Common mistakes in writing

[Robert M. Blevins]

The Point-of-View problem is a common one. We get about five to ten submissions a week, and many have POV screw ups.

Simply put, only ONE character at a time in a scene or section of a novel is allowed to have private thoughts.

A Good Example of Bad POV:

The Captain stared at the horizon and wondered if the 'Sussex' would really be able to catch the French schooner and send it to the bottom. He turned to the First Officer. "Raise sail, Mr Johnson."

"Captain," replied Johnson, "the men are exhausted." Johnson noticed the dark circles under the captain's eyes and made a mental note to keep an eye on him.

"Do it!"

"Yes, sir."

Did you spot the problem here?

[Interference]

Originally Posted by Robert M. Blevins

Did you spot the problem here?

I know I'm rubbish and everything, but actually, Robert, no. I didn't and I'm not sure I can. Is it wrong to explore each character's opinions in a scene? Isn't it just a literary equivalent of a film maker choosing different close-ups? Is my greatest flaw that I feel it encumbant on me to show why people keep doing the odd things they do in pursuit of their individual and often conflicting goals. Because if it is, then I think it's a flaw I want to keep and to Hell with fame, fortune and, of course, the highest of all conceits, recognition.

I thought you were going to leap between first/second/third persons in your example, but all it showed me was that the Captain has his concerns and Mr Johnson has his. Are we not to know where these perceptions will lead each character? Of course, if Johnson is never mentioned again in the entire work, then I might take your point and support it.

Is there another example of a bad example that even an idiot novice like me can understand?

[Leisha]

Interference, what the example shows is that you can't switch from one character's viewpoint to another. Take, for example, this bit:

The Captain stared at the horizon and wondered if the 'Sussex' would really be able to catch the French schooner and send it to the bottom. He turned to the First Officer. "Raise sail, Mr Johnson."

As you can see, we are shown the Captain's thoughts (the part where he "wonders"). This means he is our point of view character. We expect, as a reader, to then follow his story, his thoughts, and see only what he can until the end of this scene. But suddenly in the next paragraph we encounter this line:

"Captain," replied Johnson, "the men are exhausted." Johnson noticed the dark circles under the captain's eyes and made a mental note to keep an eye on him.

This line suddenly switches into Johnson's thoughts ("Johnson noticed..."), therefore swapping POV character. Some authors have been known to do this, but it's best avoided. Try only describing one character's thoughts, showing us ONLY what he/she can see. Don't get "into" anyone else's head.

Hopefully here's an easier example of a POV switch (I've highlighted the three different character's thoughts):

Peter looked up at the building in front of him, wondering how they would enter without being noticed.

Bill noticed Peter's frown, but after knowing his friend for three years, he knew Peter would cheer up shortly. "Come on, off we go," he said.

Katie shook her head as she watched the two men set off towards the back entrance. After spending the last two days planning this, why did Peter look so doubtful? Surely they'd manage the job. Still, seeing Peter's doubt, Katie could feel her hands begin to tremble. Perhaps this was a bad idea...


To avoid this, you'd only stick to one POV character at a time, avoiding jumping into anyone else's head. So if your main character can't see or hear something, don't describe it.

Also, in the last line you'll see I've described Katie's hands sweating. This is also a POV switch. How could Peter, who I'll say is my POV character, know her hands are sweating unless she holds them up, or he's very perceptive. In that case you'd have to re-word the sentence to "Peter noticed Katie's hands begin to sweat".

Hope this clears it up for you...

[Teresa Edgerton]

Actually, there are very good writers who do switch point of view within the same scene, but you have to handle it just right to keep it from jarring. If you're writing the whole story in third person omniscent with the occasional brief dip into a character's mind, it can work. Using your own analogy of movie making, Interference, it works like this: You do the wide establishing shot, then eventually zoom in on a single character. Then you draw back and watch everyone from a little distance for a while before you do a close-up of another character. But you don't do a series of quick cuts back and forth between close-ups unless you want to create a choppy, disorienting effect.

In the same way, if you're going along writing a scene from one character's viewpoint and you do a sudden switch to another character ... it's sloppy. Fame and fortune aside, it's messy and awkward. The flaw is not in trying to make everyone's motivations clear, it's in choosing the least effective way to do that. If you try to do too much in a scene (for instance, tell what everyone is thinking at the exact moment they think it) it usually creates confusion rather than clarity. There are other ways, better ways to do what you want to do than to create a kind of whiplash effect by alternating back and forth from mind to mind. It's also, as others have pointed out, the mark of an amateur. Whether or not that matters to you, I assume you do care about becoming the best writer that you can possibly be. Paying attention to this kind of detail is what will get you there.

[Interference]

Teresa and Leisha, thank you both for taking the pains to explain this issue to me. I do get what you are both describing and am suddenly made aware that it has its concomitant drawbacks. What I'm not sufficiently experienced to understand - and, hands raised, it's my problem - is when is switching from mind to mind allowed? Because surely writers like Ed McBain, John Galsworthy, Arnold Bennett must have done it all the time, given the ensemble natures of their storylines.

Now, I know it sounds like I'm just saying it for effect, but there is an underlying slit-belly honesty about my amateur standing and so forth. I've had stories rejected which have fallen into what you have described as an amateur's trap, and if focus-flipping is the reason for the rejections I think it's something I should seriously address. Unfortunately, it is an ingrained method of my current style and I'm not sure I wish to abandon the concerns of all my characters to favour just one. I want to know as much about the assassin's motives as the victim's terror, probably because I started life writing for screen, stage and radio, and I've directed more plays than I've had hot dinners (I eat a lot of salads). So I would sell the family silver for guidance in this area - you know, obviously, if the family had any silver worth selling.

So, will this adherence to a style that is considered 'bad' be my ultimate downfall and the source of all my longest-standing regrets? (That might be rhetorical - please don't say 'yes' just yet.) Or are there acceptable exceptions? (I'd love a little 'yes' in there, if that's ok, but I'd appreciate it even more if you'd expand a bit on it.)

[Leisha]

Originally Posted by Interference

What I'm not sufficiently experienced to understand - and, hands raised, it's my problem - is when is switching from mind to mind allowed? Because surely writers like Ed McBain, John Galsworthy, Arnold Bennett must have done it all the time, given the ensemble natures of their storylines.

The way I see it (and, no, I'm not published), writers can afford to switch between POVs if they know how to handle it well, and if they already are published, which means book buyers and publishers will have confidence in them. I'd say if you're starting off on the "unpublished" rung of the ladder -- which is the lowest of the low -- don't write anything that may get you rejected. Remember, your work has to stand out from the hundreds of submissions agents/editors receive in a week.

So I'd say the answer is never. Never switch into someone else's head. There are ways around the drawbacks -- have your character guess what the other people are thinking; this saves switching POV. Example: Robert knew just by the look on Darren's face that he felt uneasy with the situation. Or (and this way saves too much "telling"): Show your lesser characters behaving slightly differently, then we'd guess what's wrong with them (if you've made your writing --and the character's motivations -- clear).

Unfortunately, it is an ingrained method of my current style and I'm not sure I wish to abandon the concerns of all my characters to favour just one. I want to know as much about the assassin's motives as the victim's terror, probably because I started life writing for screen, stage and radio, and I've directed more plays than I've had hot dinners (I eat a lot of salads). So I would sell the family silver for guidance in this area - you know, obviously, if the family had any silver worth selling.

I'm in the same boat as you. I have no recommendations, no previous publishing credits, nothing.

As for your story -- why do you have to sacrifice the rest of your characters? If you want the reader to hear the thoughts of other characters, you just finish off the scene you're currently working on, put a couple of line breaks, then retell the next scene from a different character's perspective. You could have one scene with the hapless, bumbling hero, then the next you could show your scheming villain plotting your protagonists downfall. So you would allow the reader to see into the heads of both (and many more) characters. Thus you can play tricks with your characters; have the reader know some plot that the evil guy is setting in motion, then when they read the hero's next scene, Mr Hero would be bumbling away, quite blissfully unaware of his imminent downfall. Yet we, the reader, would be saying "No! Don't go in there! Mr Evil is waiting behind the door, and he's got an axe!". Effective, no?

So, will this adherence to a style that is considered 'bad' be my ultimate downfall and the source of all my longest-standing regrets? (That might be rhetorical - please don't say 'yes' just yet.) Or are there acceptable exceptions? (I'd love a little 'yes' in there, if that's ok, but I'd appreciate it even more if you'd expand a bit on it.)

I suppose if your work is good enough, people will want to read it regardless. But -- and I'm being completely honest -- you're already getting rejections, which means maybe it's time to start looking at your work again with a fresh eye.

Ultimately, if you find you can't write in any other way, just write to make yourself happy. If a publishing contract comes along that would be a bonus, but that's a big if...

[Teresa Edgerton]

As I said, there is a way of doing POV changes in omniscent viewpoint where it goes along so smoothly that no one notices the switches. The problem with this is that it only gives a shallow impression of what each character is thinking and feeling. It works well in, for instance, a light, comical piece, but not at all well when there are complex motivations and interactions that the writer wants to convey.

For the more complex motivations, you need to go deeper, and to do that effectively you just can't go flitting from mind to mind throughout a single scene. But of course you can switch viewpoints each time you start a new scene -- or, in a long scene, if there is a logical dividing point (perhaps after some dramatic turning point or revelation) you can put in a text break and make the switch there.

Say that you are writing a scene where two characters are in conflict. You decide which character should be the viewpoint character for that particular scene, and you only tell what that character sees, hears, thinks, feels. The reader comes to understand that character's viewpoint completely because the other character's thoughts and feelings aren't there as a distraction. Then the next scene (or a later scene) begins with the second character reflecting on the events of that previous scene as he goes about ... whatever he is supposed to be doing at that point in the story. Now the reader begins to understand his thoughts and feelings while still retaining an understanding of the previous character's motivations and reactions. From this point on, the reader knows each character well enough that it isn't necessary to tell exactly what he or she is thinking in every single scene, because the reader is able to put together more subtle clues, such as body language. Of course you will return to each viewpoint from time to time, so that the reader's understanding of the character deepens.

By taking these viewpoints one at a time, you establish a stronger identity for each character. Another advantage is that scenes usually have better pacing this way. In some cases (and where it's appropriate to the story) each fresh viewpoint can come as a revelation to the reader, which adds a certain dramatic punch. There are other advantages, as well, but I won't go into them because that would turn this posting into an entire article.

Could your failure to stick with one viewpoint per scene be the sole reason your stories have been rejected in the past? That's unlikely; a story is seldom good or bad for one reason only. But the more you learn about the kinds of details that add or detract from the overall effect, the better your writing will become. The POV switch happens to be one of the more obvious mistakes that inexperienced writers make (therefore a red flag for a lot of editors), but it is also, fortunately, a problem that can be easily fixed once you recognize it.

[Interference]

Without you, I wouldn't have known the issue to exist. Without you, I wouldn't have been bothered by the concerns I've been enjoying this week. Without you, I wouldn't be re-working my current novel and planning the same for the others I still have plans for.

Have I fallen into the Terrible Trap? Yes, but not as seriously as I had at first thought. So far, I seem to have performed naturally some of the acrobatics you have both suggested for getting out of one head and into another, but there are definitely, definitely a few places - only a few, so far - where I have committed the sin of doing so within the same para - most notably where two (or towards the end of the book, more than two) major protagonists appear together in the same scene.

This writing lark is tough, isn't it? Not just perdy words and car chases, is it? God alone knows how many other red flags I've been sending up which I am in absolute ignorance of (and God and I haven't exactly been on speaking terms since I let Richard Dawkins explain to me how He doesn't exist an' all).

Thank you both again, I can't begin to tell you how refreshing it is to get this kind of informed guidance. Other boards, other people, can get so snotty and self-important sometimes, can't they?

Just me, then.

Ta, fer now

[daisybee]

Interference, just a thought, maybe you could post a short extract of your writing in the critique section-not that I'm saying you need the assistance, but the friendly peeps on here do tend to pick up other "red flag" mistakes that as the author we just don't spot ourselves. I posted a few draft pieces, and the advice was great. I haven't used all the pointers, but the points made had me rethinking about the actual writing style- which I have put to good use in the new stuff I'm working on. POV was a big issue for me too, but I have managed to be brutal, and decide which characters would give my story the most depth, by allowing us inside their heads.
Writing is hard isn't it?

[Interference]

Nice idea, daisybee, I'll cobble some samples together and post 'em for a critique. Then hide. I'm so insecure since the coalman started blue-pencilling my notes ("You persistently ask for 'two bags of coal'. However, as this is a smokeless zone, it would jeopardise my career to comply. Please do not ask me to break the law again! Sincerely, The Smokelessfuelman").

Originally Posted by daisybee

Writing is hard isn't it?

If it was easy, everybody would be doing it, and their biggest fans would be their mums.

[daisybee]

Ha! Insecurity is the curse of would be writers- when the whole point is to have as many people as possible read our work! Or at least a few that think it's worthwhile.

I have actually lost my mother as a fan, since being brutal and destroying oodles of writing and leaving her hanging with a half written story in her head. She now refuses to read anything untill it's FINISHED. Wise woman.

[Leisha]

I'm glad I've been of some help. If you post in the critiques section, Interference, I'll be sure to give you some comments when I have time!

Keep at it, that's the key. Your work will never improve otherwise.

[Interference]

I'm feeling a bit like I've hi-jacked this thread, sorry, guys.

Thanks for the help, it's all been very valuable to me. I hope you'll get a chance to skim over my submission in the Critique section.

Thanks again. Someone else can take over from me here ...

[Marcus15]

I suppose I'm guilty of switching POV somewhat. I'd like a critique of the little I've written to see if I handle it ok or if it's too "jarring" Thanks for the links.

[pyan]

Bung some of it into critiques, Marcus, (read the stickies first!), and you'll get feedback.