Head Hopping vs. Omniscient Narrator

[DonnaDuck]

And the difference is . . . ?

I always figured the point of an omniscient narrator was that they knew everything hence they could "see" into the heads of multiple characters (thus omniscient) but when I tend to write what I think is omniscient it's deemed head hopping by betas. So what's the difference between the two? Is it the "norm" to write a third person limited as opposed to an omniscient and when people see "head hopping" they're just assuming that the author meant to write in limited and couldn't keep the writing tight? I'm having difficulty grasping the difference between the two since, from what I understand of an omniscient narrator (essentially an all-knowing narrator) is that they head hop. Otherwise they wouldn't be omniscient.

[Stew21]

you can do multiple POV's in a book without headhopping. It is considered headhopping if you are in more than one head per scene.

Here's an example of where I did it in my first novel (really very sad little thing). It's in the woman's POV, and I inadvertently jumped into the man's - it's been edited out now:

She sucked in hard and her chest heaved with it, “Yes I’m going. There is no reason for me to stay here this weekend!” She protested, but inside she was trembling. She reminded herself, steady.
“I have things for you to do too! If I have to work this weekend, so do you!” He yelled this time.
“I’ve been planning this for weeks and I’m going.” She had stopped walking down the stairs now, afraid of walking into the wall of his chest and being flung back against the wooden stairs.
He could hear the fear in her voice as she spoke and it empowered him. He loved the sound of fear. “You’re pathetic, you know it?” He laughed. “You still” he took a step, “haven’t” step, “learned” step, “to follow the rules” he said directly into her face and at her level now just one step below her.

Omnicient can use the POV and inner thoughts of any character, and move between them with chapter breaks. But more importantly, omnicient narrators can know about scenes and interactions where no one else was present besides the interacters and doesn't have to pick a POV character to tell it.

[Bufty]

Head-hopping in any shape is jarring -that's why it's called head-hopping.

The Omniscient narrator moves smoothly around the heads.

http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2112820#post2112820

[underthecity]

Head-hopping is changing character viewpoints within a scene, maybe even after every couple of sentences or paragraph by paragraph.

Third-person omnicient would require each scene to be devoted to one character. When the scene changes, the character changes. Or, within a scene, perhaps by using the * * * break.

Skilled writers writing in third/omnicient can change viewpoints within a scene by using a device such as description, or other action. For instance, early in Stephen King's The Shining, the viewpoint changes from Wendy to Danny within the same scene with description between them. It occurs more than once. It flows very well and the casual reader doesn't notice. I noticed it during a re-read because I was looking for things like that.

allen

[rossmart34]

I've been having the same issues. I have been trying to write in third person limited but, I want to use a narrator to explain back story and other details. Only problem is, I feel like I am putting space between the reader and the story. I just feel that in a fantasy story a reliable/unreliable narrator can convey back story and detail better than just laying it out for the reader plainly; I think it can carry more emotion coming from a narrator. It's pretty damn confusing though.

[DonnaDuck]

Ah, I see it now. But even so, the line between head-hopping and subtle transition within a scene itself seems pretty thin. I'm assuming that few are capable of doing something like this without it being jarring, I take it? But I get the difference now. Thanks everyone!

[DeleyanLee]

POV is where the camera sits at any point in time.

If the camera is sitting behind a character's eyes, it's 1st person.

If the camera is sitting behind the reader's eyes, it's 2nd person.

If the camera is sitting outside any character or reader, it's 3rd person.

If the camera is sitting on a single character's shoulder for a limited length of time (a scene, chapter, book), it's limited 3rd person.

If the camera sits on one character's shoulder and then hovers off and lands on another's shoulder, and the changes again, it's shifting 3rd person.

If the camera sits like God On High and can extend its view, however momentarily, into any and anything's eyes, it's omniscent 3rd person.

To my experience "head-hopping" is a derogatory term used by POV purists who preach that the ONLY valid form of POV is 1st or limited 3rd when, in fact, it is merely very badly done POV regardless of which person it was supposed to be.

[rossmart34]

I like that camera analogy. I used it to explain the difference between story and plot to a friend of mine. Plot is anything that can be seen happening through the camera lens. Story is anything happening inside of the characters on camera or compelling them to act out in front of the camera.

[JanDarby]

Omniscient usually has a consistent, identifiable narrator (might be the author, might be a character) outside any of the other characters, even when the narrator is telling/showing what's inside a character's head.

If you read a lot of well-done omniscient, you'll find that there really is a distinct narrator and, even if the narrator is going deep inside a character's head, there's a teeny-weeny reminder somewhere that the narrator is telling the story, that you're not simply along for the ride inside the character's head, but are being navigated where the narrator wants you to be.

Check out Terry Pratchett for omniscient done brilliantly.

JD

[Stew21]

Omniscient usually has a consistent, identifiable narrator (might be the author, might be a character) outside any of the other characters, even when the narrator is telling/showing what's inside a character's head.

If you read a lot of well-done omniscient, you'll find that there really is a distinct narrator and, even if the narrator is going deep inside a character's head, there's a teeny-weeny reminder somewhere that the narrator is telling the story, that you're not simply along for the ride inside the character's head, but are being navigated where the narrator wants you to be.

Check out Terry Pratchett for omniscient done brilliantly.

JD

excellent point.
The Castle in the Forest does this too. The character that explains the feelings, motives, etc of the other characters is omnicient, but he always stays in his own voice.

[IceCreamEmpress]

Check out Terry Pratchett for omniscient done brilliantly.


Yes.

I am learning a lot from Pratchett on how to move gracefully between different characters' viewpoints without making it feel jumpy.

[rossmart34]

Omniscient usually has a consistent, identifiable narrator (might be the author, might be a character) outside any of the other characters, even when the narrator is telling/showing what's inside a character's head.

If you read a lot of well-done omniscient, you'll find that there really is a distinct narrator and, even if the narrator is going deep inside a character's head, there's a teeny-weeny reminder somewhere that the narrator is telling the story, that you're not simply along for the ride inside the character's head, but are being navigated where the narrator wants you to be.

Check out Terry Pratchett for omniscient done brilliantly.

JD

It is often said that Antonio Corrent, Crown Prince of the Alturran Empire, was sent out upon a path set him by destiny. That being the only son of Diego "the Conqueror" and his Impressa, Soriana Maria Corrent, left him no avenue other than that leading to greatness and immortality brought about by the annals of history and the telling of legends....


Does this sound viable? It's the reliable narrator I've had in mind for my novel but this is all new to me and kind of confusing...

[JanDarby]

I am learning a lot from Pratchett on how to move gracefully between different characters' viewpoints without making it feel jumpy.

What I find particularly interesting in Pratchett books, with respect to POV, is when he's pretty deep inside a main character's head (usually Vimes, but also Moist and William deWorde), but if you look closely (yes, I've read most of his books multiple times, and I'm always finding something new to study), there'll be something -- sometimes minor, sometimes major -- that establishes that the character's experience is being filtered through the narrator/author. There's just that teensy-weensy bit of distance that enables the reader to go with the flow, regardless of where that flow takes us.

JD

[Windsong]

Thanks for the examples. I've been having a hard time trying to distinguish between these as well.

[Danger Jane]

Head-hopping is changing character viewpoints within a scene, maybe even after every couple of sentences or paragraph by paragraph.

Third-person omnicient would require each scene to be devoted to one character. When the scene changes, the character changes. Or, within a scene, perhaps by using the * * * break.

Skilled writers writing in third/omnicient can change viewpoints within a scene by using a device such as description, or other action. For instance, early in Stephen King's The Shining, the viewpoint changes from Wendy to Danny within the same scene with description between them. It occurs more than once. It flows very well and the casual reader doesn't notice. I noticed it during a re-read because I was looking for things like that.

allen

Omniscient doesn't require that the POV only shifts between scenes. It's simply harder to shift well in the middle of a scene. I really appreciate reading smooth POV shifts.

[maestrowork]

Omniscient: the POV is that of the narrator, an all-knowing "being" who happens to know what the characters are thinking or what is happening when and where. But the POV is that of the narrator -- there's a distinct, distant, sitting-on-a-cloud type narrator. Even with an all-knowing (omniscient) narrator, the narrator doesn't randomly jump from one character to another -- there's usually a focus at the time.

Head-hopping: it's usually an ill-controlled POV by the author to try to follow multiple characters at the same time, but without any cohesion or a unique omniscient narrator. The POVs are of the characters', but the POV jumps from one character to another without control, usually within the same scene or even paragraph. It's usually a symptom in 3rd limited POV. For example, as the story is told for character A's POV, suddenly the readers are privy to character B's thoughts or feelings or observations (outside of character A's POV). It's jarring and uncontrolled.


Omniscient:

There were six people on the island, and they were all thinking one thing: how to kill the others to survive. Little did they know, however, that a giant lizard was coming their way from the far end of the island.


Head-hopping:

Stuck on the island, Joe thought of his survival, and how he would kill the others. He looked over to Mary and wondered what she was thinking. Mary looked back at Joe and thought: I should kill Joe so I can survive. Joe knew that look on Mary's face. He realized she was thinking the same thing.


At first glance, it doesn't look like the two examples above are different (well, they're short paragraphs), but on the whole, the readers will sense the POVs. In the first one, they would sense that there's a narrator sitting somewhere telling a story. In the second one, they realized that the POVs are constantly shifting and following different people.

[DonnaDuck]

Those are great examples. I see the difference now. I guess it's something that never really bothered me in the past or just something I never noticed about other writing. Or I've just read writing good enough to omit such things. I'd like to think the latter! But now that I'm aware of it, I'm sure I'll notice the difference not only in my own work but others as well.

[JacobWorld]

I have always been a great fan of the books where the main character tells the story while happening .
Like the voice in this head he asses and predicts all this is going on in his head .

[Bufty]

Hmmmm.

I have always been a great fan of the books where the main character tells the story while happening .
Like the voice in this head he asses and predicts all this is going on in his head .

[Twizzle]

http://edittorrent.blogspot.com/2008/03/pov-questions.html

a great blog post on POV, esp head-hopping vs omni...

[maestrowork]

http://edittorrent.blogspot.com/2008/03/pov-questions.html

a great blog post on POV, esp head-hopping vs omni...

Hmm, her examples still look "head-hopping" to me, especially if she's telling it from the POVs of the characters. Really, if you're doing omniscient, you need to tell it from the POV of the narrator.

For a good example of omniscient, read Atonement by Ian McEwan.

[otterman]

I think it comes down to the smoothness of the transition. If it's clunky, awkward and affects flow, it's head-hopping. If it is done well and works for the reader, it's perfectly fine. I think the suddenness of the change (as stated) is an important factor. I've been guilty of making the transition too quickly/often and luckily a beta reader has pointed this out to me.

[ColinMacDougall]

*NEWBY ALERT*

Hi, everybody, honored and delighted and all that and I'd dearly love to hear your thoughts on this.
In my fantasy novel I change POV's fairly frequently in third-person limited. For example, in one chapter the bad guys are storming the castle and a bunch of good guys attack the attackers in an attempt to break in to reinforce the defenders. One brother leads the defenders and one the relieving force and I tell the story of the battle from both points of view, changing 'focus' as needed to tell the story more efficiently.
One long chapter uses the POV of (God help me) eight different characters. HOWEVER - I use scene breaks (an extra space) and I always have a narrative reason behind the change, for example at the end of the another chapter (about a coup) all the main characters are in different places and I move from one to the other in quick three or four sentence paragraphs, each slightly shorter until the last - two short sentences. I only do that once in the book, mind, but I like using at least two or three of these scene changes among the major characters in any scene of any length. Obviously there's no room here to demonstrate, but assuming I do a good job of keeping their voices distinct would you say....
A) If you can pull it off, more power to you.
and/or
B) Don't even think about it, Kiddo. lessen' yer name ez Jordan er Shakeyspeare er sem sech.
and/or
C) It can't work.
Having read through a good many threads here, I'm sure your opinons would be a great help, and thank you for your time.

[Matera the Mad]

I'm giving you an "A", Colin ;)

[ColinMacDougall]

Thanks!

[The Lonely One]

Stuck on the island, Joe thought of his survival, and how he would kill the others. He looked over to Mary and wondered what she was thinking. Mary looked back at Joe and thought: I should kill Joe so I can survive. Joe knew that look on Mary's face. He realized she was thinking the same thing.

All you've convinced me of here is that head-hopping is fun as hell to read :)

[maestrowork]

All you've convinced me of here is that head-hopping is fun as hell to read :)

I'm just THAT good a writer. :)

[semilargeintestine]

I just read Bleak House for the first time. There is definitely some head-hopping going on there. It made me do a double take the first time, but I actually enjoyed it a bit.

[Aschenbach]

I just read Bleak House for the first time. There is definitely some head-hopping going on there.

I disagree (respectfully, of course ;)). With Dickens there is never any doubt that a seperate omniscient narrator is telling the story. A narrator that can look forwards and backwards in time, scrutinise any character he likes, and make all kinds of biblical and political allusions his characters wouldn't know about.

[semilargeintestine]

There are definitely a few instances near the end of the novel where he randomly jumps from one person to the next and back within a paragraph.

Also, in Bleak House, there is a definite switch between omniscient and third person limited many times in the novel (it's even in the table of contents :D ). This is my first Dickens novel, but I hear he isn't usually like that, as you say.

[maestrowork]

Repeat after me: omniscient and head-hopping are not the same thing.

There, I feel better now.

[semilargeintestine]

I'm aware of that, lol. But from the description I got on this thread, bouncing from one person to another in the same paragraph is head hopping. I'd never heard the term before yesterday, so I may be wrong. Also, I read it while my car was undergoing a nearly 1,000 dollar repair, so I may be remembering incorrectly.

[tehuti88]

*NEWBY ALERT*

Hi, everybody, honored and delighted and all that and I'd dearly love to hear your thoughts on this.
In my fantasy novel I change POV's fairly frequently in third-person limited. For example, in one chapter the bad guys are storming the castle and a bunch of good guys attack the attackers in an attempt to break in to reinforce the defenders. One brother leads the defenders and one the relieving force and I tell the story of the battle from both points of view, changing 'focus' as needed to tell the story more efficiently.
One long chapter uses the POV of (God help me) eight different characters. HOWEVER - I use scene breaks (an extra space) and I always have a narrative reason behind the change, for example at the end of the another chapter (about a coup) all the main characters are in different places and I move from one to the other in quick three or four sentence paragraphs, each slightly shorter until the last - two short sentences. I only do that once in the book, mind, but I like using at least two or three of these scene changes among the major characters in any scene of any length. Obviously there's no room here to demonstrate, but assuming I do a good job of keeping their voices distinct would you say....
A) If you can pull it off, more power to you.
and/or
B) Don't even think about it, Kiddo. lessen' yer name ez Jordan er Shakeyspeare er sem sech.
and/or
C) It can't work.
Having read through a good many threads here, I'm sure your opinons would be a great help, and thank you for your time.

I'd say A as well...if only for the reason that this is the technique I myself prefer. :D

I don't vouch for how great my work is (for all I know it's lousy), but this is an example where I switch POVs in rapid succession in my second serial "Return To Manitou Island." The unbolded text at the beginning of each part is the POV character for that scene.

(Sikt Natha) A warm yet unwelcoming wind suddenly blustered over them, and the fur on Sikt's hackles rose. She turned her head to see another figure standing some distance away, cloaked in shadows but with yellow glowing eyes. It looked like a woman, and for the briefest irrational second Sikt thought of her grandmother. Her fur prickled.

The dark figure raised one hand, eyes glittering with menace. "You don't belong here," she rasped, and flames started dancing around her hand, a heat haze making her outline blur.

Sikt's ears flared. Her eyes focused more intently, and for a moment she couldn't be certain whether it was actually a woman, or a man, she was facing. When a ball of fire formed over the figure's hand, it no longer mattered. She jerked her head up.

Father! It is here!

Sikt jammed her claws into the ground. The charred soil glowed slightly around her hand. The figure wielding the fireball paused just long enough for another light to flicker down from the sky, and glanced up at it in surprise. The light grew larger and faster as it descended, until the glowing shape of a demon emerged. It landed in front of Sikt and Manabozho, turned its head to look at the dark figure, and then raised one hand and swept it through the air in a wide slicing motion...

*****

(Tal Natha) ...just as Tal Natha's claw tore through the coursing stream of dreams, severing one strand...

*****

(Chakenapok) ...just as Chakenapok gasped and jerked backwards, grabbing at his stinging hand, another connection severed...

*****

(Niskigwun) ...just as Manabozho gasped and stiffened in Niskigwun's grasp, then fell limp, his head lolling and his body slumping to the ground as if dead.

Niskigwun still held onto his arm, a stunned look on his face. He finally forced himself to let go and Manabozho's arm fell to join the rest of him. He stared at him for a long time, yet nothing else happened. He leaned down to stare into his face and saw that his eyes had stopped moving, yet he was still breathing--he no longer dreamed, yet he still slept. The Michinimakinong peered at him for a good long time before poking his shoulder, feeling at his neck, and pulling on one eyelid. Manabozho remained unconscious. Yet at least he wasn't whimpering and shaking anymore.

I don't usually use such abrupt POV switches, though I can think of at least two times, including the above, when it suited the scene in question. (I should add that these aren't even the only POV switches in that chapter--there are more--but this was the abrupt part.)

Hope that helps. :D

[Matera the Mad]

I was just re-reading something by Anne McCaffrey, and noticing how she managed the POV changes. It didn't bother me the first time I read the book, and it doesn't now, although I am so highly sensitized that some books I might once have enjoyed give me editor-fits. It seems natural when some writers do the head-dance, while some are annoying as hell.

[maestrowork]

I'm aware of that, lol. But from the description I got on this thread, bouncing from one person to another in the same paragraph is head hopping. I'd never heard the term before yesterday, so I may be wrong. Also, I read it while my car was undergoing a nearly 1,000 dollar repair, so I may be remembering incorrectly.

Head-hopping is actually a term used for 3rd person limited narration, when we have POV characters, and the author switches POVs mid-scene or even mid-paragraph/sentence.

Omniscient is always from the POV of the narrator. So the narrator can report anything he wants, including thoughts and feelings, but the POV is always his.

[ColinMacDougall]

Thanks for the feedback, all. When I've read samples of 'head hopping' it doesn't resemble my writing -- I would never change POV without a clear transition or within a paragraph -- But so many folks say there should be only one POV per novel or per chapter I get worried.
When learning a new skill-set it seems the most basic definitions are the hardest to get clear. One thing I make a point of is never using a character for a POV unless that character has already been introduced. So I'll set up a sympathetic minor character and use them when something is going on far away and the major characters can't be there. Maestrowork's mantra "Repeat after me: omniscient and head-hopping are not the same thing." is a great relief to me. Thanks again!

[RJK]

If you are in Omniscient, it is perfectly legitimate to shift POV as was mentioned in the camera analogy. I think you can apply a test to determine whether you are head hopping or just shifting POV. If the character is using any of his five (or more) senses, or is thinking, you have shifted into his head.
Speaking is not one of the senses. If the characters says "I was thinking about this, and I feel it should be this way after I saw so and so and heard what she said and smelled her perfume..." You are not in the character's head.
If you, as the author say Jane felt she had to say something. or Tom saw the knife on the table. you are in their head.
If you as the author, write Tommy's throat constricted. He tried to scream but could only produce a squeak. you are not necessarily in his head. This can be observed by an omniscient observer.