoughts and evesdropping anywhere in the universe. He can descrbe anything and intervene in the story as narrator if he so chooses. It is the natural story telling voice of 'once upon a time' and I have no idea why people are so afraid of it.

[FennelGiraffe]

Says who? Surely it depends on the story and what you are trying to do with it. All those huge Fantasy things have a cast of thousands and who knows how many POVs - though they are usually all tight( limited) third.

"Usually" isn't the same as "always". There are no absolutes in writing. Still, some things are the smart way to bet.

Of course it depends on the story. Use as many POV chars as your story needs, but take a good, hard look at each one to be sure it really is needed. POV is a powerful tool when used carefully; spreading it too thin, however, weakens the story. Any time you can combine two lesser POV chars into one, your story is likely to be stronger for doing so.

A huge epic, purely by virtue of having more words and more subplots, can support more POV chars than an average-length novel. Even so, not all epics need that many. Have some gotten published anyway? Sure. But what does that have to do with making your story the best it can be?

[timewaster]

Are they limited? Or are they omniscient?

I can't imagine an epic fantasy with 20 major characters being handled by 3rd limited. In this case, I think most certainly the thing should be written in omniscient.

I've read enough with a series of different voices, all in limited third. Actually a huge number of books are written that way, I've always rather seen it as the default.
I don't write long books but I've certainly used five or six viewpoint characters for some things all in tight third with one dominant perpective and the others just filling in for the odd chapter here and there. You can pretty well do anything you like with viewpoint - whatever works.
Sometimes you want omniscient sometimes you don't - there is no 'should' involved.

[timewaster]

[quote=FennelGiraffe;3321084]"Usually" isn't the same as "always". There are no absolutes in writing. Still, some things are the smart way to bet.

Of course it depends on the story. Use as many POV chars as your story needs, but take a good, hard look at each one to be sure it really is needed. POV is a powerful tool when used carefully; spreading it too thin, however, weakens the story. Any time you can combine two lesser POV chars into one, your story is likely to be stronger for doing so.

I don't know that I agree with that. The idea of combining two characters is quite alien to me - how do you combine characters?
I don't see how you can spread POV thin. What on earth do you mean?

[maestrowork]

I've read enough with a series of different voices, all in limited third. Actually a huge number of books are written that way, I've always rather seen it as the default.

Can you name a few that has more than five or six POV characters written in 3rd limited, and not omniscient?

[alyssalynne]

I'm almost half way through the first draft, so I will probably just keep my 4 POV characters for now and when it's done I'll hopefully be able to see the big picture and decide if it works, or I should narrow it down to one POV character or use 3rd omniscient in the next draft. I appreciate everyone's thoughts on this.

[timewaster]

Can you name a few that has more than five or six POV characters written in 3rd limited, and not omniscient?

Why? Have a look yourself in the Fantasy sections. My own Silverboy ( Spellgrinder's Apprentice has six but its only 80k or so ) Had it been longer I'd probably have used more.

[DMarie84]

Thanks.

Is 3 or 4 POV characters in 3rd limited too many?

Right now, I focus most of the time on the MC's POV, but the story involves a long journey and I spend some at various points on the POV of the two people she's traveling with.

I have four in mine, though I may drop it to three (unsure if the one helps advance the plot or not). Most of the book is through the MC's eyes, but I do switch to the antagonist's POV for his side, and occassionally I switch to her father's POV. But there might only be five or six chapters in the entire book with his POV and maybe a dozen with the antagonist. The other viewpoint, from the love interest, may only happen four or five times, hence the reason I think I may drop it.

I personally don't like much more than four, but if their voices are distinct and I'm interested in their character, then I don't mind more.

[JimT.]

Timewaster said:

"I like your explanation. I just think about POV as being a combination and camera position and intimacy."

It makes perfect sense that the source of the "view" (the POV character) should be expressed as a camera. Years ago I came up with a writing technique I called Virtual Camera, in which description can be made to move just as a camera in a film would. The initial purpose was to get rid of the clumsy "we move closer" directions in spec screenplays, but I later adapted it to other forms of writing. I think it's helpful to writers who see scenes as they write.

[FennelGiraffe]

"Usually" isn't the same as "always". There are no absolutes in writing. Still, some things are the smart way to bet.

Of course it depends on the story. Use as many POV chars as your story needs, but take a good, hard look at each one to be sure it really is needed. POV is a powerful tool when used carefully; spreading it too thin, however, weakens the story. Any time you can combine two lesser POV chars into one, your story is likely to be stronger for doing so.

I don't know that I agree with that. The idea of combining two characters is quite alien to me - how do you combine characters?
I don't see how you can spread POV thin. What on earth do you mean?

Combining isn't likely to happen with major characters. But say there's an important event none of the major characters are present to see. So you give the POV for that scene to minor character X just because he's present. But if you take a step back to think about it, you might realize minor character Y, who already has POV for several other scenes, could be present with just a few minor tweaks. So character X still exists, but now he doesn't need to be a POV char.

Or you've given your MC three buddies, but as you write you find you can't really tell them apart; buddy A isn't bad, but buddy B and buddy C are too much alike. So you take about 85% of buddy C and blend it with buddy B. Another 10% turns out to work for buddy A. The last 5% that didn't fit either one was cool, but not really important; eliminate it. Now there are only two buddies, but they're stronger, more distinct characters.

Spreading POV thin: When the POV is concentrated in a few characters, the reader has time (aka word count) to form a strong connection with each. When the POV is spread across many characters, the reader never gets to spend much time with any one of them, so the connections formed are weaker.

For most people it's a lot easier to focus attention on a small number of targets. Show someone two trees and they'll notice which is taller, which has thicker branches, etc. Show them a hundred trees and all they see is a forest.

[maestrowork]

Why? Have a look yourself in the Fantasy sections. My own Silverboy ( Spellgrinder's Apprentice has six but its only 80k or so ) Had it been longer I'd probably have used more.

Why not? I'm sorry, you're making a claim that most novels (at least in fantasy) have more than five or six POV characters (or maybe even 20, since that was the number I gave in my post) done in 3rd limited. Is it so difficult to give an example or two? I'm not trying to be contentious, but I think you need to back up your claim when you say "most" or "usually."

I don't read fantasy, so I'm just asking for a clarification on your part, since you've read SO MANY. Would it be a problem to name, say, five?

[timewaster]

Spreading POV thin: When the POV is concentrated in a few characters, the reader has time (aka word count) to form a strong connection with each. When the POV is spread across many characters, the reader never gets to spend much time with any one of them, so the connections formed are weaker.

For most people it's a lot easier to focus attention on a small number of targets. Show someone two trees and they'll notice which is taller, which has thicker branches, etc. Show them a hundred trees and all they see is a forest.[/quote]

This tends to happen anyway - as long as you have a small number of key POV characters who may or may not be the protags (but usually are,) you can get away with a number of other viewpoints if it helps the story.

I think I've read more guff written about POV than almost anything else. I think it is important to tell the story the way you want to tell the story and not to get too hung up on what you can and can't do with POV. YOu can do anything that works. Advice to reduce POV characters quickly morphs into rules about how many POV characters a writer can have, and becomes nonsense.

I have published novels in first, omni, multiple third, and alternating third. None of them is any better or any more difficult than any other. It's just about finding the right voice for the story and letting the requirements of the story determine the approach.

[timewaster]

Timewaster said:

"I like your explanation. I just think about POV as being a combination and camera position and intimacy."

It makes perfect sense that the source of the "view" (the POV character) should be expressed as a camera. Years ago I came up with a writing technique I called Virtual Camera, in which description can be made to move just as a camera in a film would. The initial purpose was to get rid of the clumsy "we move closer" directions in spec screenplays, but I later adapted it to other forms of writing. I think it's helpful to writers who see scenes as they write.

Yes but it is a metaphor because I also think of it as being in someone's thoughts to varying degrees too so I don't restrict it to just the visual.

[timewaster]

Why not? I'm sorry, you're making a claim that most novels (at least in fantasy) have more than five or six POV characters (or maybe even 20, since that was the number I gave in my post) done in 3rd limited. Is it so difficult to give an example or two? I'm not trying to be contentious, but I think you need to back up your claim when you say "most" or "usually."

I don't read fantasy, so I'm just asking for a clarification on your part, since you've read SO MANY. Would it be a problem to name, say, five?

You're right of course. I was just being irritated, by what I perceived as yet more bad advice on POV. I'm sorry to have sounded ill tempered and unreasonable. People seem to talk about POV a lot on writing forums perhaps because unlike quite a lot of elements of writing it is quite easy to talk about.
Some writers do use a light omni approach to hold a novel together which has many viewpoints, though the bulk of the novel will read like multiple third. However, for some reason omni fell out of fashion and a number of books just hop from one third person viewpoint to another. I seem to have culled the big fantasy books of this sort from my shelves but multiple POV is the default. Whether it is true multiple third or apparent mulitple third ( with a small number of obviously omni linking passaged making it omni) I couldn't say without checking. However for most writers it is a distinction without much of a difference as for the bulk of the bok you move from one limited vewpoint to another - some writers stick some first person narrative in there too for good measure. It works well for big baggy Tolkeinesque books set over a wide gerographical area with many protags. Can't remember if LOR the ur text is omni or multiple third as it is years since I read it.

[nevada]

LOTR is most definitely omniscient.