POV - your thoughts

[SarahMacManus]

How do you feel about alternating 1st person with 3rd person limited in one work? Do you think it works?

I can't think of any novels off the top of my head that use that - and I can't find it discussed by searching.

Your thoughts?

[Delhomeboy]

Hell, I'm doing it. So...I do hope it's not a problem.

[Matera the Mad]

There was some discussion of it somewhere recently, I think. But picking the search words can be treeeeky.

I don't see it as a problem per se, just a matter of right timing and doing the characters well.

[BravoYankee]

My prologue is from a 3rd person perspective, but then the rest stays in the 1st.

[DeadlyAccurate]

I've read books that do that. IIRC (I let my sister borrow the book, so I can't check), Kelley Armstrong's first Nadia Stafford book, Exit Strategy, switches between the heroine's 1st POV and the serial killer's 3rd POV.

I don't really care, so long as it's done right.

[ClaudiaGray]

I've seen it done well, but most of the time, I admit, I find it jarring.

[SarahMacManus]

Yeah, it feels odd to me - although I'm a much faster and more prolific writer when I can really get inside the character's head.

Just wondering if anyone can think of a novel that is done that way.

And I've tried a multitude of searches in the forum, it's VERY tricky. :)

[Fade]

I wouldn't mind it done well. I've seen it done mediocre.

[Judg]

Widdershins by Charles de Lint. And probably a lot of his stuff, but that's all I've read.

[ChaosTitan]

Loved it: Red, by Jordan Summers

Couldn't get past the first 100 pages: Maximum Ride, by James Patterson

So far, those are the only two books I've read that mixed first and third. My opinion is fifty-fifty. :)

[Fade]

Couldn't get past the first 100 pages: Maximum Ride, by James Patterson

That's the mediocre example I was thinking of. And When the Wind Blows (which I liked better).

[maestrowork]

How do you feel about alternating 1st person with 3rd person limited in one work? Do you think it works?

Question, is the 3rd limited from a different character's POV or the same as the 1st person?

I've seen it done from a different POV character and that works fine, I think -- if it's written well.

If it's the same character, then I find it jarring, and would question why you need two different narrative styles for the same character.

[SarahMacManus]

Question, is the 3rd limited from a different character's POV or the same as the 1st person?
I've seen it done from a different POV character and that works fine, I think -- if it's written well.
If it's the same character, then I find it jarring, and would question why you need two different narrative styles for the same character.

I was going to use short bits of 1st person for reaction/contemplation/backstory and 3rd person limited for all action for the same character and two others.
All action would be in 3rd person limited; follow up reaction would be in first person.
I'm not sure it's going to work, just thought I'd play with it a little.

[maestrowork]

I was going to use short bits of 1st person for reaction/contemplation/backstory and 3rd person limited for all action for the same character and two others.
All action would be in 3rd person limited; follow up reaction would be in first person.
I'm not sure it's going to work, just thought I'd play with it a little.

Same character? Then I think you'd be better served sticking to one POV. Or, whenever you're following the same character/MC, use 1st person -- don't switch between 1st and 3rd for him -- that's like a POV whiplash. It's disorienting for the readers and, IMO, unnecessary. You don't need 3rd person to write action, and you don't need first person to do thoughts and feelings.

In my first book, I used to have the flashbacks told in 3rd person while the main story was told in 1st. But my editor suggested that I keep it all to first person because switching to 3rd person was a) unnecessary, and b) confusing, even though eventually she realized it was the same character. Basically, anything that takes your readers out of the story and make them scratch their heads would be a risky move.

[Toothpaste]

Well . .. um . . . I'm doing that. With the same character's POV. It's my latest, my YA, that hopefully my agent will be shopping soon.

My use for it is similar to yours actually. My book is a re-imagining of Shakespeare, so for the actual plot everything is told in 3rd person past, but then I interject what I consider soliloquies, told first person present. The idea is that my main character is telling his own story in third person, but every once and awhile decides to talk in the moment to his readers.

I guess my point is . . . it's doable (lol, I hope it's doable, I mean so far out of all the problems I've had to fix, the POV switch hasn't ever been mentioned), but make sure you have a concrete reason for doing it. Oh, and something else I've learned, try not to disrupt the action too much with the first person. You don't want your story to suddenly stall. Spend more time moving the story forward, than the introspection. Otherwise your readers are going to get uber annoyed.

[SarahMacManus]

Widdershins by Charles de Lint. And probably a lot of his stuff, but that's all I've read.

That sounds fascinating, and just the sort of thing I like to read. Thanks for the recommendation and the help.

Do YOU think it was well done? Or did you find it put you out of the story?

[SarahMacManus]

Well . .. um . . . I'm doing that. With the same character's POV. It's my latest, my YA, that hopefully my agent will be shopping soon.


Thanks for that. I guess the only way to be sure is to try it. Should be easily mended if it's too clunky.

I will avoid an overload of introspection. :)

[Judg]

That sounds fascinating, and just the sort of thing I like to read. Thanks for the recommendation and the help.

Do YOU think it was well done? Or did you find it put you out of the story?
De Lint really complicates things by having multiple viewpoints, some told in first person, some in third. The chapter headings tell you who's speaking.

At first (like at the beginning of Chapter 2) it really threw me, because I didn't know what was going on. Once I got used to it, I was OK.

[Red_Dahlia]

I'm planning on trying this for one of my next projects. Hopefully it'll work out ok. Good luck!

[gypsyscarlett]

Widdershins by Charles de Lint. And probably a lot of his stuff, but that's all I've read.

If you liked that, try his, "Someplace to be Flying". :)

To the OP: Like a lot of things, it's all in how the writer handles it. Good luck!

[Shara]

It seems to work very well in crime thrillers, with the perspective of the killer in 1st person, and the detective's POV in 3rd person. It works because although we're inside the head of the killer, we don't really know who he is, and the thrill of the chase as the detective stalks the killer is still there.

Mark Billingham uses this technique in 'The Straw Men' as I recall.

I would advise against using 1st/3rd viewpoint for the same character. I think this would add unnecessary confusion.

Shara

[Raphee]

Nothing against it.
Nothing against any POV as a matter of fact.
As long as it....

[eveningstar]

I think it can definitely work if done well and presented so the narrative structure doesn't get confusing.

My current WIP alternates 3rd with 2nd, and has a few sections in 1st. So far none of my beta readers have had any problems with it.

[maestrowork]

I was saying there would be a potential for confusion especially if you're switching between 1st and 3rd for the same character. So beware.

You can always just write it, and see if it works. If it doesn't, it can be fixed. And if you tell your story well enough, and if that one part doesn't work, you may still get the contract, just be prepared your editor may want you to rewrite that. But you never know until you try, and it's all in the execution.

[SarahMacManus]

I was saying that the would be a potential for confusion especially if you're switching between 1st and 3rd for the same character. So beware.

You can always just write it, and see if it works. If it doesn't, it can be fixed. And if you tell your story well enough, and if that one part doesn't work, you may still get the contract, just be prepared your editor may want you to rewrite that. But you never know until you try, and it's all in the execution.

Yes, I can see the potential for confusion from here. :) I'm going to try it - it won't be difficult to change later if it's awkward and might speed up the process for me. It won't require a lot of rewriting if it doesn't work.

[maestrowork]

Yes, I can see the potential for confusion from here. :) I'm going to try it - it won't be difficult to change later if it's awkward and might speed up the process for me. It won't require a lot of rewriting if it doesn't work.

One thing to do is to introduce the 1st person narrator first. That way, we already know the narrator is Joe. Then later when you have Joe as a 3rd limited POV character, the transition isn't as jarring as when you do it the other way (3rd limited Joe, followed by 1st person Joe).

Also, if you keep the 1st person narrator to ONLY one character, it would be less jarring. However if you have both 1st and 3rd versions of three different characters, it may become really confusing.

It's all about how you manage and execute your storytelling. One key thing of storytelling is clarity. Always keep that in mind when we write.

[Delhomeboy]

I forgot Toni Morrison's Beloved. She does it very well in that book as well. It's only four small chapters, but its placing seems right.

[SarahMacManus]

One thing to do is to introduce the 1st person narrator first. That way, we already know the narrator is Joe. Then later when you have Joe as a 3rd limited POV character, the transition isn't as jarring as when you do it the other way (3rd limited Joe, followed by 1st person Joe).

Also, if you keep the 1st person narrator to ONLY one character, it would be less jarring. However if you have both 1st and 3rd versions of three different characters, it may become really confusing.

It's all about how you manage and execute your storytelling. One key thing of storytelling is clarity. Always keep that in mind when we write.

No, only one person would be in 1st person, the MC. More would be ridiculous. What I was thinking was more in order of short blurbs that filled in the reaction/backstory, sort of like a log or diary entry, but not formatted as such. The rest would be entirely in 3rd person and there would only be two other characters with POV.

Really, all I can do is try it and see if it works. If it doesn't, it's easy enough to convert back to 3rd person limited. I wasn't planning a lot of internalization.

Thanks! :)

[Feidb]

Mixing 1st and 3rd seems to be a growing trend. I've never liked first person and still dont. However, a friend of mine uses both in the same story and though I loved the story, I would have loved it a lot more if it was just 3rd.

Because of her, I read a published book that mixed 1st and 3rd, and it sucked so bad I can't even remember what it was. I'm sure there's one of my Amazon reviews of it somewhere.

I'm only one person, though. It may turn out to be the hot trend in the coming years. It's sure going to save me a lot of money if it becomes popular!

[wandergirl]

When it's the same character, I hate it (although I would love to be proved wrong). Children of Men did it, but I would have preferred the narration straight one way or the other.

I've also seen 1st/3rd alternation with focuses on different characters in three YA novels I recently read: Jellicoe Road by Melina Marchetta, The Astonishing Life of Octavian Nothing by M. T. Anderson, and After the First Death by Robert Cormier.

If you're talking 3rd solely in backstory/journal entries/etc., also see Bliss by Lauren Myracle.

[SarahMacManus]

When it's the same character, I hate it (although I would love to be proved wrong). Children of Men did it, but I would have preferred the narration straight one way or the other.

I've also seen 1st/3rd alternation with focuses on different characters in three YA novels I recently read: Jellicoe Road by Melina Marchetta, The Astonishing Life of Octavian Nothing by M. T. Anderson, and After the First Death by Robert Cormier.

If you're talking 3rd solely in backstory/journal entries/etc., also see Bliss by Lauren Myracle.

Yes, Glory Season by David Brin is 3rd person for the MC and 1st person in the way of log entries by another character and it works well.

I'm thinking 1st person for backstory/journal/reaction, 3rd person for plot/action.

[RunawayScribe]

I started a thread like this recently. I personally think it's fine if it's handled well to avoid confusion and the story calls for it.

[Dave Veri]

Read the James Woods book, On Fiction; he calls it free indirect style. Once you learn how it works with your own style and have tested it with your reading group, it can be great. I find I have to establish two or more strong voices, and then make the narrator a distinct and recognizable holder of his own style. Then the characters have a firm foundation to let their thoughts out. Best to stick with thoughts from MCs only. Avoid confusion. Then you win the best of both worlds.

[WriteOn85]

How do you feel about alternating 1st person with 3rd person limited in one work?

I don't know, but I'm doing my novel (a murder mystery involving a theater actor getting strangled, a missing husband, two rival police detectives, and a blond au pair living with an elderly socialite) sort of how the book version of Election is done: the book jumps from POV to POV and acts as a liasion between the A- and B-stories (in my case, the A-story is two police detectives settling their differences and working together to solve the mystery of a theater actor who was strangled moments before his show started; the B-story is about a struggling actress and her pregnant best friend [who's married to one of the police detectives] trying to find the actress's missing husband]).

So, to answer your question: as long as you have a reason to alternate your POV, then I see no problem in doing it.

[dgrintalis]

I've got it in my tale. My story is told in 3rd person limited and my MC has a running stream of 1st person internal dialogue.

And, I also have two different POVs. My villain has his own distinct voice. My MC is the only character to have 1st person internal dialogue. When my villain has internal thoughts, they are still in 3rd person. I've been very careful to make sure it's clear whose POV we are in when 'their' chapter begins. When they interact, the scene plays out something like this:

Quick and dirty example:

Chapter 1. Villain's POV: Villain is across the street and sees MC step outside of the restaurant to have a smoke and thinks nefarious thoughts in 3rd person
Chapter 2. MC's POV: She watches villain cross the street, they interact and her thoughts are in 1st person
Chapter 3. Villain's POV: Watches her go back inside and thinks nefarious thoughts, in 3rd person
Chapter 4. MC's POV: Back in the restaurant, her thoughts are in 1st person

Still with me? LOL

In the above example, chapters 1 and 3 are very short and chapters 2 and 4 are long.

I didn't necessarily intend it to be this way, but my MC and villain both have their own strong voices and choose to speak this way so I let them.

[ccv707]

I haven't written a first person ms since my very first novel length ms, some ten years ago. Since then, I've tended toward the third person omniscient, in part to juggle between the large cast of characters I usually use. This POV makes it easier to explore my stories from multiple perspectives; the way I see it, there are an infinite number of perspectives to every story, based on any number of differing circumstances. My six completed manuscripts deal with varying subjects (the nature of the human soul, our connection with what we refer to as the "divine", the affect of war on society, and so forth), and while I'm as liberal as one can get, I still divide the perspective equally between supporting my personal ideas with that of others, because I feel that unless one acknowledges every aspect of something, even if one doesn't agree with them, there can never be a true universal understanding of the idea at hand.