![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
megwritesPoll on POV changes in reading/writing by ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
miriad.
I heard someone in a writing group I was in say once, "Each time you switch POV, you give the reader a chance to walk away."
There are some pieces of advice doled out in workshops and books that I immediately just rebel against. It's like I'm a five-year-old faced with a white wall and a box of brand new crayons. I can't walk away while that wall is in pristeen condition. And I've got 64 of my best buds willing to help me out. I have to make a mess. It's practically a command in the programming of my soul.
The advice, I don't think, is meant to evoke that sort of reaction. On it's face, it's a sound statement, reasonable and logical. After all, aren't all told not to go playing with POV, because it's not a toy?
Well, the answer is this: I think the kid with the crayon has a point. Oversimplification just begs to be scrawled all over with the Big Purple Crayon of Reality. And writing rules tend to be oversimplifications.
I fundamentally disagree any clever writing rule someone comes up with, because, as Elizabeth Bear so wisely says (and I paraphrase), "You don't learn how to write a novel, only this novel." Every novel, like every person, is different.
Don't believe me? Go ask doctors why we need so many different treatments for the same diseases - because folks' bodies just don't respond the same. Some people perk right up with a bit o' penicillin and some bedrest. Some people (me) are horribly allergic to penicillin and might, yanno, DIE if you gave it to us.
Same way with novels. Putting an injunction against POV switches might really streamline one novel, but kill another. Why?
Because POV switches are like lane changes when you're driving. When used unnecessarily in the hands of an amateur who has no idea what they're doing and has just gotten behind the wheel, they can cause flaming wreckage. In the hands of someone skilled, it's a tool, like anything else, that can add tension, drama, and dynamos to the story.
However, I do think that the person who made the statement in the group was not entirely wrong, or at least not without some justification. From what I remember about the story being critiqued, it was cluttered feeling and messy.
There are stories in which putting an injunction on POV changes will do a world of good. It will streamline, simplify, clarify, and sharpen the writing. There are other stories that need the POV changes if they're going to do what they need to do.
So, as with anything, either writing or driving, you can't live by pithy rules. The conditions of the road and the craft of writing are ever changing. All you can do is use your best judgment and make sure your insurance is up to date.
miriad.I heard someone in a writing group I was in say once, "Each time you switch POV, you give the reader a chance to walk away."
There are some pieces of advice doled out in workshops and books that I immediately just rebel against. It's like I'm a five-year-old faced with a white wall and a box of brand new crayons. I can't walk away while that wall is in pristeen condition. And I've got 64 of my best buds willing to help me out. I have to make a mess. It's practically a command in the programming of my soul.
The advice, I don't think, is meant to evoke that sort of reaction. On it's face, it's a sound statement, reasonable and logical. After all, aren't all told not to go playing with POV, because it's not a toy?
Well, the answer is this: I think the kid with the crayon has a point. Oversimplification just begs to be scrawled all over with the Big Purple Crayon of Reality. And writing rules tend to be oversimplifications.
I fundamentally disagree any clever writing rule someone comes up with, because, as Elizabeth Bear so wisely says (and I paraphrase), "You don't learn how to write a novel, only this novel." Every novel, like every person, is different.
Don't believe me? Go ask doctors why we need so many different treatments for the same diseases - because folks' bodies just don't respond the same. Some people perk right up with a bit o' penicillin and some bedrest. Some people (me) are horribly allergic to penicillin and might, yanno, DIE if you gave it to us.
Same way with novels. Putting an injunction against POV switches might really streamline one novel, but kill another. Why?
Because POV switches are like lane changes when you're driving. When used unnecessarily in the hands of an amateur who has no idea what they're doing and has just gotten behind the wheel, they can cause flaming wreckage. In the hands of someone skilled, it's a tool, like anything else, that can add tension, drama, and dynamos to the story.
However, I do think that the person who made the statement in the group was not entirely wrong, or at least not without some justification. From what I remember about the story being critiqued, it was cluttered feeling and messy.
There are stories in which putting an injunction on POV changes will do a world of good. It will streamline, simplify, clarify, and sharpen the writing. There are other stories that need the POV changes if they're going to do what they need to do.
So, as with anything, either writing or driving, you can't live by pithy rules. The conditions of the road and the craft of writing are ever changing. All you can do is use your best judgment and make sure your insurance is up to date.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-13 02:02 pm (UTC)Genuine omni3rd is like really good candy, but when people get lazy with 3rd limited, I tend as a reader to notice it and get cranky.
My opinion, no charge.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-13 04:22 pm (UTC)I'm kind of laughing at that. Seriously? One sentence in the WHOLE BOOK. That's slightly amazing in a way. Because you'd think an editor or something would go, "Uh, hey, you know if you just change ONE SENTENCE, your novel will be way better", but no.
Genuine omni3rd is like really good candy, but when people get lazy with 3rd limited, I tend as a reader to notice it and get cranky.
Yes it is. ZOMG. There are so many times, especially when I'm reading a certain genre of books from a certain publisher, when I want to say, "Why the frak didn't you just write in first person????"
I think genuine omniscient 3rd requires the writer to have a strong voice without being intrusive, and a lot of writers don't have that, thus their 3rd pov gets sloppy.
My opinion, no charge.
Weirdly enough, your opinion is one I'd actually fork over money for. :)