Out of curiosity, what makes you want to try varying viewpoints "all over the place"?

Can cast different perspective on the same event and can reveal differences in the characters perception of how they appear and how they appear to others and that sort of thing.

As a reader I prefer it.

And it makes the plotting easier.

Emma

Stephen King seems to do a hell of a lot of this. When he doesn't he writes micro chapters i.e. the chapters are broken down into tiny segments.

I've recently finished reading Irvine Welsh's Bedroom Secrets of the MasterChefs. There are two main characters in that, and it switches between their point of view within a chapter. there are also other minor characters and we get a bit from their point of view from time to time. Sometimes it takes a few lines to get used to whose head we're in, but more often than not it works.

That said it wasn't one of his best, but he does the multiple point of view thing in most of his novels.

Ben

I've noticed that with King, yes. I recently finished The Dead Zone (great read btw) and he switches POV a lot in the same scene with no by your leave. I think it can work though. Do you think the Americans are less concerned about it?

JB

I read The Dead Zone in the last year or two, too, agreed, it's a top read.

I do find it slightly confusing if in a scene where both the main characters present are viewpoint characters - I have to keep my wits about me to remember which viewpoint we're currently in.

I have the same problem, especially when I'm writing a first draft, so I use different font colours for each character. I always use a blue background – because it’s easier on my eyes – and it has the added bonus of giving me more choice of colours. I always know which POV I'm in without having to check back, and the different colours are also a good visual aid to ensure balance. I can quickly scroll through a manuscript to make sure no single character dominates.

Dee

I currently have 4 viewpoints in 8000 words all fighting to tell the tale.

Some of them are going to have to go...

Sarah

<Added>

I like the coloured fonts idea - might help me sort this tangle out! Thanks, Dee.

<Added>

Thinking about it I do kill two of them...

Can I ask a slightly different question about POV? Or perhaps it is more about what is meant by a character's 'voice', and how deep this shoud go.

Say I am writing tradtional third person narrative and I have a scene which is in one character's POV. Let's have a silly example. Say Janet and John are having a cup of tea.

________________________________
"Care for a cuppa?" asked Janet.
That would make three since lunch - she'd be needing the loo all evening if she didn't watch it. And she didn't want to be out of his company for an instant longer than necessary, not tonight.
"Go on, then," said John. How did he manage to make even that sound sexy, as if a cup of tea were a full-body massage?
She walked over to the kettle and clicked the switch, reaching up on tiptoes for the mugs.
_______________________________


Now, this is in Janet's POV, right? The only bit we have of John directly is what is visible/audible to Janet - I.e. his actual words of dialogue: "Go on, then." It's only those words that would have to be 'in character' for John.

But what about Janet? Again, the dialogue has to be in her voice. I would need to worry about whether "cuppa" is a Janet-type word or not. And ditto the bits that are her direct thoughts: all that stuff about needing the loo, and how sexy he sounds. I'd need to think, for example, whether Janet says "loo", and whether she is the kind of woman who goes in for full-body massages - or at least whether that's an image which would occur to her.

But what about where she just walks over to the kettle. That's my own narrative voice, is it? So I could say, for example, that she sauntered over to the kettle like a just-awake cat, or something like that, even if Janet would NEVER see herself in that way, or use those words? Because at that point we are looking at her from the outside? Or if I do that, does it take us too far outside Janet's head, and spoil the connection with her that I want in the scene? Would I be better to stay 'in character' all the time, even when describing her actions. For example (if this is how Janet talks/thinks):
_____________________________
She walked over to the kettle and clicked the light-up switchy thing, reaching up on tiptoes for the mugs, the blue ones which Grandma had given her when she left for college.
____________________________

Does anyone else get what I'm on about? I'm still tying myself in knots about it!! Any advice/ideas gratefully received!

Rosy.

Interesting, but Janet isn't the narrator, otherwise she would be writing in the first person - but, if your narrator is a character, say this was all written from Ian's POV, and Ian is writing this novel in the first person, but telling this scene as it is, then it would be written the same as above, but you would have to consider if "sauntered" would be in his (Ian's) vocabulary.

I can see this tying us up in knots.

I didn't mean there was an actual narrator who is a character, no. ( Just me!) It's just all about how much distance it might create if there is too much of an intrusive sense of a 'narrative voice' rather than it all sounding pretty much as if we are inside Janet's head (even though not written in the fisrt person as such). I suppose it's about how close-in to go, in other words. Personally, I am not keen on writers who have a very strong 'external' authorial voice commenting on characters' actions and motivations (like Dickens does, for example) and I shouldn't want to attempt that. But if I step out of Janet's experience and vocabulary at all in 'her' scenes will they lose their immediacy, and the reader lose his/her connection with Janet?

Does this make any sense? (It sounds so silly when it's in relation to this banal Janet-and-John example I've given! But I hope people get the question I am trying to ask...?)

Rosy.

It makes sense. I write for Young Adults, so if I'm writing in the third person I limit my vocabulary and keep the voice of the narrative young and lively. Philip Pullman, on the other hand, uses a friendly, "storyteller" narrative that comes across as quite old. It does give the narrative a different feel. I've never really thought about it on this level though.

For me, the closer you can bring the reader to the action, the better. Perhaps this reflective style needs a new name: third person shoulder-cam?

Stories for very young children (pre-reading age) often have a similarly young voice with limited vocabulary and short sentences.

It's just a style of writing, called omniscient

I know, Colin - I was just echoing the original question.

I don't like it, personally. I've just been reading a published work which does this and I find it very disorientating. In most 3rd or 1st person writing you connect with the viewpoint character, but in omniscient I don't know who to connect with and that spoils it for me, though I know it's an acceptable (though uncommon) technique.

Deb

I think it's about intrusiveness.

If you are very much in Janet's head - as in the scene you describe, you probably just need to be aware of the transition and I really think the thing to do (though I'm not an expert on this - Emma and Terry are the ones to really advise) is to read it over and see if it reads right.

To me, the just-awake cat didn't work because it was a jump and didn't take us from the moment before very seamlessly. But if you took Janet's feelings and turned them outward it probably could work. For example:

"Care for a cuppa?" asked Janet. That would make three since lunch - she'd be needing the loo all evening if she didn't watch it. And she didn't want to be out of his company for an instant longer than necessary, not tonight. "Go on, then," said John. How did he manage to make even that sound sexy, as if a cup of tea were a full-body massage? She moved to the kettle, slowly, as a dog reluctant to leave his owner's side.

I realise that is a seriously shit example. But I mean that the outside image matches the interior thought process so there is less of a jump in the reader's head, even though the POV has changed.

I think the thing is to read it over a lot and it becomes noticable where the awkwardnesses are and to smooth them out in different ways, rather than having to be too prescriptive about it.

<Added>

Similarly, if the internal stuff was more about tiredness then your original example I think would work because it would tie in seamlessly.

<Added>

If you can work out the transitions then you can move into the other POV from there.

I have the same problem, especially when I'm writing a first draft

Dee, I meant when reading someone else's writing if they quickly change viewpoints. I never have that problem when I'm writing, for some reason - probably because I get a long way inside my characters' heads even in 3rd person.

However, my scene/chapter plan for my novel uses different font colours for the different narrators's scenes, to keep it clear what pattern I'm creating.

Deb