Please read. Significant change on the site that will affect compatibility [ Dismiss ]
Home » Forum » Author Hangout

Forum: Author Hangout

Is it ever okay to "head hop"?

JoeBobMack 🚫

I'm new to trying to write fiction, so much of what I do is by "feel" developed from a lifetime of reading. As a result, I'm only just beginning to delve into more structured ways of thinking about writing. One guidance I have seen is to keep a consistent point of view in a scene. However, as I'm re-writing some two-character scenes, I'm finding that the interior thoughts and the emotions they drive are important for both characters. I've tried moving the pov back and forth between them, generally separated by actions that relate to their thoughts and emotions, and it seems to read okay to me. So, are there times "head hopping" is okay? When have you seen it work? Not work?

Switch Blayde 🚫
Updated:

@JoeBobMack

So, are there times "head hopping" is okay?

Yes, when it's seamless to the reader.

The term head-hopping is derived from a ping-pong or tennis match where the viewer's head keeps bouncing back and forth to follow the ball. It's that same bouncing that occurs when the reader bounces back and forth between different characters' thoughts.

A scene should be from a single character's POV. The reader is living the scene through that character. The idea is the POV character, and therefore the reader, only knows what they see, hear, etc. Unless they're mind-readers they can't hear the other character's thoughts. They can observe the other character's expression or gestures and surmise, but that's all. And sometimes they surmise wrong which sometimes is important to the plot.

Now when the POV changes, you're supposed to start a new scene. What I mean by changing POV seamlessly is that you don't start a new scene but slide into the other character's POV. But that's not jumping back and forth.

Another time it's okay to tell the reader something the POV character doesn't know is when it's important for the reader to know it. Let's say the character leaves a bar and someone is lurking in the dark watching him. The POV character obviously doesn't know he's being watched but it's important for the reader to know it. So it's okay to tell the reader that.

What I found reading bestselling novels is that authors' head-hop all the time. A reader not trained in writing fiction doesn't even realize it. You simply have to do it in a way that isn't annoying to the reader. Jumping back and forth between two characters' thoughts is typically annoying to the reader.

For me, POV is the most difficult part of writing fiction.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
awnlee jawking 🚫

@Switch Blayde

What I found reading bestselling novels is that authors' head-hop all the time. A reader not trained in writing fiction doesn't even realize it. You simply have to do it in a way that isn't annoying to the reader. Jumping back and forth between two characters' thoughts is typically annoying to the reader.

That doesn't make sense to me. If bestselling authors do it all the time, what's wrong with it? And if readers don't even realise, how can they find it annoying?

AJ

Replies:   Switch Blayde
Switch Blayde 🚫

@awnlee jawking

That doesn't make sense to me. If bestselling authors do it all the time, what's wrong with it? And if readers don't even realise, how can they find it annoying?

That's the point. Although it might "technically" be head-hopping, it's done in such a way that the reader wouldn't notice it. Be jarred by it. The only reader who would notice it is one trained in the craft of writing fiction. And then he would say, "Hmm, that's a good way to do it."

What's wrong with it? Absolutely nothing if done well.

It goes back to the "rules" of writing fiction. They're not hard fast rules. They're principles. "Don't head-hop" means, "This is what head-hopping is. This is why it's bad. Don't do it that way."

hiltonls16 🚫

@JoeBobMack

So, are there times "head hopping" is okay? When have you seen it work? Not work?

As a reader I find head hopping easier when written in the third person and the change of focus to a different character is a scene change. Wes Boyd does this in most of his stories.

More intrusive and difficult to follow is when it is in first person and the character narrating switches. Oyster50 does this with varying success. Different chapter, different narrator generally works; multiple narrators with a few paragraphs each in one chapter is more difficult to follow.

One first person story I read (cannot remember name or author) had chapter 2 as a repeat of chapter 1 from the perspective of a different character. Too much repetition to really make it work as a separate chapter. I think the author needed to find a different way of conveying the second character's thoughts.

Switch Blayde 🚫

@hiltonls16

multiple narrators with a few paragraphs each in one chapter is more difficult to follow.

And that's the "bad" head-hopping.

Crumbly Writer 🚫

@hiltonls16

One first person story I read (cannot remember name or author) had chapter 2 as a repeat of chapter 1 from the perspective of a different character. Too much repetition to really make it work as a separate chapter. I think the author needed to find a different way of conveying the second character's thoughts.

I just read one recently (though I won't name names to protect the guilty) where the other kept switching the POV with only a single plain text name announcement, and it wasn't once, twice or thrice a chapter, instead it was continually. They'd write maybe 20 paragraphs, then it would be yet another character taking over the story mid-chapter. I found it very disconcerting!

bk69 🚫

@hiltonls16

One first person story I read (cannot remember name or author) had chapter 2 as a repeat of chapter 1 from the perspective of a different character. Too much repetition to really make it work as a separate chapter. I think the author needed to find a different way of conveying the second character's thoughts.

Piers Anthony wrote a seven book series revolving around the same group of characters, and over roughly the same period of time, with the main difference being the main character of each novel (and, in one case, the directionality of the flow of time). But, maybe half of each book was events already covered in other books.

But yeah, if you want to have multiple people's thoughts, you generally should consider at least semi-omniscient narrators, or at least a telepathic narrator. (A narrator who's questioned all or most involved since the time of the events but prior to writing about them can usually be considered semi-omniscient.)

Mushroom 🚫

@bk69

Piers Anthony wrote a seven book series revolving around the same group of characters, and over roughly the same period of time, with the main difference being the main character of each novel (and, in one case, the directionality of the flow of time). But, maybe half of each book was events already covered in other books.

Well, almost but not quite.

Yes, the "Incantations of Immorality" series mostly concentrates on the same era of time, but not really exclusively. But they do all ultimately hinge around an "eternal battle" between good and evil. Which ultimately "culminates" in Satan himself nominating the replacement for "God".

A thoroughly enjoyable series. But indeed a great many scenes through it are indeed seen the eyes of many individuals. But also not, as a great many parts take place decades before or after the original story.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
awnlee jawking 🚫

@Mushroom

Since hips seem to degrade disproportionately compared to skulls when you have osteoporosis, head hop might be preferable to hip hop.

AJ

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Crumbly Writer 🚫

@awnlee jawking

Since hips seem to degrade disproportionately compared to skulls when you have osteoporosis, head hop might be preferable to hip hop.

Or, if you're particularly religious and oppose drinking and dancing, you might go for a head drop (i.e. prayer) instead, just as long as you keep your head our of my personal business! (Grr!)

Crumbly Writer 🚫

@bk69

But yeah, if you want to have multiple people's thoughts, you generally should consider at least semi-omniscient narrators, or at least a telepathic narrator. (A narrator who's questioned all or most involved since the time of the events but prior to writing about them can usually be considered semi-omniscient.)

My favorite narrator isn't your typical 'God-like' individual who knows what everyone is thinking at any given time, but is merely an individual (possibly a member of the story) who's discussed the events described and has a general feel for how everyone was thinking at the time.

That allows for a more personalized feel to the narration, as the narrator isn't dictating what happens, but is merely telling a story, as one used to back in the days of bonfires on the beach or at campsites, where everyone brings stories that they've heard in their travels. It also allows for narrator confusion or biases, especially when it turns out there was a discrepancy between the participants telling the story over what actually happened, and the narrator simply chose to accept one explanation over the others.

palamedes 🚫

@bk69

Piers Anthony wrote a seven book series

The Incarnations of Immortality series now has 8 books.

On a Pale Horse (1983) - Death
Bearing an Hourglass (1984) - Time
With a Tangled Skein (1985) - Fate
Wielding a Red Sword (1986) - War
Being a Green Mother (1987) - Nature
For Love of Evil (1988) - Satan
And Eternity (1990) - God
Under a Velvet Cloak (2007) - ???? (lets not give spoilers)

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Crumbly Writer 🚫

@palamedes

The Incarnations of Immortality series now has 8 books.

On a Pale Horse (1983) - Death
Bearing an Hourglass (1984) - Time
With a Tangled Skein (1985) - Fate
Wielding a Red Sword (1986) - War
Being a Green Mother (1987) - Nature
For Love of Evil (1988) - Satan
And Eternity (1990) - God
Under a Velvet Cloak (2007) - ???? (lets not give spoilers)

Forget the endless diatribe over God vs. Satan, how about the eternal struggle between the competing forces of dick vs. pussy, and the counter-competing force of 'just stop touching yourself like that!', otherwise know as the MOM force!

Replies:   palamedes
palamedes 🚫

@Crumbly Writer

touché

Dominions Son 🚫

@palamedes

touché

Why two ches, why not one or three?

Replies:   palamedes
palamedes 🚫

@Dominions Son

To give you but one would be an insult and three or more would require you to pay taxes.

Crumbly Writer 🚫

@palamedes

touché

I'll touché the aforementioned biologic organs!

Switch Blayde 🚫

@JoeBobMack

as I'm re-writing some two-character scenes, I'm finding that the interior thoughts and the emotions they drive are important for both characters.

If the story requires that, it's best to write it in omniscient. You can't have any character thinking (internal dialogue) but you can have the omniscient narrator tell the reader what each character is thinking and feeling. It's not head-hopping because you aren't hopping from one character to the other. The only POV is that of the omni narrator.

This article explains that better than I can.
https://thewritepractice.com/head-hopping-and-hemingway/

Replies:   JoeBobMack
JoeBobMack 🚫

@Switch Blayde

Thanks, Switch Blayde! Very helpful. Could you give an example or two of books where this is done well? On she I have seen it but, as you say, just didn't notice. I would like to read with a writer's eye.

Replies:   Switch Blayde
Switch Blayde 🚫

@JoeBobMack

Could you give an example or two of books where this is done well?

Not off the top of my head. I've been reading thrillers lately by David Baldacci, Vince Flynn, and Lee Child. But I don't know if they'd be good examples. I didn't particularly like their writing, but I liked their stories.

I've also been reading James Patterson novels. But he doesn't write them anymore. He has an army of writers. I actually hated the writing in the two I read (by two different ghost writers).

Unless the head-hopping is obvious or jarring, it's not a problem and the normal reader wouldn't recognize it. It you want to look for it, just remember the scene is being told from the POV character for that scene so unless he sees it, hears, it, smells it, thinks it, reads about it, etc. it can't be described in the scene. But as I said, if it's needed for the story, it has to be there. It's just not bad head-hopping if it's not jarring.

I'm definitely no expert on head-hopping.

The only reason I'm concerned about it is because the first novel I wrote was rejected by a traditional publisher with the following feedback: Show don't tell and don't head-hop.

At that time I had no idea what those terms meant so I began learning. And if the publisher's editor rejected the novel because I was head-hopping, that sent a message to me that it's important.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Crumbly Writer 🚫

@Switch Blayde

Unless the head-hopping is obvious or jarring, it's not a problem and the normal reader wouldn't recognize it. It you want to look for it, just remember the scene is being told from the POV character for that scene so unless he sees it, hears, it, smells it, thinks it, reads about it, etc. it can't be described in the scene.

For me, a better guide is not to describe what each character thinks, or even describe what happens, but to capture how they respond. It takes a LOT more time to write that way, but it catches most of the oversights you'd likely miss otherwise. Thus, you're capturing internal thoughts by their physical responses: whether a head tilt, a pursing of the lips, or one of my favorites, a pregnant pause with an ellipsis (& m-dash;).

Replies:   JoeBobMack
JoeBobMack 🚫

@Crumbly Writer

CW, I agree that there is a lot to be gained in reader enjoyment by describing actions. But, isn't something more required for the reader to know the character's thoughts if those thoughts are necessary to the story? Can this be done without actually stating those thoughts?

So, something happens. The character perceives that event. The character has thoughts about those perceptions. As a result of those thoughts, the character experiences emotions and, perhaps, physiological reactions. Those emotions and reactions predispose the character to notice and interpret things in particular ways, they have more thoughts (judgments, characterizations, plans, etc.) and they act. But, the thoughts cannot be definitely assessed from the behaviors. Different thoughts can lead to the same behaviors. Similar thoughts can lead to different behaviors. And, sometimes, a person's thoughts, at least those they are consciously aware of in the moment, may not explain the emotions or behaviors of the individual, even to the individual. So, if the specific thoughts are important, then it would seem difficult for actions to show them.

For example. a man and woman have just made love. The man says, "I love you." She recoils, her eyes wide and mouth open, then says, "No! No! Don't say that."

Maybe, with enough context and background, we could guess what she is thinking. Or, maybe, the point of the story would be to make readers guess one thing, then reveal that it was really another. Or, as a third alternative, we might find that even she did not know what was really behind her emotions and reactions in that moment, that what she thought was going on, and what the reader also believed, really wasn't the deeper belief (thought), that was actually operating in the moment. Each way would be a good story. And, each could resonate with readers, because each is true to human experience; they could each make good psychological sense.

Maybe I'm overthinking the point (not the first time!), or maybe your point assumed all of what I've said and just pointed out how powerful descriptions of the emotions and reactions from thoughts can be. Just something that I thought about from your comment!

BTW, I'm really interested in your point that writing out behaviors helps catch things you would miss otherwise. I think I have an idea of what you're saying, but need to think more about it, or maybe notice how it plays out as I write and re-write. Thanks.

Crumbly Writer 🚫
Updated:

@JoeBobMack

CW, I agree that there is a lot to be gained in reader enjoyment by describing actions. But, isn't something more required for the reader to know the character's thoughts if those thoughts are necessary to the story? Can this be done without actually stating those thoughts?

It's definitely not as straightforward, but observing how the exchange unfolds based on how the people respond to each other, as opposed to being TOLD how it unfolds is rewarding—at least for me.

Granted, no one does it all the time, but for short, intense passages, it adds strength to the exchange—especially if you intersperse the observations of the responses with 'action tags', where you describe their actions—turning aside, doing the dishes, painting each other's toenails.

The key is, rather than TELLING the reader what the characters are feeling, the reader gets to discover it for themselves, putting the pieces together on their own. It may seem counterproductive, but readers—for whatever reason—seem to value the distinction, at least some of them!

In your example, the scene might play out as follows:

He glancing into her emerald eyes, pausing to lick his lips. "I … I love you!"

Instead of answered, she drew back, pursing her lips, her eyes leery.

"No response?" he pressed, his eyes dilating slightly.

"I'm … thinking."

"What's there to think about, either you love me, or you don't?"

"No," she argued. "I just … don't like throwing terms like that to lightly. Otherwise, it loses all meaning."

Rather than answering, he leaned back, crossing his arms, awaiting her response.

"It doesn't mean anything if you do it to say 'Thanks for the fuck!'" she accused, getting up and storming out. He shook his head, staring at her long after she'd disappeared down the hall.

Again, it takes more work figuring out precisely how each character responds each moment of the exchange, but …

As far as revealing her thoughts later, as she wrestles with it herself, my example still leaves that option, though rather than showing her actual thoughts, you'd probably switch to her and her girlfriends, as they pry for the details as she continues dancing around the topic.

But again, rather than doing this ALL the time, you pick and choose your battles, using the most effective strategies when it's most vital, relying on shorthand techniques for the less essential discussions.

And trust me, this is something we all wrestle with. We find a technique that we're comfortable. We grow accustomed to it and try variations. Then, once we've played out multiple variations, we trying a slightly different technique.

One technique is no more 'efficient' than the other, though some can be slightly more powerful than the other in the right contexts, but not unless you're in the right headspace in that particular moment.

Switch Blayde 🚫

@JoeBobMack

But, isn't something more required for the reader to know the character's thoughts if those thoughts are necessary to the story? Can this be done without actually stating those thoughts?

And that's why POV, in my opinion, is the most difficult aspect of writing fiction. I honestly don't know the right answer to that question. Of course omniscient is one way to get into every characters' thoughts, but you lose a lot with omniscient which is why it's not as common as it used to be.

I got an email today from someone who I believe is a Linkedin connection. It's titled, "Readers' pet peeves about modern writers." Head-hopping was #14. This is what they had to say about it:

"14. Head-hopping."

This isn't just an editor peeve, see?! Readers can lose the thread of a plot and immersion in a character very quickly if a writer hasn't distinguished between points of view of different characters sufficiently clearly. Yes, some writers manage it, but it takes a lot of skill.

For me, the important part of that paragraph is, "Readers can lose the … immersion in a character."

That's why I believe omniscient isn't favored anymore. The reader doesn't want a narrator telling them the story. They want to live the story through the character(s). So just like you can't read someone's mind after you say, "I love you," either can your POV character.

So what if the girl was thinking something the POV character didn't interpret correctly and it's important for the reader to know? You have a scene later from the girl's POV where she tells her friend about it or she struggles with what the guy said. The reader learns what she was thinking (albeit a little later), but the POV character doesn't (maybe he'll find out later if it's important). Isn't that how real life works?

The POV of the story is probably the most important decision as a writer. "To Kill a Mockingbird" is from Scout's POV. Because of that, it's a coming of age story. Imagine if the POV would have been from her father's POV, the attorney. That would have been a story Grisham would write. Or what if it was from the black man's POV?

Now if you write in 3rd-limited multiple, you switch POV character at a scene change. So what I said in the last paragraph is just as true. For each scene, it's important to get the POV character right. In the scene where the guy says, "I love you," you wouldn't have the problem with the girl's thoughts if she were the POV character for that scene,

Or the chapter could have two scenes. The first one ends when the POV character (the guy) tells her he loves her. The next scene switches to her as the POV character and the reader gets to hear her thoughts.

richardshagrin 🚫

Most hoppers use their feet. You need a very strong helmet to hop on your head.

awnlee jawking 🚫

@richardshagrin

Most hoppers use their feet. You need a very strong helmet to hop on your head.

Breakdancers (soon to become an Olympic sport) who head-hop are asking for early dementia.

AJ

Switch Blayde 🚫

@richardshagrin

You need a very strong helmet to hop on your head.

The NFL will tell you that is not enough.

Uther Pendragon 🚫

@JoeBobMack

I sometimes do it.
OTOH, plenty would tell you that I'm nota good author.
I've written 2-person stories in which the POV switches back and forth in alternate paragraphs. I think one was named, Moving Experience.

Replies:   JoeBobMack
JoeBobMack 🚫

@Uther Pendragon

Thanks, UP! Will read.

Mushroom 🚫

In most cases I have read, if the story involved a change in POV characters, that story is almost always written in the third person POV.

And one of the best I think is Harry Turtledove. His stories are normally epic, spanning decades of time and 6+ books. And most times each chapter is from a different character.

And it is interesting, seeing different characters "promoted" or "demoted" to and from POV. Somebody who started as a minor character in one book, the next book is POV. Plus of course he is kinda like George R.R. Martin, in which he has absolutely no problem killing off a POV character.

Once even almost doing in one like GRRM did with the Horse Lord. A main POV character over several books, she gets a boo-boo on her finger while cutting chicken and dies from an infection.

Switch Blayde 🚫

@JoeBobMack

In my WIP novel, I wrote: "To Lt. Fox's credit, other than a sly look and a twinkle in her blue eyes, she pretended not to notice and went on with the bathing."

Lt. Fox is not the POV character in that scene. I told the reader that she pretended not to notice. I guess the POV character wouldn't know that for sure, but I don't see it as head-hopping that would jar the reader.

I also wrote in that story: "On her knees facing him, straddling him, she grabbed the back of his head with both hands and gazed into his eyes. Her eyes were pleading."

I've been doing that a lot lately. The POV character can read the emotions in another character's eyes.

In another part of the novel I did it with: "Boyd forced his gaze to leave the breasts and meet Lt. Fox's eyes. Worried eyes. Panic-stricken eyes."

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Crumbly Writer 🚫

@Switch Blayde

I've been doing that a lot lately. The POV character can read the emotions in another character's eyes.

In another part of the novel I did it with: "Boyd forced his gaze to leave the breasts and meet Lt. Fox's eyes. Worried eyes. Panic-stricken eyes."

That's a much better alternative to head-hopping, but can also be problematic, as it's just another shortcut, and is akin to giving away an ending before the ending of the story. The readers want the story to unfold naturally, not have the author 'spill the beans' prematurely. As usual, the author is focused on the ending, but sometimes, that single focus bites them in the ass when he gives too much information away too soon.

While "worried" and "panic-stricken" are viable literary adjectives, it's still better--depending on context--to draw it out a bit by observing her blinking, or looking away or even biting their lips--each of which introduces the element of doubt, without detailing the nature of the doubt. That part comes later in the story and is steal much of the ongoing story tension. Let the readers hang for a bit, wrestling over why someone is uncomfortable. You want to leave them curious, so they'll keep turning the pages. That way, when they finally figure out the conflict, the resolution is much more satisfactory.

But again, you've to to temper such techniques. Not everything bit of information is essential to the story, and saying that a tertiary character 'looks worried' is fine if they're not playing a significant role in the story, and likely won't remain long enough to explain later what they were worried about.

But the biggest problem with POV issues, aside from yanking readers who associate with the protagonist out of the story, is that the vital information is like a relief valve, allowing the story to lose the vital tensions which make it interesting in the first place. So, let the reader stew for a bit, because that makes it more satisfying when everything finally comes together.

Replies:   Switch Blayde
Switch Blayde 🚫

@Crumbly Writer

can also be problematic, as it's just another shortcut, and is akin to giving away an ending before the ending of the story

Once again, using a snippet from a story without context is problematic. Her panic was for that moment. This is a larger part of it:

For the second time, Boyd gazed at Lt. Fox's breasts. But the first time he had been busy making love. Now they had his undivided attention. They were firm with youth, wider and rounder at the base, narrowing as they jutted out from her body. Topped with small, light-colored areolas no larger than a dime. The nipples made up for what the areolas lacked in size. They were long and thick and dark.

Lt. Fox slapped her hands over her breasts. "Is there something wrong with them?"

Boyd forced his gaze to leave the breasts and meet Lt. Fox's eyes. Worried eyes. Panic-stricken eyes.

"Wrong?" he asked, confused.

"You're staring at them like there's something wrong with them."

"I'm staring because they're magnificent. Can't take my eyes off them."

If I were to head-hop instead, I'd get into Lt. Fox's thoughts. Something like, Oh no, he doesn't like my breasts or What's wrong with my breasts? Why is he staring at them?

richardshagrin 🚫

"touche" Is it too much to pay to get a toupee if you need to pee.

Back to Top

Close
 

WARNING! ADULT CONTENT...

Storiesonline is for adult entertainment only. By accessing this site you declare that you are of legal age and that you agree with our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.


Log In