Multiple POV characters - reading vs writing

[HazelRah]

I have never found it that easy to really get into a book that uses multiple POV characters (especially when there are more than 3 or 4). I have never understood why, but recently I have come to the conclusion that it's probably down to how much time I am given to connect with a character and their story before effectively having to start all over again with a different character (and often setting), followed by the disruption of constantly switching between.
I think it's the emotional connection that I need to have with the characters in order to find that book a) interesting, and b) un-put down-able. So multiple POVs generally just won't work for me.

On the other hand though, when writing, I often find that I automatically use multiple POVs. I worry that a story is too linear without it... But I'm also really not sure it makes much sense to want to write in a way that I don't like to read

So I thought I'd put it to you lovely folk.... Does anyone have any strong feelings for or against multiple POVs either in reading or writing?

(And does anyone else have any paradoxical reading/writing behaviours? )

 

[ratsy]

It all comes back to the story. If it's a good story, I like it with 1 POV, 2, 3, or even 10.

My one book has around 6 POV's, One Main, Two supporting main, and the others minor. (May not be the technical terms for them )

The new one is all 1st person, 1 POV

So no strong feelings, as long as book is good.

 

[HareBrain]

As a reader, I don't have a preference between single and multi, but when reading a multi-POV story I have to resign myself to a certain amount of frustration when a new POV character first appears. (Game of Thrones was terrible for that, but it paid off in the end, as I'd hoped.)

As a writer, I now prefer multi, because it allows you to bring strands together in exciting and satisfying ways, though oddly it took me ages before I attempted a multi-POV novel.

 

[The Judge]

I'm happy reading either single or multi-POV novels, and I don't think my enjoyment has been affected, and I don't mind the disruption of changing POVs. But if all the POVs are from major characters (as opposed to throwaway scenes from a peripheral character just to get some info into the book easily) then to my mind sufficient time has to be spent getting to know each one before moving onto the next, and they can't all be brought in immediately, but some have to wait until the first two or three are bedded down. I had a terrible time getting into Greg Keyes' The Briar King because there were too many characters opening the book in relatively small discrete scenes and I just couldn't settle.

In writing, I've gone in the opposite direction to HB. My SFs use multiple POVs -- more than 10 in each, I think it came out to -- many from minor characters whom I use in very short scenes, like a thriller. Then in my first fantasy I used only 3, the main characters. And in the present fantasy it's all from a single POV from the protagonist, which has been fine thus far, though it's getting a bit more difficult now, as I get to the final chapters -- I need so many things happening that he can't witness himself, I'm having to arrange for countless people to tell him what's happened elsewhere.

 

[Hex]

I'm like you @HazelRah, and I really struggle with books where there are lots of points of view. I didn't read GRRM (or Greg Keyes) partly because of the multiple viewpoints (and partly because of the entrails). I don't mind a couple of POVs, but when I'm expected to leave a dramatic and exciting scene and plunge into getting to know a new character or whatever, it really annoys me.

The Two Towers was a bit annoying that way -- Merry and Pippin and WAR and ORCS, or Frodo and Sam trailing endlessly across a swamp.

I tend to write single POV stories as well, because I don't have a concept of the story as separate from the character's experience of it, because I am a bear of little brain.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Does anyone have any strong feelings for or against multiple POVs either in reading or writing?

My finding is that genuinely independent POV characters are very rare in fantasy.

In most instances, a book will have a single protagonist by which any other POV character relates to, not least: love interest, best friend, antagonist. In each instance, the POV characters are all defined primarily by their relationship to the central protagonist. So I would argue that although such books have multiple POVs, they do not have multiple protagonists.

Some people might suggest that I'm splitting hairs, but IMO a protagonist needs to be independent in terms of having their own goals, struggles, and development arc. So when other POV's exist only to provide further context to a central protagonist, then really the story is really only about a single protagonist.

I make that comment because you say you struggle with some multi-POV novels, but it may actually be the case that you feel that you're wasting your time on character POV's that struggle to add anything unique and interesting to the story, other than: look, that central protagonist is my best friend/lover/enemy.

Of course, "observer" POV's are often provided in novels, for no other purpose than to witness some event for the benefit of the reader, that the protagonist cannot yet experience or know about. Such POV's tend to be short fillers - though some authors invest a lot of time in trying to make such characters look important, and give them multiple chapters, even if that character exists for no other reason than to provide a little background information and then die (I hate those books with a passion!).

Anyway, that's the reading side.

On the writing side, my advice is this: never attempt a novel with multiple protagonists until you've mastered a novel-length story about a single protagonist. If you cannot get the single one right, you will struggle immensely to get multiple ones right.

I speak from bitter experience of trying to do exactly that - it is immensely difficult to try to do well. With hindsight I would definitely have taken that advice above.

Multiple POV's based around a single protagonist is probably more difficult than sticking to the protagonist POV - but because they are defined primarily by their relationship to that protagonist, they are in effect supporting characters, and therefore do not need their own development arcs.
And, as mentioned above, observer POV's to provide background information don't have to be well developed either.

But the moment you have multiple protagonists, you are not longer writing a single novel, but multiple novels all compacted into the format of a single novel. Each character should have their own goals, struggles, and resolution, all within a development arc that must continue on if your novel is planned to be part of a series - for example, a trilogy.

So, overall, master telling the story of a single protagonist. If you need to add minor POVs to help flesh that story, by all means, do so. But I can only caution in the strongest terms against attempting to write a novel with multiple protagonists. It is extremely rare to see this format attempted in published fiction, and the number of authors who have successfully done so I can count on my fingers.

2c.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I like multiple povs as both as reader and writer - lots of nailbiters - but also read single povs too.

 

[prizzley]

I have never found it that easy to really get into a book that uses multiple POV characters

Me too, so I rarely read them.

I had multiple POV characters in my first novel, but only three major POV characters in my second and two minor who have one chapter each. My ideal is just two POV characters, but I haven't managed that yet.

 

[tinkerdan]

I don't mind multiple POV when I read, as long as it moves the story forward. I have, for instance, been bothered when the POV tell two separate stories that don't seem to intersect at all; but those tend to show up in series that might tie things up later.

As to my writing: I'll just say that I like to experiment a bit with POV: and leave it at that.

 

[TitaniumTi]

I'm happy reading either, but I get frustrated when the author fades a favourite protagonist out of the story; I'd almost prefer that the protagonist died. Sometimes, when I find one protagonist much more appealing than the other, I find myself racing through the other protagonist's story because I want to find out what happened to my favourite. Years ago, I was in that situation with one of Robin Hobbs' series; looking at goodreads, I think it must have been the Liveship Traders. I finished the series, but I haven't picked up any of her other books.

I have a related dilemma: conflict develops between two protagonists during the opening scenes of my WIP. It's not the main focus to the story, and it isn't personal; one protagonist is a detective and the other is a suspect. The story moves on and the conflict becomes history. However, I've just realised that the conflict between those two characters can't just fade out; without some clear, and probably dramatic, resolution to that conflict, readers may feel cheated. What do I do?

 

[TitaniumTi]

But the moment you have multiple protagonists, you are not longer writing a single novel, but multiple novels all compacted into the format of a single novel.

That's very interesting, Brian. Do you think the society or community can be the protagonist, with multiple POVs supporting or resisting the society/community struggle, and their individual goals playing a secondary role?

Two examples that spring to mind are David Weber's Safehold series and Eric Flint's 1632. On reflection, the principle protagonist of Safehold is Merlin; his story and Safehold's are interchangeable.

Eric Flint manages his multiple protagonists slightly differently, at least in the original 1632. Once again, the principle character struggles for the community. Other character arcs work almost like short stories within the larger narrative.

 

[LittleStar]

@Brian Turner you make an interesting point about the POV vs Protagonist, I hadn't thought of that. With many POV's all adding to the protag's story via their own relationships.
But might that not work both ways, and it be difficult to engage with multiple protagonists, as you say in the multiple novels all in one format, rather than multiple POV.

As HB and Hex have mentioned trouble in this area with GRRM, I might use him as an example, is it because he doesn't have a central protagonist which all other POVs are feeding, that people might struggle to engage? I think spoiler free i can say each of them, with perhaps a few exceptions, are their own main characters of their own stories, and have the developmental arcs.

So is there a point where this becomes deconstructive, as the OP mentions not having the time to engage with the character fully before being handed off to the next one to start the process all over? Or even worse perhaps, in liking the character and then cutting away to one of lesser enjoyment. Is that a possible flaw, or just a Risk writers take when using mutiple POV?


I myself enjoy multiple POV to read, as I enjoy single as well. And while I would have thought writing multiple was what I did, thinking back on it it turns out most of my drafts are single POV, or maybe 2 at most... I might have to experiment with more then

 

[thaddeus6th]

I'm the exact opposite.

It's much harder for me to try and keep a multi-POV story balanced and the pace right than a solitary POV. I think my tendency to cock up continuity (better recently, but still an issue, especially when making changes) has something to do with it.

A single POV also enables you to tailor all the writing to that perspective and have the reader, hopefully, quickly understand that. I don't think that's as easy hopping from one head to another.

When reading, I tend to prefer multiple perspectives.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Do you think the society or community can be the protagonist, with multiple POVs supporting or resisting the society/community struggle, and their individual goals playing a secondary role?

I'll freely admit that my reading focus is very narrow, and I'm making potentially contentious statements as a result of that. I'm sure there are additional interpretations.

GRRM, I might use him as an example, is it because he doesn't have a central protagonist which all other POVs are feeding, that people might struggle to engage?

George R R Martin is reportedly the biggest-selling modern fantasy writer. Whatever criticisms can be levelled at his writing, readers plainly love his characters.

 

[Hex]

George R R Martin is reportedly the biggest-selling modern fantasy writer. Whatever criticisms can be levelled at his writing, readers plainly love his characters.

But not all readers do. I guess lots of people like those big multi-POV epics, but they're not for everyone.

There must be an aspect of reading and writing what you personally like, irrespective of the big market sellers.

 

[HareBrain]

As HB and Hex have mentioned trouble in this area with GRRM, I might use him as an example, is it because he doesn't have a central protagonist which all other POVs are feeding, that people might struggle to engage?

He has something like five different POVs in the first five chapters. I found this constant readjustment jarring at first. But this feeling largely fades as you get used to who is who, and to the story, though occasionally it's still a bit irritating to have to try to remember what a POV character last did when they reappear again after several chapters.

In this case, rather than multiple POVs feeding into a central protagonist (though they do to some extent in Ned Stark) I think it's more that they feed into the plot, which binds them all tightly together -- unlike some epic fantasies that have multiple plotlines that won't even touch each other in the first book/s.

 

[Toby Frost]

On the writing side, my advice is this: never attempt a novel with multiple protagonists until you've mastered a novel-length story about a single protagonist. If you cannot get the single one right, you will struggle immensely to get multiple ones right.

I think this is very good advice.

I'm currently writing some sort of epic fantasy story with a number of POVs, most of whom are geographically separate and have their own stories. What I've found is that there is one central story thread, which isn't followed by one particular character. Character X might be fighting the minions of the arch-villain, while Y is uncovering a mystic truth that will have a greater effect. However, depending on what happens, they may swap over. At any one time, the main storyline is passed around the characters like the baton in a relay race. And as Brian says, it's difficult.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Although I started with a multi pov trilogy* (16 povs over the three books, I think). Horses for courses.

*although I'd only recommend doing that to the true machocists.

 

[Ursa major]

In most instances, a book will have a single protagonist by which any other POV character relates to, not least: love interest, best friend, antagonist. In each instance, the POV characters are all defined primarily by their relationship to the central protagonist. So I would argue that although such books have multiple POVs, they do not have multiple protagonists.

Yes and no.

As you've mentioned GRRM, I think there's an interesting example of where it's both true and not true. Without going into spoilers (for those who've just arrived on Earth...), there's a character arc in A Song of Ice and Fire which though connected to the others (by history, by the way that that history informs the characters' present, creating the situation they're in) is also very separate (because this character's present is mostly driven by what's happening around them). I've read that GRRM was worried about this disconnect, and I know readers and viewers have sometimes thought it an issue.

GRRM brought this character's chapters from A Game of Thrones together as a (standalone) novella**, which was published in Asimov's Science Fiction. Those of us who've read the chapters in sequence in the novel won't be able to judge how well the novella stands on its own, but it would be interesting to know what those who read the novella first thought about it.


** -

Spoiler

Blood of the Dragon.

 

[HazelRah]

Interesting points.

it may actually be the case that you feel that you're wasting your time on character POV's that struggle to add anything unique and interesting to the story, other than: look, that central protagonist is my best friend/lover/enemy.

I actually think you may have pointed out exactly what I do like with multiple POV's. I hadn't thought of it before, but for instance, GRRM seems to use multiple protagonists (as LittleStar has also pointed out), and it leaves me feeling like I'm reading six different books at once - whether it all comes together in the end or not it, it still means that up til that point it's a hard slog. So multiple POV's who share a common protagonist would be more appealing to my little brain, I feel.

However, I think that all POV characters should have their own character development arc and B storyline ( just perhaps not enough of one to make them into a character of their own right). But then where is the line drawn between the two? And then maybe it does become more of an issue of a community protagonist, perhaps with a main ringleader or two...

It may just be that I haven't stumbled on the right excecution of multiple POV's yet.

In terms of writing. Brian, you make a good point about mastering single POV first, as how will you write multiple if you can't write single? However, I think the difficulty largely comes from what type of novel you are writing. Epic fantasy, especially with multiple settings, I imagine would be extremely difficult to do well without first being comfortable with single POV. But for a simpler book, maybe a YA or a Discworld-like novel of standard length, I think it's perhaps not such a complicated challenge. Although the more words you spend switching through alternative characters, the more refined your writing needs to be for each individual POV, I would have thought. A valid point though.