Just like every technique and stylistic choice, there are good and bad ways to do multiple points of view. For some people, the point of view of a book will determine whether they’ll read it or not. I can’t say I have ever personally gone through a phase where I straight-up hated the choice as a whole. Except for in Eldest. (Christopher Paolini, you know what you did.)
However.
For some reason, for some strange and incomprehensible reason, Colleen Hoover is really popular right now.
Enough people on the internet are talking about the weird dynamics featured in her story. Enough people on the internet are talking about her single-dimensional characters. Enough people on the internet are talking about the examples her fictional relationships are setting and romanticizing. THIS POST IS NOT ABOUT ANY OF THAT.
No, this post is gently blaming Colleen Hoover for this epidemic of books that switch the character point of view with absolutely no good reason to do so.
When you are dealing with a romance book, it can be a lot of fun to watch characters falling in love with one another. It can be a lot of fun to see a singular event happening from multiple character’s perspectives. But sometimes, including things that are “a lot of fun” is at the expense of your coherent plot line. Sometimes, you should have just conceded and written a limited omniscient point of view.
Throwing some quick definitions your way just in case you need a refresher.
- Omniscient is where the narrator knows all and sees all. The narrator is generally, but not always, separate from the characters of the story being told. Because the reader is not directly in anyone’s head, it can pose a challenge to get the reader emotionally invested in your characters. Also called Third-Person Omniscient.
- Limited Omniscient is where the narrator knows everything about ONE character. It tells the story using the opinions, emotions, biases, and perceptions of the main character. All other characters are described, seen, and presented to us based on the views of the main character, not objectively like in regular/third person omniscient. You can deliver information about that main character that is not known to the character. Like a stowaway in a car, or a mystery item in a purse. This style is meant to make you sympathize and root for the main character particularly. Sometimes this is further divided into Objective Limited Omniscient where the narrator ACTS completely omniscient and impartial, but only follows that one main character.
- First-Person is where the stories paint you as the main character. It uses “I”, “me”, and “myself” to put the reader into one character’s brain and hear their thoughts and feelings. This is similar to limited omniscient in that it really focuses on one character, but differs in that if the character does not know a thing, the reader is not told that thing either. This is utilized a lot in novels meant to encourage escapism.
- Switching Point of View or “Head-Jumping” is typically a first-person style narration, but instead of focusing on one character, you focus on two or more. This is generally organized by putting different characters’ viewpoints into different chapters with names in the headers. For the rest of this post, I will be referring to this style as “switching POV”.
When is it a good idea to use a switching POV? When the story will benefit from it. When your plot is building suspense. When you need to show a different world than the one the main character perceives. When you need to build out your setting and characters. It can also be used if you need to reflect the main character’s personality through someone else’s eyes (eg. when the main character is unreliable).
When is it NOT a good idea to use a switching POV? When it will confuse or upset the reader. When it is just there to bulk out the book. When it will not add a character-building moment, a setting/world-building moment, or further the plot in any way.
Now, the crux of this post:
Please. Friends. I am so tired of reading chapters from “his” point of view where the entire thing is telling me how hot he finds the main character. How amazing she feels and her quirks. How he’s changed his life for her. How he thinks about her the entire motorcycle ride to their next date. I don’t care about his motorcycle ride spent thinking of her. Well, not enough for it to make me happy about it taking up an entire chapter.
Too many writers (especially romance writers) use a switching POV as an excuse to be lazy. Instead of showing us through a secondary character’s actions that they’re conflicted about the relationship, we switch to their point of view and TELL the reader about it. To use my motorcycle example from above, we told the reader how Mr. Love interest was feeling about the main character. Why not have it shown instead? How he misses what the waitress says to him or how he doesn’t seem to be listening but is staring intently at her? Explain the softness of his eyes to make sure it doesn’t come across as creepy or overbearing. Don’t tell me in ANY setting. Show me. Let me figure it out for myself.
Colleen Hoover does this switching POV to “tell” a lot. I think it’s in part responsible for making her characters feel very flat.
I also think her popularity has sparked an interest in this style of writing, without anyone considering the pros and cons of how it feels to the reader (especially in a genre made to accommodate escapism!).
At worst, switching POV can confuse the reader who is trying to keep track of which characters know what. It can also muddy your plot and make certain sections needlessly drawn out. At best, it’s a thrilling way to explore different characters and their opinions/perceptions.
Keeping just one or two questions in your head like “Is this clear enough?” or “Is this adding anything we don’t already know in an effective way?” can make a WORLD of difference in how your piece comes across when there are multiple perspectives in it. If you ARE interested in writing a piece with switching POV, I highly recommend taking a look at the Masterclass link I have below in the reference section.
Winters Writer 