Since my history is that of an emotionally erased child, I am, for all practical purposes, invisible in my own story. Speaking from invisibility, I have some advantage amongst the disadvantages, and have learned so much about how my handicap determines how I see life but allows me to “see” what otherwise might be hidden both from and about me.

What you have shown me, almost panoramically, is that the editor I’m thinking to work with needs rethinking. BTW, I find submitting snippets of my memoir to contests to be very instructive, with really fine feedback about where I scored and where I bombed….great to have judges’ eyes on this work for a song. True, often there is zero feedback, but when there is, I win even when I lose.

I’m a relatively new writer, currently writing a novel with sixteen pov’s. The protagonist is written in first person, present tense, and the others are all third person, past tense. I’ve been encouraged to narrow that down a lot, and I probably will but, for now, with the encouragement of another writer, I’m letting the story unfold as it will and enjoying the process.

I started with just the single first person, present pov, but found I was having to resort other characters coming in and telling him what was happening on the outside (he’s confined), so someone recommended I try another pov and they multiplied like rabbits. I’m trying to keep continuity by having more scenes of my main character’s pov sprinkled throughout.

I love the rule, “Does it work?”

And love this site!

Claudine

When I first started my urban fantasy, I struggled with the viewpoint. I normally write in third, but it felt really wrong for the story. About then, a viewpoint workshop popped up, so I took it. Based on comments, I decided to change the book to first person. Once I wrote fifty, I understand exactly why I was having a problem with the viewpoint. First was way, way too personal for the story. My humor, instead of being funny, turned annoying. Third was better, but only slightly, and neither fit the story.

Then omnniscient was next in the workshop, and I was just hitting a pivotal scene. I switched omniscient, and the story sang. Omniscient had what I needed for this story. Though I had heard everywhere–all the how-to books, other writers–that no one uses the viewpoint and you’ll never get published, I had a hard time buying into. I was seeing omniscient in new releases, so it was selling. And I had never seen an agent or editor have on their list of top ten reasons for rejection “Omniscient viewpoint.” I reasoned that the story needed to shine, and the omniscient viewpoint needed to be done well.

Eventually, I posted the first chapter for a critique. I didn’t expect the extremely negative reactions to the omni I got from writers. You’d think they thought I was a vampire and were going for the stakes and garlic. I was sternly admonished for using the viewpoint and told I wouldn’t get published if I used it. I explained my reasons why I had changed to this viewpoint, and the writers dismissed them, saying it could be done in third. I was even told, “I’m sure you know your story, but here’s how it would be done in third.” Everyone seemed to think it was better to have a badly written story in an “acceptable viewpoint” then a well-written story in a “unacceptable viewpoint.” The vitrol was so bad that I had to take six weeks away from the book so I could think about it objectively. I later talked to another writer who got so much vitrol on his use of omniscient that he changed it to third.

If you choose to use omni and it’s right for your story, stick your guns.

I love the omniscient POV style, but whenever I think of omniscient POVs, I always think of the inclination to ‘tell instead of show’. The narrator is practically god. Why not just tell what they’re thinking and get on with the story. That’s probably why I’m such a Michael Critchton fan, by the way.
How much balance do you think there should be. When or where do you think is the most effective.

Tom

I just finished reading a wonderful book that has a third person omniscient POV that shifts frequently between two main characters as well as briefly to some secondary but crucial running members of the cast. “Independent People” by Halldor Laxness, may be the most famous book you’ve never heard of. First published in 1945, it’s now enjoying a rediscovery as a Vintage paperback. Laxness, who won the Nobel Prize for literature in 1955, wrote this epic novel about Iceland with a stunning range of depth, power, and humor. Don’t miss it.

Speaking of old masters, Tolstoy could tell a story from an omniscient point of view without losing the perspective of several characters in a huge canvas. “War and Peace” famously tells the epic history of Napoleon’s failed invasion into Russia from an omniscient perspective which nevertheless slips seamlessly into several character’s point of view.

A more modern example I read not long ago is “Slow Man” by another Nobel Prize winner (in 2003), the South African novelist J.M. Coetzee. This book is a virtuoso portrait of a 60 year old crippled man who falls in love with his nurse. Coetzee is able to concurrently and consecutively give us the point of view of his protagonist while also getting inside his other characters perspective, the key to successful third person narration.

This isn’t to say that only Nobelists can write successfully in third person! But the omniscient POV is a great way for any writer to paint a big canvas.

-Alan

As I said earlier, several people have read the first two chapters with now difficulties or confusion in following the narrator. Probably because it’s written in about 85% dialog, so the majority of the information offered the reader comes directly from the cast of characters.

I do plan to call you soon to discuss some of your available services to determine which will benefit my book most, and am excited about the prospects there.

Thanks again for encouraging this first time novelist;

Dina

Thanks, Tom.