Multiple POV

[NuclearFairy]

I follow an author on another site, where six 1st POV characters is her paring back. She even has one that is just one disjointed sentence. It works really well for that story. I think twenty-four first person voices in the same story is the most she's done. But, that was also a rather long story.

What she does is she places the name in bold above their chapter, maybe the time and date as well depending on the story, and then she gives each character a very distinct voice.

I've never tried having multiple viewpoint characters in 1st, but I've done it a few times in 3rd. When I do it in third, I have one main character that gets most of the viewpoints, and then occasionally, as I feel the story needs it, I'll switch to someone else.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I'm toying with a similar problem but with only two points of view. I'm looking for a novel solution.

In your case with so many points of view, omniscient third person might be less confusing to readers than changing the point of view.

Close third works just as well, if the cast is small. I've written a bunch of stories with three characters, and close third works well in that situation. The trick is to keep the relative weightings fairly even.

 

[dirk2024]

I have a WIP that, by the fourth chapter, will have four couples in it. The first three chapters center on one guy with various people coming and going as the whole thing is going to arch over 14 years. So I am using third person omninisicient. The whole thing mostly centers around the
one guy, then the woman who becomes his wife when she joins the story line. The other characters get some attention here and there.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

I'm with ElectricBlue on this one. Close Third probably makes more sense absent some really compelling reason it HAS to be 1p. Otherwise its...

 

[liliput1]

I'm with ElectricBlue on this one. Close Third probably makes more sense absent some really compelling reason it HAS to be 1p. Otherwise its...

View attachment 2636846

It always starts with "Ooh" and "Aah" but later there's running, and screaming.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

It always starts with "Ooh" and "Aah" but later there's running, and screaming.

If the Pirates of the Caribbean breaks down, the pirates don't eat the tourists.

 

[liliput1]

I struggled through reading a split POV recently. The good parts of it were discovering two different people interpreting the same information in very different ways leading to a misunderstanding. It made the characters more human and relatable.

But the bad parts included the second POV being introduced after one would assume the entire story was being told first person. The order of events also made the author restart the entire scene, which I'm more sensitive to than many, so maybe other people didn't even mind the retread.

It seems to me that in epic, award winning fiction, the Split Party situation tells the story of the world from multiple perspectives but only re-explains the same scene in three situations:

1) The impetus for the group splitting. Something happens, group A goes left, group B goes right
2) The reunion - after parallel journeys, when we start seeing events we've already seen, we know the reunion is coming
3) The missed connection - one group was leaving the town going West at the same time the other was entering from the East. This is the author fucking with us via dramatic tension.

I don't need to see the entire lead-up to the split from both perspectives. Just the split. And as we discussed in several other threads, sometimes you might need to adjust the order of events in order to make the pacing work, to keep the ping-ponging to a mininum. Movies based on real events get into "trouble" for this, because they change order of events around to keep the story moving and building. In really bad cases they change the motivation of the characters, but for others it just doesn't matter that much unless you're being pedantic.

 

[anthrodisiac]

If the Pirates of the Caribbean breaks down, the pirates don't eat the tourists.

See, you say that, but...

 

[liliput1]

See, you say that, but...

That one time when Johnny Depp scared the shit out of the riders by jump-scaring them doesn't really count.

 

[Duil2]

I am currently working on a story that needs multiple POV, at least 3 and could be up to 6. At the moment, it is written in first person, but that could be changed.

My concern is balance. Some characters are getting more page time than others. Does that matter?

In my Novella published here I had many different POVs each written in first person.

Because of the length overall 34K+ words, the way I handled it was a chapter per POV. That often meant that the POV only got the exposure that was required for their chapter so some longer, some shorter.

It does also allow you to tell parts of the story in first person from the perspective of whoever from the cast was present even if the 'main' character wasn't.


VIXEN

 

[liliput1]

In my Novella published here I had many different POVs each written in first person.

Because of the length overall 34K+ words, the way I handled it was a chapter per POV. That often meant that the POV only got the exposure that was required for their chapter so some longer, some shorter.

It does also allow you to tell parts of the story in first person from the perspective of whoever from the cast was present even if the 'main' character wasn't.


VIXEN

I know there were times when, for instance, I was pretty sure Tad Williams gave one of his lesser characters a chapter to themselves because they're about to do something amazing and it felt like a disservice to the imaginary person to just put that heroic act into someone else's turn to talk.

People who don't like Williams complain about the POV shifts, and I must say that I see a bit of their point. He won awards in spite of the POV shifts, not because of them.

 

[Duil2]

I know there were times when, for instance, I was pretty sure Tad Williams gave one of his lesser characters a chapter to themselves because they're about to do something amazing and it felt like a disservice to the imaginary person to just put that heroic act into someone else's turn to talk.

People who don't like Williams complain about the POV shifts, and I must say that I see a bit of their point. He won awards in spite of the POV shifts, not because of them.

I read a lot of novels that are written like this, with a chapter per person or if it suits the story better to stay with one character for a few chapters they do that.

As a reader it has never really bothered me to read them once it's made clear, either by labelling the chapter with a name, or ensuring it's clear in the writing, which POV you're currently following.

Like any writing choice there are pros and cons and as already been mentioned it's best to do what serves the story, if possible.

 

[AStrangeDesire]

Coming at this late:
I wouldn't do more than two characters while using 1P. I've done it with two, and I think it's fine. I've read stories where there are more, and I find I have a difficult time keeping track of who's who, even with the name of the character at the top of the section. I tend to use my own reading preference as a guide.

If I need more I use close 3rd. I used to use omni, but I've been moving away from that.

 

[liliput1]

I read a lot of novels that are written like this, with a chapter per person or if it suits the story better to stay with one character for a few chapters they do that.

As a reader it has never really bothered me to read them once it's made clear, either by labelling the chapter with a name, or ensuring it's clear in the writing, which POV you're currently following.

Like any writing choice there are pros and cons and as already been mentioned it's best to do what serves the story, if possible.

The problem which is less a problem here is that chapter per character can set up not one but two cliffhangers while your bedtime is sliding past. It's challenging to get a story here to the point where readers are cursing your name. But if you release a chapter at a time, that's certainly possible.

 

[Duil2]

The problem which is less a problem here is that they chapter per character can set up not one but two cliffhangers while your bedtime is sliding past. It's challenging to get a story here to the point where readers are cursing your name. But if you release a chapter at a time, that's certainly possible.

I was lucky in that the novel was completed before I began publishing so I was able to get a chapter out every couple of days so they didn't have to wait long... all 12, or whatever, readers lol.
I also only did one story cliffhanger in each chapter.

 

[Duil2]

Coming at this late:
I wouldn't do more than two characters while using 1P. I've done it with two, and I think it's fine. I've read stories where there are more, and I find I have a difficult time keeping track of who's who, even with the name of the character at the top of the section. I tend to use my own reading preference as a guide.

If I need more I use close 3rd. I used to use omni, but I've been moving away from that.

Steer clear of my couple of novellas, more than 2 POV and all 1st person, eeekk

 

[Voboy]

If I'm understanding your dilemma correctly, OP, then 1P is absolutely the wrong way to write this story.

I'm a believer that you have to be disciplined about these things (meaning I have to be, and that's what I like to read as well). If you're constantly head-hopping, but sticking with 1P, then you're trying to have your cake and eat it too. 1P demands compromises in how your side characters are perceived and in how their actions are understood by the reader.

To me, that's the fun of 1P. But I have to say that if I came across a 6P story, I'd nope right out of it. Better to stick with omnicient 3P, I think, or submit to the strictures of 1P.

 

[Britva415]

It does also allow you to tell parts of the story in first person from the perspective of whoever from the cast was present even if the 'main' character wasn't.

My (unpopular) opinion is that overall this doesn't sound like a story the "main character" should be telling. Their story is complete without this other POV, but for some reason they aren't telling it. They're telling some other story they don't even know parts of.

And if the other person isn't telling a whole story themselves, what are they doing but filling in a blank an author feels is present in the main person's story. It fails to meet the "motivation" test, unless the author makes sure to make it not fail.

People tell me that making the character's motivation to tell the story apparent isn't required, and there is an extent to which sometimes they're right, but there are also situations where all that is is a "don't scratch at the peeling paint" attitude. The paint still looks fuckin' rough.

 

[Stanfield2025]

In my Novella published here I had many different POVs each written in first person.

Because of the length overall 34K+ words, the way I handled it was a chapter per POV. That often meant that the POV only got the exposure that was required for their chapter so some longer, some shorter.

It does also allow you to tell parts of the story in first person from the perspective of whoever from the cast was present even if the 'main' character wasn't.


VIXEN

Wouldn't this be more of an ensemble cast that doesn't have a single main character?

 

[TheRedChamber]

I know there were times when, for instance, I was pretty sure Tad Williams gave one of his lesser characters a chapter to themselves because they're about to do something amazing and it felt like a disservice to the imaginary person to just put that heroic act into someone else's turn to talk.

People who don't like Williams complain about the POV shifts, and I must say that I see a bit of their point. He won awards in spite of the POV shifts, not because of them.

I just finished reading Memory, Sorrow and Thorn earlier this year. It's very noticable how his attitude to PoV shifts after the first two-thirds of the first book which is definitely one main PoV with wandering switches into secondary characters and then on becomes a more rounded cast of equally important characters. Definitely an improvement as a little of his main character goes a long way. It's also very noticable how, once he's properly underway, his MC no longer has to accidentally overhear important political and plot developments multiple times in successive chapters. Great books nevertheless.

It's also worth studying G.R.R. Martin for an example of PoV creep going completely off the rails. The first Game of Thrones book (i.e. A Game of Thrones) is fairly tight in the number of characters - four or five members of the same family, an inside view of the enemy family and someone a thousand miles away whose import can clearly been seen but has (almost) no direct connection to anyone else yet. That grows over the next few books but is mostly still managable - mostly getting PoVs to characters we know who are becoming more important (and fan favourite) Then by books four and five (which are really part of the same mega-book) he's handing out PoV's like candy to multiple new people we've never heard of in regions we've never been to before and then not giving reasonable development space to the new characters he's introducing (how could he with so many?)

For myself, I'm more structure-focused than most, so I like it when these things nicely balance out (at least roughly) in terms of word count and, sometimes, in the order we visit and revisit characters. Spitballing here, but I imagine that there are some rules you can ask yourself when deciding to introduce a new character or not:

1) Can I achieve the same narrative goals without introducing this character?
2) What am I going to do with this character once this critical plot point is done?
3) Does this character have a defined arc which the reader is going to be interested in following? Do they need one?
4) Am I willing to put in the ground work and extra words needed to make this a proper character with their own unique voice, motivations and backstory, or are they just going to be an extra 'camera' focused on the actually important people in the story.
5) Could this character end up being more popular with readers than the 'real' MC of the story? Is that a problem if it happens?

More to the point, a good question is:

6) What is the absolute minimum number of PoV's I need to tell this story? Is there any good reason not to use that minimum?

I'm sure there are more, but that's a start at least.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

I read a lot of novels that are written like this, with a chapter per person or if it suits the story better to stay with one character for a few chapters they do that.

As a reader it has never really bothered me to read them once it's made clear, either by labelling the chapter with a name, or ensuring it's clear in the writing, which POV you're currently following.

Like any writing choice there are pros and cons and as already been mentioned it's best to do what serves the story, if possible.

There are plenty of novels where the story follows different characters, but how many aee written in 1P from multiple characters perspective?
That's the real issue to me. There aren't many, and there's a reason for it.

 

[Duil2]

My (unpopular) opinion is that overall this doesn't sound like a story the "main character" should be telling. Their story is complete without this other POV, but for some reason they aren't telling it. They're telling some other story they don't even know parts of.

And if the other person isn't telling a whole story themselves, what are they doing but filling in a blank an author feels is present in the main person's story. It fails to meet the "motivation" test, unless the author makes sure to make it not fail.

People tell me that making the character's motivation to tell the story apparent isn't required, and there is an extent to which sometimes they're right, but there are also situations where all that is is a "don't scratch at the peeling paint" attitude. The paint still looks fuckin' rough.

I've done multiple POV to let the reader hear the story from all the perspectives of all the characters involved in the story.
Each character only tells the part of the story they participate in and how they see it. Since I use first person, the reader gets to see things through their eyes.
Granted it might be an amateur way of telling the story from a POV who doesn't know everything that is happening to keep things from the reader also.

 

[Duil2]

There are plenty of novels where the story follows different characters, but how many aee written in 1P from multiple characters perspective?
That's the real issue to me. There aren't many, and there's a reason for it.

I've read a good few but they are within the same subgenre of the overarching Romance banner.

 

[Duil2]

Wouldn't this be more of an ensemble cast that doesn't have a single main character?

In the ones I've read and written the female character tends to be seen as the main character with her love interests getting screen time also so the development of the romance is seen from everyone's point of view.
All of the characters are actually equally important to the story but in terms of word count the FMC tends to win out.

 

[Duil2]

If I'm understanding your dilemma correctly, OP, then 1P is absolutely the wrong way to write this story.

I'm a believer that you have to be disciplined about these things (meaning I have to be, and that's what I like to read as well). If you're constantly head-hopping, but sticking with 1P, then you're trying to have your cake and eat it too. 1P demands compromises in how your side characters are perceived and in how their actions are understood by the reader.

To me, that's the fun of 1P. But I have to say that if I came across a 6P story, I'd nope right out of it. Better to stick with omnicient 3P, I think, or submit to the strictures of 1P.

Same goes for you

Steer clear of my couple of novellas, more than 2 POV and all 1st person, eeekk