Point of View–A Primer
There are few subjects in the craft of writing that are more perplexing to writers than Point of View. Most simply defined, point of view is the perspective through which a story is being told. Metaphorically, it’s the camera lens through which the reader experiences a story. Except in the oral tradition, telling a story is not the author’s job…showing the story is.
And to show, you need Point of View.
Here’s a quick breakdown of point of view types:
First person limited
First person omniscient
Second person
Third person limited
Third person omniscient
You should remember that from English class. 
First person means that the narrator of the story uses the pronoun “I” when describing what is happening to her. Or him, as the case may be. Second person uses “you”–and is rarely used, except in self-help genre, because YOU is the focus of the piece. Third person uses “he” or “she.”
Easy, yes?
Okay, then there is limited and omniscient. Omniscient is pretty self-explanatory…it’s the type of narrative point of view that knows everything every character is thinking. Limited point of view focuses on one character, or at least, one character at a time.
For contemporary fiction, limited point of view, either first or third, is used most often. If you use something else, you’re putting yourself at a disadvantage.
Romance novels, specifically, use the third person almost exclusively–almost. When chick-lit, which is usually first person, became popular, some romance authors adopted first person narration into their work. So it’s an option, but still one that isn’t used in romance all that often.
Some of my favorite books, by the way, are told in first person. Julie Kenner’s DEMON-HUNTING SOCCER MOM series, for one. Diana Peterfreund’s SECRET SOCIETY GIRL series for another. But these aren’t romances. They’re women’s fiction. The focus is on the women and their experience, so no one really cares what the other characters are thinking, which is why the limited first person point of view works so expertly.
Julie Kenner used both first person and third person points of view in the series she did for Pocket that started with THE GIVENCHY CODE (followed by THE MANOLO MATRIX AND THE PRADA PARADOX.) She used first person for the heroines and third person for the heroes. She even switched tenses. (That’s another lesson for another day.) She pulled it off beautifully.
But for new romance authors, my suggestion is this: Use third person limited point of view and stick to it.
Head hopping is the act of changing points of view multiple times during a scene. Some authors, Nora Roberts for instance, do this expertly. Most authors, especially new ones, do not. By remaining in the point of view of a single character for one scene, the author is forced to fully explore the emotional revelations of one character, thus connecting the reader closer to the action. It’s like the difference between those rollercoaster simulators where you’re sitting in the seat and experiencing the action right there or standing outside the simulator and watching all the different people react to the action. You can see which one is more immediate. More compelling.
I’m not a Point of View purist, believe it or not. I believe that certain scenes need the point of view of more than one character to be highly effective. But those scenes are few and far between. I must prefer to stay with one character at a time, focus, get under their skin so to speak. Then in the next scene, switch to the other character and you can get their perspective on the situation. But always with moving the story forward.
How do you choose which point of view character for each scene?
Well, that’s a sticky wicket. Some people say you choose the person with the most at stake…and sometimes, that’s a good answer. But other times, it’s not. I think it’s best listen to the writer’s gut on this one…and if the scene doesn’t work, switch and see what happens. I’ve fixed many a scene by simply changing point of view.
Okay…got questions? I hope I’ve got answers!
Great subject, Julie. I go with my gut. Nothing scientific. I don’t even think about it. It just happens … which is why very often, when I go blank, the story won’t write, it is because I am writing in the wrong person’s POV. Change the POV, BINGO! There is story. Unfortunately for me, it can take me two weeks to realize why I’m blank.
Comment by Carly — August 18, 2007 @ 6:09 am
Interesting blog!
Comment by Estella — August 18, 2007 @ 7:48 am
Gosh, perfect timing because I do have a question….just not sure how to phrase it to make sense.
OK, in one of my sentences, being told from the hero’s POV I had a sentence that said, “Erik leveled his friend with a piercing gaze” and my CP said it didn’t work because I was in the hero’s POV he wouldn’t see himself doing that.
Later it said, “He shot blue daggers at Steve to shut him up.” (He’s really not hostile or violent, this is just his best friend who knows how to push his buttons - and ones he definitely doesn’t want pushed).
Anyway, the same comment for both. So my question is, how do you do any description of their facial expressions from their POV? Does that make any sense at all?
For those of you who have read Stephen King’s book on writing…does the above remind you of the part where he tells people who can’t express themselves their in the wrong F…. profession? Jeez!
Comment by Jodie — August 18, 2007 @ 8:20 am
1. “Erik leveled his friend with a piercing gaze” and my CP said it didn’t work because I was in the hero’s POV he wouldn’t see himself doing that. - IMO he can do this b/c he can KNOW he’s doing it. You can leave this.
2. “He shot blue daggers at Steve to shut him up.” - this is different for two reasons and your CP is right - he can’t see himself shooting BLUE daggers. This is more of something someone would see. If you take out the word blue, “He shot daggers at Steve to shut him up” it’s more awkward b/c would someone THINK like that? So that can change to: “He glared at Steve to shut him up.”
Do YOU see the difference here? If not, I can go on, LOL. And I know the other plotmonkeys will give their opinions, which I’m curious to see if they think I’m right.
Comment by Carly — August 18, 2007 @ 8:40 am
ROTF. I LOVED Stephen King’s ON WRITING. You know, there are a lot of times when CP’s can be wrong. Excessive. Or right. And it’s a judgment call. I go with the blatant ones. For example, the person whose POV you are in can’t see their eye color, NOR WOULD THEY THINK about their eye color when shooting daggers or glaring. The shooting daggers is just a tough call because although he can deliberately do it with his gaze, he probably wouldn’t be thinking in those terms. That’s sort of how I make the call. Clear as mud? :wallbash:
Comment by Carly — August 18, 2007 @ 8:43 am
It does make sense because I sort of thought the same thing with the 2nd one, (especially with using the color blue) but since I got the same comment on both I was confused. Makes perfect sense!! Thanks!!
Comment by Jodie — August 18, 2007 @ 8:44 am
Sometimes a third opinion helps. Even if you have one CP you trust, you can ask a third person in the writing world if you aren’t sure.
Comment by Carly — August 18, 2007 @ 8:48 am
Carly, I think you’re totally right and probably explained it a whole lot better than I would with the revisions-brain I’m suffering.
Sometimes, I think people are a bit too literal in their interpretation of point of view. That’s why I’m not so much a purist. In cases such as these, I tend to want to switch to deep POV to make sure that the sentence isn’t questionable.
For example: Instead of “Erik leveled his friend with a piercing gaze”–which while in Erik’s POV, isn’t as “deep” as it could be. Maybe something like, “Erik leveled Joe with a look he knew from experience would shut his friend up.” That’s a little deeper, see? Now, that might not be Erik’s “voice” but do you get the idea. Making it a bit more conversational in your hero’s voice gives it a deeper feel.
Comment by Julie Leto — August 18, 2007 @ 9:25 am
Julie, I understand what you’re saying but I never, ever would have thought to go in that direction!
Thank you, Plotmonkeys, for helping us figure it all out!!!
Comment by Jodie — August 18, 2007 @ 9:29 am
Jodie, *I* never would have thought to go in that direction, so I’m learning too!
Comment by Carly — August 18, 2007 @ 9:32 am
Thanks, Carly, that makes me feel better. I also pulled out the book of Workshop Handouts (thank you!!
) and read up on Deep POV in there.
Hubby wants to ride to the river for the day - it’s more condusive to sitting and doing nothing down there - so I’ll be back this evening to catch up on what I’ve missed today.
I love these workshops!! Thank you!!
Comment by Jodie — August 18, 2007 @ 9:57 am
So off of the subject today….I am reading STRIPPED (which is good
), loved the mention of a CP book. LOL I had a good laugh with that one.
Now, I know which Julie Kenner book to read first (told you I was off subject).
Comment by katie — August 18, 2007 @ 11:21 am
Hey everybody, how are things? I hope that everyone is having a wonderful weekend so far…
Julie, thanks for the mini English lesson…it took me right back to Junior High (7th grade)…my English teacher was one of the best I had at the time…I remember talking about POV and the omnicient writer…I didn’t recall the first or thrid person limited though, which your lesson today helped me to do…I have to think about that sometimes when I write poetry…it is difficult sometimes to figure which point of view I want to use…varies with topic and purpose of the poem…eventually I end up going with what my gut says is the most powerful way to send my message…
Since you are the writer today, I am thinking you have a reprieve from revisions…should be
or is this just a breather? Even if it’s not either of those, it is good that you came up for air…Just think of me rooting you on in the background 
Have a great rest of the day…gotta go to acting class…ttys
Comment by Paula R. — August 18, 2007 @ 11:28 am
Hi All,
Hope you’re having a great Saturday. I was the doc’s office yesterday with a terrible spasm in my neck. After a night of really great drugs
I am feeling better but still don’t have much mobility–can’t drive, can only turn my head so far…
Julie, you must be taking a break from revisions and that’s good. Celebrate the work you’ve done so far. :-)
POV in a scene is more organic for me. 99% of the time I know whose POV the scenes should be written in. It’s strange but I know before I start writing the book, I can see them laid out in my head.
The other 1% is when despite my gut feelings the scene isn’t flowing the way it should. Then I change the POV character and it solves the problem.
Just finished reading Stripped and LOVED it! No wonder it received 4 1/2 stars and was rated a Top Pick in RT. :-)) A fun but highly emotional read.
Cher
Comment by Cher — August 18, 2007 @ 11:46 am
Thanks Julie! Thanks Carly! I feel like I’m finally starting to get a good handle on POV but still it’s easy to slip here and there. Does it ever become easy? Or are you always having to pay close attention? And thanks for reminding me that if I’m stuck, it could be I’m in the wrong character’s POV. I need to ingrain that in my mind!
Have a great weekend and thanks again!
Comment by Robin — August 18, 2007 @ 11:53 am
Yes, ladies, today is just a breather. I’ll be back to revisions in a few minutes…at least for a couple of hours. I find it easier to work everyday so I don’t loose the story flow.
Robin, NOTHING about writing gets easier!! Seriously, it does become more intrinsic…more natural, as it were, but I still slip. I do it all the time. And sometimes, because I write in layers (laying down dialogue first, then action, then description, then introspection and not always one at a time or in that order) I often forget whose point of view I’m in! Doesn’t happen often, but it does happen!
Cher–thanks for the kudos on STRIPPED. It always surprises me to hear “emotional” associated with my writing…but I hear it all the time, so there must be truth to it. :lightbulb:
Comment by Julie Leto — August 18, 2007 @ 11:59 am
Wow, what a great topic today, and a subject I’m still struggling with. Ok so I just write the POV of the voice in my head
wow that sounds crazy, if my husband heard me say that I know he would be thinking 
I need to get her some mental help…
….does this make sense to anyone???
Comment by Tina Martinesi — August 18, 2007 @ 12:07 pm
Tina, that depends…if the voice is actually a character in your work, then yes! And your husband needs to realize now that all writers are nuts. It will make his life–and yours–easier!
Comment by Julie Leto — August 18, 2007 @ 12:22 pm
I refuse to remember back to English in school.
Well actually, I can’t remember that far back anymore.
Interesting topic but I am so glad,
I am the reader and not the writer.
Her funny for this week, she found a mint somewhere
and when she hopped on Don’s lap he told her
her breath was minty fresh. She is so trying to steal my man.
Have a great day everyone.
Comment by jeannie — August 18, 2007 @ 12:57 pm
I have a kind of off topic but at least it is about writing. How did all of you get to the point where you knew which POV you would write a book in??
Have you ever just sat down and began a book without any thought as to the POV or outline of it? I guess I am asking if you have an easier or more difficult time if you were a seat of your pants writer??
Comment by Kelly F. — August 18, 2007 @ 2:34 pm
Kelly, being a seat-of-your-pants writer has nothing to do with point of view. You have to have a clear picture of who is telling your story–in each of its parts–because that is the person your reader connects with in any given scene. If you don’t have focus, then neither will your reader.
I do think about POV before I sit down to write a scene. I ask myself whose POV will provide the best emotional punch, because in romance, that’s the main focus. Always. Emotion. Even in action, it’s about how that action affects the characters that is primary. Sometimes, the most emotion comes from the character who is experiencing the event–sometimes, it comes from the witness. You as the writer have to decide what is best. And sometimes, you’re wrong and you have to change it. But I don’t think POV can be willy-nilly. Not if you want the book to connect with readers.
I also look to strike balance in my romances between my hero/heroine and secondary characters, so if several scenes have been from one POV, I know it’s time to shift. That helps me plot. I never thought of it that way before, but now I realize…POV helps me decide which scene comes next!
Comment by Julie Leto — August 18, 2007 @ 3:11 pm
Sorry Kelly F.:cry:
Comment by jeannie — August 18, 2007 @ 3:20 pm
That makes perfect sense to me Julie. I guess maybe I could have worded the question better, but you ended up answering my question anyway. LOL!
Jeannie why are you sorry???
Comment by Kelly F. — August 18, 2007 @ 6:08 pm
You said, “I have a kind of off topic but at least it is about writing.”
Have a great day everyone.
Comment by jeannie — August 18, 2007 @ 6:48 pm
Ohhh…no Jeannie I wasn’t talking about your post being off topic. Sorry it came out that way. I was apologizing for going off topic of POV. It had nothing to do with your post at all. Please don’t think that. I would never be so rude as to say something like that about someone elses post.
Gosh, today just isn’t a good day for me at all. I can’t think straight and form coherent thoughts or type them out for that matter. I think it is time for bed. :oops:
Comment by Kelly F. — August 18, 2007 @ 7:09 pm
Not to worry Kelly F I wasn’t sure so took the safe road.
No problem. I do get carried away ask anyone here.
Hugs
Comment by jeannie — August 18, 2007 @ 8:39 pm
Jodie had a question she posted that I thought I’d answer here:
I’ve rewritten two books from scratch (DIRTY LITTLE LIES was one, but I kept about 1/4 of the original manuscript), but I think you’re referencing my upcoming PHANTOM PLEASURES. Yes, it was a great concept that I originally wrote in 1994 and just didn’t have the skill to originally pull off. Plus, that book was written specifically for the then category line, Silhouette Shadows. Those books had a very gothic feel, very dark, and I didn’t want that entirely for this book. I loved the setting, the characters (though names changed) and the beginnings of the worldbuilding, but now that the book was going to be a single title, I needed much more.
I added a gypsy curse, gave the hero brothers, and introduced a whole secondary storyline that didn’t exist at all in the original.
I didn’t want to be tempted to try and revise any of my old manuscript, so I never even looked at it. I’m glad I didn’t. My voice has changed so much since then. Anyway, it’s just an example that sometimes, it’s better to let go of old manuscripts and then hopefully, recycle the ideas later.
Comment by Julie Leto — August 19, 2007 @ 10:11 am
Thanks, Julie! I had forgotten that you’ve mentioned you wrote Dirty Little Lies twice, also,
You’re explanation made a lot of sense. After getting the TARA comments back I’ve pretty much started all over from scratch. Both judges, along with my CP (who I hooked up with after entering the contest) said my conflict needed to be stronger. So, in order to do that, I’ve had to basically start all over and I was just curious about whether or not it made sense to do that or just scrap the book and start a new one. I think, personally though, I need to see this book through to the finish so I guess starting over is the way for me to go.
On a side note, one of the judges from the TARA contest was extremely kind and generous with her time. She wrote a second note on lined paper (about 4 pages) with additional comments and explanations and suggestions on how to make the story better. Her comments were absolutely priceless!! Thank you for letting us know about the contest, it was one of the best things I could have done!
Comment by Jodie — August 19, 2007 @ 12:23 pm
Jodie, I’m so proud of the TARA judge! Good for her. That’s above and beyond and I’m glad you were the recipient of her extra work. And I’m glad it helped!
I do think that one restart is good when you’re first starting out and learning about big things like conflict. I also think you’re right that you need to see this manuscript through now to the end. I learned so much simply from the act of finishing a book. A lot of aspiring writers never get that far. Keep it up! And if you have any suggestions for future topics for the Saturday blog, let me know!
Comment by Julie Leto — August 19, 2007 @ 1:57 pm
Dialogue. I think you mentioned before you were going to pull out a workshop, maybe, that you had done on dialogue. I think Tina Martinesi commented that she’d like a Dialogue workshop, also.
The judges comments on my use of dialogue confused me. I almost asked this yesterday but didn’t want to get off topic, especially if you were going to be covering it as some point. The judge who took so much time made the comment that I had too much information placed in between my dialogue. That I needed to leave that out and let the reader just enjoy the conversation.
So I pulled some of your and Janelle’s books, to see how you guys handle that, and I didn’t have much more explanatory stuff in there than you guys do. And at the very beginning, I’m not sure how to pull off just dialogue, because there has to be some explanation as to what they’re talking about. Doesn’t there? If I try to include the information in the actual dialogue then it doesn’t sound natural. :wallbash:
Comment by Jodie — August 19, 2007 @ 3:22 pm
Got it…dialogue! I’d forgotten Leslie and I were going to look for those notes.
As for the comments…well, all comments might not be right on. It’s all subjective. Take an extra look and if you think your dialogue flows, then leave it as is. If another judge at another time says the same thing, then look at it again. If not, move on. It’s a matter of taste, sometimes, and you as the writer have to decide what works for you and what doesn’t.
Comment by Julie Leto — August 19, 2007 @ 3:31 pm
Jodie, I think a Dialogue workshop is a good idea. Janelle always tells me I have talking heads and I have to go in and add more “people doing stuff”. So my issue isn’t introspectin in between. but I agree you don’t want to have so much that the reader loses track of what was being discussed before. IMO that’s the only worry. Not whether you’re letting the reader enjoy the conversation but understand, remember it.
Comment by Carly — August 19, 2007 @ 4:29 pm
Julie if you and Les don’t have it, I’m sure we can find an author who wouldn’t mind the exposure of reprinting here …?
Comment by Carly — August 19, 2007 @ 4:29 pm
You guys are awesome!! Thanks!!
Comment by Jodie — August 19, 2007 @ 7:00 pm
That wasn’t me who left that comment, but it could have been, since too much introspection between bits of dialogue is one of my biggest pet peeves in reading. If I can’t follow the conversation, tell what question a character is responding to, etc., when I’m reading, I very quickly lose interest. It’s the kiss of death for pacing as well.
And yes, that’s precisely how one describes personal preference, but it’s my
and I’m going to stand on it. There are authors I won’t read before because it’s always ::line of dialogue::a page of introspection::line of dialogue::another page of backstory::line of dialgoue and soon you’re ten pages into the book and only five seconds have passed in the book’s timeline. Personally, I’d rather have talking heads! But again, that’s me. Like Carly, I often have to go back into my scenes and layer in more introspection and movement and etc to avoid “talking heads.” It is about finding a balance.
And, unfortunately, I don’t think it’s as easy as looking at books by your favorite writers and counting up paragraphs between lines of dialogue and comparing it to your own. Because “too much” doesn’t necessarily mean line numbers or word count. It’s just a feeling that they get. Maybe because the conversation is complex or hard to follow. Maybe because the wording of the dialogue is too vague to work unless it’s shot-gun style. For instance,
“Are you meeting us later?” asked Julie.
“You bet,” Diana replied.
Works just fine. But if you add some introspection, it might get a bit confusing:
“Are you meeting us later?” asked Julie.
It would be silly to turn down an invitations for drinks with the Plotmonkeys. After all, Diana had always heard what a great margarita-mixer Julie was. Still, it had been ages since she’d had her roots done, and since her stylist had closed down his salon, she’d had a horrible time getting a hair appointment. Given her booksigning tomorrow, Diana figured it would be a good idea to look her best. “It depends,” she said. “What time will you be at the bar?”
See how a simple “you bet!” wouldn’t work there?
Comment by Diana — August 20, 2007 @ 10:50 am