Is using one P.O.V. only considered a terrible faux pas?

I disagree with your judge. Some romances work really well with multiple POV, and some are better in single. If, for instance, you don't want to make it clear that the object of desire returns the MC's love, you don't include their POV. That creates tension, not diminishes it.

My first book included both (eventual) partners' POV, but the 2nd and 3rd did not. And I'm working on one now that's in first person, so that too will have only one POV.

Evelyn_Alexie said:

Thankfully, this contest had the judges enter comments for low scores. Turns out the main thing I'd done wrong was write the opening from the hero's P.O.V. only. According to this judge, there's no way to have any suspense or tension when you write in just one P.O.V.

Click to expand...

I don't agree with this judge's opinion. However...

As far as I recall, I've only read two romances that didn't include both parties' points of view. One of them worked for me, and the other didn't.

That's two, out of a lot.

So although I think it's quite possible to have suspense and tension with just one POV, I personally like seeing things from both the hero's and heroine's (or hero's and hero's) perspectives. If I don't get that in a romance, the other elements of the story need to be fantastic to make up for it.

And of my romances, I always have both characters' perspectives. So maybe I'm biased that way too.

At the moment, I only write in close third or first person. Some of my favorite books are written that way. I don't think any POV will ruin your chances if it's done well. The only POV and tense combo that seems to have a lot of hate associated with it is first person present.

Guess what my first novel was written in?

The book has two POVs, but the first chapter is only told by the Hero's. If you only submit one chapter, how would the judge know?

I have read several romances with only one POV, and am writing two right now. Note that all the ones I read were:
1) first person
2) heroine's POV only (in m/f)

Like, say, all of Kristan Higgins's earlier books. Lisa Kleypas's Smooth Talking Stranger. Kristen Ashley's Motorcycle Man... While it is not the most common choice, I don't think of it as uncommon.

Having said that, I cannot come up with a historical romance with only one POV. Hmm. I read more contemporary than historical romance, but I still read historical romance regularly.

But I am a bit confused by the judge's comments. How many words was the excerpt you submitted to the contest? How long until you see the heroine's POV? (Do you use the heroine's POV? I know you don't in the first few chapters, but later on? Not 100% clear.) In a short excerpt, it is common to just have one POV even in a book with 2 POVs. And "no way to have any suspense or tension when you write in just one P.O.V." is a bit WTF to me...

The judge definitely sounds confused. Having only one POV is practically the EASIEST way to have suspense/tension. Old Skool romances were single-POV (heroine only), and a lot of the conflict came from the heroine not knowing that the brooding hero actually was falling in love with her or had good reasons for things that seemed bad. (Think of old gothics, with the brooding hero in a gloomy old mansion, when the heroine is afraid that he's going to kill her, except he's so hot, she's willing to wait around and find out.)

A single POV is extremely common in my genre of mystery (I used to read a lot of romance, but never managed to write one convincingly), where first person and third-person, from just the sleuth's pov are the most typical POVs. And there's certainly suspense and tension in mysteries!

Oftentimes, a judge will find something that doesn't work for her -- the pov for some reason -- and struggle to find an explanation, which often isn't the right one.

I'd suggest, either a) ignore her completely, because she's confused, or b) consider whether there's something about the hero's POV that might be offputting, or perhaps that was too flat somehow (I'm trying to think of why the judge might have thought there wasn't enough tension in the scene, without blaming it on using just one pov versus using two).

But don't spend too much time on it. At some point, if you can't find something that you can learn from the judge, it's best to just say "She wasn't my reader," and move on.

LJD said:

I have read several romances with only one POV, and am writing two right now. Note that all the ones I read were:
1) first person
2) heroine's POV only (in m/f)

Click to expand...

I also see this in several m/m romances/LGBT stories as well, but they can also be in third-person, not just first-person.
Then again, there are some stuff in m/m that may not be as common or allowed in m/f....

Evelyn, one POV is fine. I personally feel that one POV can be very suspenseful--because you don't know what the other characters are thinking and your narrator may be unreliable, and so on.

However, it's not as common as two POV's. I hear around on various sites and comments that many romance readers have a preference for both POV's. Maybe this judge may have this same preference?

Still, you can still create suspense with one POV.

I'm one of those people who prefer single POVs in most novels (mostly non-romance or m/m), but for most m/f, most romance readers prefer two POV's.

One-POV M/F that is male-POV is pretty rare. I look hard for these and like them, but the fact they are like hens' teeth probably reflects that they are not widely popular?

What Veinglory said - assuming this is M/F Romance - I've read plenty of single-POV romances (usually in 1st person though), and can't think of one I've ever come across that began with the male POV, never mind one written entirely from his POV.

However, I also cannot see how the tension would be less in that scenario, for reasons stated in an above post.

Wilde_at_heart said:

What Veinglory said - assuming this is M/F Romance - I've read plenty of single-POV romances (usually in 1st person though), and can't think of one I've ever come across that began with the male POV, never mind one written entirely from his POV.

Click to expand...

Me neither, though I'm not as well read as many of the lovely writers in this forum.

Usually, if the hero's POV is in the beginning, then I would expect the heroine's POV to be shown some time soon. That is, if the book is a m/f romance.

If it's not of the romance genre or if the romance is not the main plotline (ex: SFF with romantic elements), then you may have more leeway.

I have seen and heard about romance books with one POV--but, POV is the heroine's. And, like Wilde_at_Heart said, usually first person, too.

However, if your m/f story is an historical romance, then I (and most other readers) would expect the heroine's POV to be told as well.

Evelyn_Alexie said:

Thanks Marlys and Queen of Swords! In this story, the hero spends the first few chapters trying to figure out who the heroine is, so I thought diving into her P.O.V. would reduce the suspense. But it's good to know that this might prove a barrier to some readers.

Evelyn

Click to expand...

I would personally approach this by having a short prologue from the heroine's POV where her identity is kept hidden. This would increase suspense because the reader would have a few clues the hero didn't have, so the reader would do some extra thinking about the hero's guesses, comparing them against this additional info.

Marlys said:

My first book included both (eventual) partners' POV, but the 2nd and 3rd did not. And I'm working on one now that's in first person, so that too will have only one POV.

Click to expand...

Umm, what? There's no reason you can't have a book in first person written from more than one POV. I've read lots of books like this. They just change who the first person is between chapters.

sunandshadow said:

Umm, what? There's no reason you can't have a book in first person written from more than one POV. I've read lots of books like this. They just change who the first person is between chapters.

Click to expand...

Sorry, that wasn't clear--I didn't mean it was impossible. I meant I'm not doing it.

Marlys said:

Sorry, that wasn't clear--I didn't mean it was impossible. I meant I'm not doing it.

Click to expand...

Ah, that makes sense then.

Out of the three romance books I last read, two were single POV. They were all m/m though, I don't know if single POV is more common there than in m/f.

The two single POV books were much stronger than the duel POV one.

veinglory said:

One-POV M/F that is male-POV is pretty rare. I look hard for these and like them, but the fact they are like hens' teeth probably reflects that they are not widely popular?

Click to expand...

Any recs? (Should I start a new thread to ask?) I've been looking for an m/f romance where it's from the man's POV.

I would suggest a new thread, because finding more male POV MF would make me very happy.

I wonder if one of the reasons why male-only POV in m/f is uncommon because most m/f romances are aimed at female readers? Or, is because this is one of the few genre in which there are many main female protagonists (who are the main alongside the male hero)?

I'm just speculating, that's all. I'm always looking for reasons, lol.

For me, that is one of the reasons why I like reading some m/f romances (as well as paranormal romances or urban fantasies, MG/YA fiction,etc):

I can get plenty of male-only POVs everywhere else (in novels, lots of video games, tv/movies, comics, etc), and I enjoy reading the female POVs, so it's great when I find female POVs. I still read stories with male POVs, of course, but the ones I usually enjoy the most have female POVs.

GinJones said:

Having only one POV is practically the EASIEST way to have suspense/tension. Old Skool romances were single-POV (heroine only), and a lot of the conflict came from the heroine not knowing that the brooding hero actually was falling in love with her or had good reasons for things that seemed bad.

Click to expand...

This is more or less what I'm doing in my current work in progress, which I'd describe as a traditional murder mystery with a romance subplot. In first person from the heroine's point of view.

She suspects the love interest for a big chunk of the book -- first of cheating on her and on his sobriety, later of committing murder. He's missing for at least a quarter of the book, so until they're reunited she has no way to find out what he was really up to with the victim and after her death.

I find this character and the relationship the most interesting part of the story to me.

If I wanted to recast it more as a romance with a mystery subplot, would I be better off keeping the single POV? Or writing some from his POV but not revealing to readers everything he knows, or delaying his first chapter until it's time for the reader to find out?

I had a friend with a male-only POV novella rejected by one publisher with the reasoning that romance was marketed mostly to women and therefore needed to be 'relatable' for the female readers. For that publisher, that meant either a near even POV split or female only. The book was picked up by another publisher who didn't have a problem with the male-only POV.

As for the OP, I think that judge's opinion and reasoning can be discounted. People are people, and anyone can build up the drama and tension. Some publishers do have house rules concerning POV, which is good to keep in mind, but that doesn't mean doing it differently is wrong. If just means it doesn't fit that one mold.

It's a contemporary slightly erotic, but Tangled by Emma Chase is completely in the male's POV. First person, if I remember correctly.

Sure, it's the norm to split the POV between male and female in hetero romances, but that doesn't mean anything really. In early days of modern romance, most books were exclusively female POV. Things change and anything's allowed when written well enough.

I've read books that are both POVs, one or the other POV. I've read those that start with the male and then switch, and vice versa. Doesn't matter to me.