Are there any rules/general guidance for this, e.g 2 chapters of one person, then 1 chapter of another, or 2/3 of chapter MC, remaining 1/3 other, or can it just be random (though not as random as every other sentence, obviously)

and is it necessary to actually change POV at all

thanks

Jane

If the characters are going to be sharing most of the scenes then there may not be a good reason for changing pov - unless it's something like Nick Hornby's About A Boy where there are 2 main protagonists and there's a great juxtaposition between the child's and the adult's view points. Hornby alternates the pov chapters, so you don't feel like oyu're getting to know one character at the epenswe of the other.
It can go disasterously wrong such as the case of Sebastian Barry's the Secret Scripture where the poor characterisation of the second pov character - the psychiatrist - lost him the Man Booker prize.
Terry Pratchett's Disc World novels have many pov characters, and he separates them by scenes within chapters - sometimes a pov character's scene may only be half a page long. He is brilliant at characterisation, so it's not intrusive.
In Stef Penny's The Tenderness of Wolves she has one main character and several pov characters, and gives them different characters.

Personally, I would advise not giving the chief antagonist the pov, because it can spike any suspense you are trying to set up in the novel - especially in a plot-driven novel - by giving the reader an insight into their plans and motivations.


- NaomiM

<Added>

When changing povs, there is a huge temptation for the writer to give too much away to the reader. Resist such temptation.
Keeping to one pov in the early stages of one's writing apprenticeship is good discipline.

Keeping to one pov in the early stages of one's writing apprenticeship is good discipline

so you think it's OK to just use the female MC's POV? I have put a couple of scenes right at the beginning from the male MC POV (none from the antagonist) but then realised I was at 30,000 words and he hasn't had a go since, which made me wonder whether it was really necessary to use his POV at all, it feels a bit like it's for the sake of it rather than because he has anything useful to contribute

There is absolutely no reason not to stick just to the one POV. It's by far the easiest way to write, in a way.

In my four published books I've tried four different thing:
(1) was epistolary so in the first person voice of heaps of different people;
(ii) was third person omniscient, with the POVs of five main characters and little bits of POV of some other minor people, too, plus some small patches of authorial narrative;
(iii) was a straight rom com, so I did the traditional romance thing, with just the POVs of the two protgags, in more or less equal shares, more or less alternating by scene or chapter;
(iv) is all in the third person POV of my MC.

(iv) was by far the easiest to write. The only difficulty is when she doesn't know something that you want the reader to know - or where she doesn't realise something. But the latter can be conveyed easily enough - even in her POV you can have her see and think about things but simply fail to reach the conclusion which the reader does. And it is perfectly possible to make a virtue of the things she doesn't know - to milk the very fact of her uncertainty, of her not knowing what is going on with the other characters, to create tension and interest.

If you have the male MC's POV but only rarely, I suspect that might potentially read more oddly than if you have him there throughout, interspersed by scene or chapter - only because when his bits do come along they will stick out more. If I was going to use almost exclusively one POV, with just snippets of a second POV, I think I'd want to think very carefully about how and why the second voice came in - and use it for a very particular effect. It might be much simpler just to do without his voice.

Rosy x

<Added>

Incidentally, number (v) (which I hesitate to mention for superstitious reasons, as it is with the agent, and I have a history of many failed manuscripts....) is 80-85% in one third person POV, with the rest in snippets, dotted throughout of one other character's POV. But her sections are very specific - until right at the end, where the two come together, hers are basically all flashbacks, giving (short and limited) insights into her past. One of the main things pulling the reader through the book is meant to be the main POV character trying to decide about what happened in this other character's past, so the snippets are there for a very specific purpose. It probably doesn't work at all, but my point is that I think this is the kind of reason why I would use only small amounts of a second voice in a novel which is essentially in one main POV.

so you think it's OK to just use the female MC's POV?

Yes it's fine - and readers like to have one pov character they can empathise with.

I have put a couple of scenes right at the beginning from the male MC POV (none from the antagonist) but then realised I was at 30,000 words and he hasn't had a go since, which made me wonder whether it was really necessary to use his POV at all, it feels a bit like it's for the sake of it rather than because he has anything useful to contribute

If that's the case, then I would either rewrite it to get rid of that pov, or change it to a prologue if you think his pov adds anything to the novel.



- NaomiM

Are there any rules/general guidance for this...or can it just be random (though not as random as every other sentence, obviously)

Of course it can be random. In fact, I think there's a strong argument to be made that following a predictable A, B, C, A, B, C pattern is more likely to become boring (or at least highly predictable) for your reader, and steer you away from more interesting narrative possibilities. Tell the story as it needs to be told.

and is it necessary to actually change POV at all

Not necessarily - but again, it's your story. You're the best judge of that!

There is absolutely no reason not to stick just to the one POV. It's by far the easiest way to write, in a way.

Though then surely it's reasonable to ask why not simply write in the first person (which I find far easier to write than 3rd - as I assume is probably the case for many writers)? Particularly given that a big part of the appeal of 3rd is that you can dip into other points of view...why not exploit this?

If the characters are going to be sharing most of the scenes then there may not be a good reason for changing pov

Unless you're Virginia Woolf, of course

I'm experimenting with point of view shifts within single scenes at the moment - inspired partly by Woolf, but also by Yates and, more recently, Henry Green - but I've have specific reasons for doing so. If there isn't a good reason to do this, head-hopping is probably better avoided.

When changing povs, there is a huge temptation for the writer to give too much away to the reader. Resist such temptation.

I definitely agree with this.

(There is absolutely no reason not to stick just to the one POV. It's by far the easiest way to write, in a way.) Though then surely it's reasonable to ask why not simply write in the first person (which I find far easier to write than 3rd - as I assume is probably the case for many writers)?

My only reason is, as a reader, I usually find first person irritating. For me, third person is just the natural voice of storytelling. Purely personal thing.

R x

My only reason is, as a reader, I usually find first person irritating. For me, third person is just the natural voice of storytelling. Purely personal thing

Yes, me too. I prefer 3rd as a reader and therefore tend to use it as a writer.

There is absolutely no reason not to stick just to the one POV. It's by far the easiest way to write, in a way. Though then surely it's reasonable to ask why not simply write in the first person (which I find far easier to write than 3rd - as I assume is probably the case for many writers)? Particularly given that a big part of the appeal of 3rd is that you can dip into other points of view...why not exploit this?

As a reader I prefer 3rd person limited.
While it's important to include the thoughts and feelings of the pov character even when written in the 3rd person, the temptation of some writers is to over do it in 1st person to the point of navel gazing.
Currently reading Jim Butcher's The Dresden Files serieswhere the 1st person pov characteris a wizard detective, Harry Dresden, and he spends half the book repeating himself: mulling over who-dunnit, thinking about his girlfriends, moaning about his injuires and whether or not he's lost his powers. If it wasn't for the magic, I'd stop reading.

For me, third person is just the natural voice of storytelling.

Yes, I agree with you there. Though I'm a little surprised to hear that people have such firm preferences where voice is concerned - to be honest, it's not something I think about very much, as a reader. As a writer, yes. But if the voice is there - as it is in Borderliners, for instance, or The Golden Notebook, or The Go-Between - I'm more than happy to be led by a 1st person narrator.

(Whereas when I'm reading 3rd, I must say I like the author to shake things up a little bit, to surprise me with a new perspective now and again. It seems to me that 3rd person can also descend into samey prose - 'X did this. Then she did this. She thought this. The next day, X did something else...' - so it probably really does depend on the writer and story in question...)

For me (as a reader, this is), first person is a bit like present tense narrative (though less strongly so). It puts me off a bit when I pick up a book, so I might be less inclined to buy it. If I do buy it, it usually takes me longer to get into it, and I more frequently give up. But a really good, well-written book (even if it's both first person and present tense!) will grab me and then I'd have nothing against it at all. In fact, I'd then tend to forget the fact that it was first person at all. I have sometimes been surprised to be reminded that books I've liked are written in the first person!

R x

<Added>

But since my first published novel was epistolary (a form which puts even more readers off, I understand) and thus also necessarily all in the first person, I am on decidedly shaky ground!

It seems to me that 3rd person can also descend into samey prose - 'X did this. Then she did this. She thought this. The next day, X did something else...'

Agreed. I think it's just as important in 3rd person to find the right 'voice' for the pov character, as it is for 1st person narratives - unless it's a plot-led page turner (Dan Brown) or the author has a distinctive prose style (Annie Proulx).

<Added>

And one common problem with changing povs is finding a second distinctive 'voice' for those chapters.

why not simply write in the first person

because sometimes you just wanna watch :P and because in this case it definitely has to be third person for the genre

thanks everyone for your responses, very helpful and lots to consider. I am going to carry on sticking with the female POV, and go back and look again at the bits I've done with the male POV with the intention of cutting them out, partly because I think it will work better if the reader finds out things about the male character at the same time as the MC, and partly just to try writing something with the one third person POV and see how it works

Jane

I think it will work better if the reader finds out things about the male character at the same time as the MC,

Oh, absolutely.