Forum: Author Hangout

you may want to shift the insight to a separate segment which focuses on the people in question instead of jumping from one person's thought to anothers.

That's what I'm doing. I consider that head-hopping.

Two authors I consider to do a good job using the technique are Oyster50 and StangStar06 (I really like his latest, Twinsanity), but they write stories with a different feel, not constantly keeping their characters off-balance.

AJ

That's what I'm doing. I consider that head-hopping.

From CW's description of the other writer's story, it sounds like the MC was the narrator and told using the First Person POV. Then in CW's suggestion of a scene with just the parents, the writer could switch the narrator to one of the parents and use First Person. Alternatively, the new scene could use Third Person, and include head-hopping.

I was expecting that to be the majority view, but the balance of feedback e-mails has been very positive.

I should add that the opinion of a handful of e-mailers is not necessarily representative of the readership as a whole. If a few readers sent approbative comments but the story score tanked, you should probably take them with a huge pinch of salt. But since I've made the head-hopping "in your face", the score has been slowly creeping up.

AJ

One lesson from the experiment is that it produces more rounded characters.

I've received reader feedback rooting for the antagonist.

Either that's a reflection on the multi-dimensionality of the characterisation (due in part to the head-hopping?), or the characterisation is so crap the readers can't tell good guys from bad guys :)

AJ

Perhaps in real life your readers are bad guys who don't want a good guy to win. :)

That touches on another subject I've been wondering about but probably deserves an Author Hangout thread of its own - the ethics of dissing your readership. I try hard to treat my readers courteously and that way I think I've defused a couple of potential rows. But not all SOL authors seem to feel the same way.

AJ

If my attempt at humor offended you, I apologize.

Apologies, that didn't come across at all well.

I had no problem with your humour (and it was rather funny). But it struck me as rather ironic that I could neither agree nor disagree without casting some sort of aspersion on the readers concerned.

Should I ever make the step up to dead-tree books, those readers might be candidates for purchasers :)

AJ

Apologies

All's good then.

Sometimes it is necessary to "diss" a reader. I recall one in particular who dumped on me regarding my labeling the energy fields joining universes in my Opening Earth story the Fourth Dimension. He said I was wrong for Time was the fourth dimension, and then got downright personal and insulting in his comments. At least it seemed so to me, so I unloaded on him and then told him he was more than welcome to not read my stories if he didn't like my scenarios. That was the last I heard from him.

Now I have a couple of readers who are telling me how I should structure future Parts and Chapters. Their ideas are not bad, but they don't fit my thoughts on how the story should be structured; so I just thank them for their input.

so I just thank them for their input.

That's never a bad option. If they really don't like your ignoring their 'advice', they can always write their own stories to show how it 'should' be done.

AJ

From CW's description of the other writer's story, it sounds like the MC was the narrator and told using the First Person POV. Then in CW's suggestion of a scene with just the parents, the writer could switch the narrator to one of the parents and use First Person. Alternatively, the new scene could use Third Person, and include head-hopping.

The idea was to avoid head-hopping altogether, whether using 1st or 3rd person, instead featuring a single POV in each chapter/section focusing on a separate character.

The problem occurs when you try to interject too much information at one time, rather than allowing it to come out in it's own time.

I agree head-hopping is not a good thing. However, if you go back and reread AJ's comment, it sounds like he is trying to experiment with head hopping. That is why I mention it could be used in 3rd preson.

a thought along the lines of 'I wonder if he means that, is the easiest way to handle it

Interesting. Thank you. I'll see whether that sort of approach would work in my story.

AJ

First Person head hopping can easily be changed to what the narrator knows by indicating that the narrator is thinking about what another character might be thinking (e.g., I wonder, think, believe, etc., that X might be thinking ....)

Following a recommendation, I've started reading 'Death by Fucking' by Andrew Wiggin, winner of umpteen awards and with a SOL score of 9.14. He used the same format, changing the POV every chapter. Although the style of the story is much different, whenever the current POV-holder has uncertainties, Andrew uses 'wonder' rather than 'seem'.

According to professionals, using 'seem' is a symptom that the style of writing might be too passive. And it's true that if I nuke their occurrences in my story, it comes across as stronger. But it also raises questions about how the POV-holder actually knows, and it changes the atmosphere.

AJ

He used the same format, changing the POV every chapter.

That's not head-hopping.

I think it is. In one chapter, the author details what's in one protagonist's head. In the next chapter, the author details what's in the other protagonist's head.

AJ

I think it is. In one chapter, the author details what's in one protagonist's head. In the next chapter, the author details what's in the other protagonist's head.

It's head-hopping when the author jumps from one character's head to another WITHIN a scene. It's okay to change POV characters at a new chapter. In fact, when the story is written from multiple characters' POVs, that's how you do it.

It's head-hopping when the author jumps from one character's head to another WITHIN a scene.

According to the definition you prefer, if the POV switches between characters within a scene, it's head-hopping. 'Scene' seems to be the most popular unit for authorities to choose for their definition. Others choose paragraph, chapter etc.

I consider that if the author switches POV whatever the unit, it's head-hopping. Picking an arbitrary unit size for the switching has no logical basis as far as I can see - it's either happening or it isn't.

AJ

The reason it's a scene is because a scene is told from the POV character's perspective. Usually there's one scene per chapter, but there could be more. Dan Brown in "The Da Vinci Code" has multiple scenes within a chapter, switching POVs with each scene. But within a scene you are only in one character's head.

This is a really good article. It's purpose is to show the difference between omniscient and limited, but it explains head-hopping well.

http://thewritepractice.com/head-hopping-and-hemingway/

Perhaps you'd prefer a different term to describe what I'm doing. I'm changing the POV from chapter to chapter but they're very short chapters.

I hope Ross doesn't mind me quoting him but

I found the POV shifts very distracting.

which is exactly the reason why experts tell writers not to head-hop. So the difference between what I'm doing and what you consider to be head-hopping is in degree, not principle.

AJ

I'm changing the POV from chapter to chapter but they're very short chapters.

The real question is when you do change the POV to a different character are you providing enough information that your readers know the narration has switched to a different character in a timely manner (i.e., within the first 1-2 paragraphs).

Possibly not, although I name the POV character in each chapter heading. I nicked the idea from another SOL author because IMO it worked well.

AJ

Possibly not, although I name the POV character in each chapter heading.

I found that worked well for Rough Diamond and I made it clear by including the name of the new head in the chapter title - making the change of head clear was very important because it was written in the first person, and people could be confused if they thought it was still the previous character. Mind you, over 80% of the story stayed with the MC - but it would work regardless of how many times you jumped characters.

I found the POV shifts very distracting.

I'll use "The Da Vinci Code" again. It has a lot of short scenes within each chapter, each from a different character's POV. My guess is that's the reason for the scenes (to switch POV character without head-hopping).

Maybe you changed POV characters too frequently. Maybe you didn't make it clear to the reader who the POV character was. Or maybe Ross simply doesn't like switching POVs.

Most 3rd-limited books are told from more than one character's POV. However, most don't switch POV character at every chapter. And most aren't even a 50-50 split (usually the majority of the story is from one character's POV).

So changing POV character at a new chapter is not head-hopping. Head-hopping is when the reader is in one character and all of a sudden you end up in another character's head. That's jarring to the reader. And then you're back in the 1st-character.

With today's genre fiction, readers like to be immersed in a character. I think that's why omniscient isn't popular today. Now if you do it right, you can leave that character at a new chapter and then the reader sees the world through the eyes of the new POV character. It's when you jump back and forth that it's annoying.

So changing POV character at a new chapter is not head-hopping.

We'll have to disagree on that. It waddles like head-hopping and it quacks like head-hopping and that's close enough for me.

AJ

We'll have to disagree on that. It waddles like head-hopping and it quacks like head-hopping and that's close enough for me.

Changing POV is not the same as head-hopping. Head-hopping is a negative term, meaning you did something wrong. I Googled "definition of head-hopping" and found many articles. I chose one that was from Writers World rather than an individual author giving their opinion. This is their definition:

Headhopping refers to writing where the point of view whips back and forth between multiple characters within a scene.

Headhopping is not to be confused with multiple viewpoints. Multiple viewpoints are expected in today's romance novels. Most romance novels today show scenes from the viewpoints of both the hero and heroine. However, you should avoid switching that viewpoint in the middle of a scene.

As I said, I'm not convinced.

Head-hopping is not the same as multiple viewpoints, it's multiple viewpoints within . They chose 'scene' as their arbitrary unit and, to be fair, that's what the majority of authorities use.

AJ

As I said, I'm not convinced.

For the moment, forget about when to change viewpoints.

To me the key factor in First Person head hopping is that the narrator has not changed.

For example: Tom, the narrator, is telling you the reader about the story. Suddenly, Ton hops into Bill's head taking you the reader with him so he can show you what Bill is thinking or believes. Then Tom returns to his head bring you the reader with him.

That is First Person head hopping. Changing narrators it total different.

According to professionals, using 'seem' is a symptom that the style of writing might be too passive. And it's true that if I nuke their occurrences in my story, it comes across as stronger. But it also raises questions about how the POV-holder actually knows, and it changes the atmosphere.

that seems like a good idea.

that seems like a good idea.

:)

AJ

Seemly Head-Hopping?

Seamless head-hopping might provide a better reading experience ;)

AJ

I do not think the technique is a problem, per se, I think the problems stem from why the author chose to do it.

The problem was it was 1st-person. In one section "I" was Character-A and then all of a sudden "I" was Character-B — and, btw, with the same voice.

There is no inherent reason why thoughts of ANY characters should not be shown, and not just their actions and words.

Then write it in omniscient. It's that simple.

When you write in first-person or 3rd-limited, you tell the story through the POV character. The reader is living the story through that character. With the reader engrossed in that character, it's jarring to all of a sudden hear another character's thoughts.

Would you agree third person is the safe option for someone who hasn't figured out yet where their story will end?

Actually, if they don't yet have a rough idea of where the story will end, they have major issues until they do. However, if they don't have a reasonable idea of the general path and do have an end concept - then third person gives them a lot more scope for moving about later than first person does.

When i first think of an idea for a story I don't always have an end in sight, but I always have an end in sight before I start to write it out - simply because I need a target to aim at. Having said that, I will often change roads along the way to stop at scenic places. Thus before I write I have a start, a concept, and an end clearly set out in my mind, but may still be working on the areas in between while writing.

edit to add: In the various references on writing I've seen what Switch Blayde calls omniscient also called third person. I've never found a clear definition of one that doesn't include the other or totally excludes the other.

There are various levels you can write in the third person - usually defined as limited or unlimited - I leave it as third person.

In short, first person is seeing through the eyes of the character whose point of view is being used.

Second person I've never really understood what they mean by it and keep away from it.

Third person is another person watching the other. This can be done from any level and any position - either looking down or standing beside the events.

The main differences between first and third are how much the narrator can disclose about events away from the point of view of the character and the pronouns used.

edit to add: In the various references on writing I've seen what Switch Blayde calls omniscient also called third person. I've never found a clear definition of one that doesn't include the other or totally excludes the other.

3rd-person does not equate to omniscient.

You can have omniscient in 1st-person. "The Book Thief" has an omniscient narrator (Death).

In omniscient, an all-knowing narrator is telling the story. The narrator isn't typically in the story so it's written in 3rd-person. When the omniscient narrator is in the story, like Death is in "The Book Thief," it's written in 1st-person.

3rd-person does not equate to omniscient.

Switch, from what you say about Death it's a first person narrative because the narrator is in the story. It's just a lot of what they tell is about another person.

The best simple explanation I've found is the current wikipedia one, and it show omniscient as one of the 3rd person variants - not a different view.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narration

from what you say about Death it's a first person narrative because the narrator is in the story

No, it's omniscient because the omniscient narrator can tell you what every character is thinking, but you can't hear any character's thoughts directly.

Death isn't really a character in the story. I said that because it's 1st-person so it seems like a character. Until someone pointed that out to me I never heard of 1st-person omniscient.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narration

The important part of this article as it relates to what we're talking about is:

The second axis is the omniscient/limited axis, a distinction that refers to the knowledge available to the narrator. A third person omniscient narrator has knowledge of all times, people, places, and events, including all characters' thoughts; a limited narrator, in contrast, may know absolutely everything about a single character and every piece of knowledge in that character's mind, but the narrator's knowledge is "limited" to that character—that is, the narrator cannot describe things unknown to the focal character.

EDT: Keep in mind, when it says "a limited narrator" it's implying 3rd-limited since this is in the section called 3rd-Person.

And then there's 3rd-limited vs. close-3rd-limited (or something like that).

John is the POV character for the scene.

"John saw the door swing open." That's 3rd-limited because the POV character saw the door open. (It would also be how it's written in omniscient.)

"The door swung open." That's close-3rd-limited because you're living the scene through the POV character so the reader sees what John sees. You don't have to tell the reader that John saw the door open. How do we know the door opened? The POV character saw it open.

Yes, BUT ... we should encourage those just starting out that if the alternative is not writing at all, then they should go ahead and write something that you know will end up with major issues.

True, that's what many people call writing a plot idea or story starter. I've a few old ones of those lying around from the old days, awaiting finishing.