An Upside-Down POV

By Kim Byer

Betty Edwards, author of Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain, teaches her art students to turn photographs upside down in order to trick the mind’s eye while they’re drawing a portrait. Seeing an upside-down nose and philtrum allows the right side of the brain to accurately capture shadows and lines without the pesky left hemisphere insisting a nose is made up of two vertical lines with two dark circles along its bottom edge.

When I create a logo, illustrate a cartoon character or layout a Web page, I flip my designs upside-down to note spatial gaps, channels of white space and linear slants that I wouldn’t otherwise have noticed. This process is similar to editing. Of course in writing, turning pages or storylines upside down is a conceptual technique, not a physical act.  

In Naomi Epel’s The Observation Deck, she suggests flipping over ideas, plots, or character traits—in fact, seeking any opposite in your literal writing practice or story that allows you to write with a different perspective. Write on a computer? Write by hand for a day. Does your heroine always do the right thing? Have her screw her life up in a single, imploding paragraph. If you’re writing a non-fiction piece with point of view, give the opposite viewpoint. Or, put your outline in reverse: Start with the baby and end prior to the pregnancy.

Perspective-shifting devices work well for single creative sessions. In the next day’s session, when you’re back in the groove of your original storyline, you’ll find your right-side-up point of view refreshed and your focus renewed.

A Unique Point of View: WOLF HALL

By Bonnie Stanard

Currently I’m on page 425 of Wolf Hall by Hilary Mantel, a 532-page book that has been critically acclaimed and won the Man Booker Prize. This is my second attempt to read Wolf Hall, and it remains to be seen if I’ll finish it.

It’s the 16th Century and Henry VIII is king. The plot revolves around his efforts to banish one wife and marry another at a time when England is in the clutches of the Roman Catholic Church.

The protagonist, however, is not Henry VIII, but ambitious, brilliant, and politically astute Thomas Cromwell. The reason I put the book aside originally is because, on the first page, I became confused about the point of view (POV). However, even after I resolved that issue, Mantel doesn’t make this an easy read and here’s why:

I. First things first, POV:

After about 25 pages I figured out that Cromwell alone is telling the story in third person limited POV. Sounds simple, but here’s an example of what will have you scratching your head:

She imagines everything is about her, every glance or secret conversation. She is afraid the other women pity her, and she hates to be pitied.

This passage shows you how tricky the POV. Because you’re told what “she” (Jane Rochford) imagines, fears, and hates, you think you’re in Jane’s POV. But no, you’re in Cromwell’s. He knows what Jane imagines, he knows what she fears and hates, and he’s telling this to the reader. He speaks for her, as if he can read her mind. In fact, Cromwell transmits the views of many of the characters, and it’s up to us to realize that these are Cromwell’s thoughts, even though the context makes it appear to be the inner machinations of other characters.

On first blush, the passage below seems to belie third person limited POV. The descriptions of Cromwell appear to be views other than Cromwell’s. This is another example of Mantel’s complexity. Cromwell is telling us what other people think of him:

“Thomas Cromwell?” people say. “That is an ingenious man…” He is the very man if an argument about God breaks out; he is the very man for telling your tenants twelve good reasons why their rents are fair.

II. The quotation marks challenge. Take a look at this excerpt:

He asks the doctor where he comes from, and when he says, nowhere you know, he says, try me, I’ve been to most places.

It’s not as if Mantel eschews quotation marks. There must be a reason why some dialogue is in quotes and some aren’t. Again, dialogue with no quotation marks:

So, Thomas, he says, if you know the king’s had Anne, get a letter to me the very day. I’ll only trust it if I hear it from you.

Without quotation marks, the pronouns “I” and “me” play havoc with POV. First person pronouns shouldn’t appear in the narrative of third person limited POV books. It is left to us to figure out that “I” and “me” refer to another character (the cardinal), not the narrator Cromwell.

Even when Mantel uses quotation marks, she often omits identity tags. As a consequence characters drop in and out of scenes without identification. And Wolf Hall has about a hundred characters. You’ll spend a good deal of time referring to the list of characters in the foreword.

III. The pronoun challenge:

His glance follows the duke as he bobs and froths; but to his surprise, when the duke turns, he smites his own metaled thigh, and a tear…bubbles into his eye.

The book is abounding with flighty pronouns lacking obvious antecedents. The above passage is not as confusing as some scenes involving three or four men. While you’re trying to figure out who is saying what, Cromwell is explaining the inner thoughts of some “he.” The third person singular pronoun will drive you crazy.

I recommend Wolf Hall for its innovative POV. Hilary Mantel has a style unlike any other writer. Critics, with good reason, compliment her erudition and craft. However, this doesn’t make reading Wolf Hall easier.

At Intersections with Point of View

By Lisa Lopez Snyder

I’d like to revisit Alex’s June 26 post about point of view (POV), which I read with great interest because I, too, have been questioning POV with the two protagonists in my novel. (Background note: At the beginning of the novel, neither person knows the other, and each character is from a completely different socioeconomic background. Yet, in each chapter, they are physically situated in close approximation, and individually they struggle with identity issues and a haunted past. It’s not until later in the novel when their paths cross, that their friendship leads to powerful and dangerous complications. At least, I hope it comes across that way!)

The story is told with alternating POV chapters—the male, then the female character. When I began the chapters, I used third person close narrative for both characters, which felt rather natural for the male character, but awkward for the female. I had been struggling for months with her voice. I know what she thinks, believes and how she acts, but why wasn’t it coming across on the page?

I thought I knew her. I drew up what I felt was a fairly good character description as background to help get me inside her head. But on the page, her voice, her actions―her very being―seemed measured and pedantic. Then I experimented: I put her in first person, and suddenly, everything about her and around her seemed to come alive. I could see her struggles, her doubts, and her flaws so much more clearly. There was an immediacy and an urgency about her. I found her voice!

Does it matter whether I have alternating chapters with alternating POV? I think not, at least not right now. I’m also not concerned with transitions between the chapters, since the locations are common reference points for the characters. The other connective thread is that each chapter begins with a very short backstory, thus creating a type of second story that unveils the characters’ troubled past. Basically, I’m going with my gut instinct on what feels right for the character and then worry about how it reads once I revise and then workshop.

That said, I’m constantly trying to keep in mind Alex’s superb take away from Tom Franklin’s Crooked Letter, Crooked Letter―to “make each chapter do its part to tell the story and make each chapter interesting by itself.” Well said!

POV and All That Stuff

By Alex Raley

Very early in my writing fiction, POV jumped up to challenge me. There was a constant battle between us. There was a story to be told. Who cared from what head it came? Finally, truth began to rule: the reader gets thoroughly confused when many voices try to tell the story. If not a tower, a book of Babel contorts the story. The reader is left to sort out the confusion or to take to the shelves for another book if he doesn’t have an e-book reader. All this can leave the writer a Prisoner of Viewpoint, while being prodded by colleagues to control the POV. Do we give up or find a solution?

Dwight Swain suggests that the purpose of viewpoint is to get the reader into the skin of the character. The reader then sees and feels everything as the character does. This lets the reader become attached to the character. The bond that is established, whether of admiration or revulsion, drives the reader to stay with the story. Many writers are successful in telling the story only through one person’s eyes. This doesn’t mean that there are no other characters in the story, but they exist only as the main character sees, hears and reacts to them. Any interpretation of what is seen and heard from the other characters is in the imagination of the main character and the reader.

For many writers, secondary characters are as important as the main character. That presents a host of possibilities and pitfalls. I began a novel that is still in progress because I realized that the story would make no sense at all unless the reader knew the inner thoughts of several characters. After trying many approaches, I settled on giving each important character a complete chapter, actually several chapters for the two most important characters. One of the problems with this approach is to have a smooth transition from one chapter to another. This became my nemesis. I tried writing transitions which simply added unneeded words. The next try was to pick chapter titles that would indicate the point of view. Some novelists have done this quite well. I zeroed out.

Then I read Tom Franklin’s Crooked Letter, Crooked Letter, a 2010 New York Bestseller and Edgar Award Nominee. Franklin has two main characters. Each character has his chapter at the appropriate times. The chapters are simply numbered. Readers know in whose skin they are by the way Franklin jumps immediately into the chapter with the character in action. What does this say to me? Get in there and make each chapter do its part to tell the story and make each chapter interesting by itself,

Point of View

By Monet M. Jones

I think POV is a lot of BS. Let me clarify that statement. I think strict adherence to a particular Point of View when writing a novel is as useless as Broom Straw.

Understand me; a field of broom straw undulating in a light breeze is a beautiful thing. I remember running with my brother through such fields as a youngster. My brother and I thought the waist high grass was wonderful. However, after stumbling over hidden roots in one and almost stepping on a snake in another; we concluded broom straw looks good but hides important details.

I agree that when defining a scene it is important to use a strict point of view. However confining one’s depiction of a story to the insight of a single character simply because some nebulous “they” has decided one should is BS; those letters may not mean Broom Straw in this instance.

I recently reread Of Mice and Men and thought it would have been a shame if Steinbeck had read his story to a writer’s workshop. He told the story his way. So much dimension would have been lost if he had slavishly observed a restrictive narrative mode.

I have decided that henceforth I will use third person omniscient as my usual writing point of view. This should resolve any conflicts about a narrative mode and of course make my writing more like that of Steinbeck.

DIALOGUE on ETHNIC PERSONA

By DiAna DiAna and Vikki Perry

The Question
I'm revising a slave's story and recently read in the NYT's Book Review about the maelstrom that surrounded William Styron's publishing The Confessions of Nat Turner (1968). What I got from the article is that whites can't understand the slave's life, and for one to try to write about it is insulting African Americans. I don't know what to think about that. —Bonnie Stanard

DiAna
I agree that it would be almost impossible to write as a black person without living the black experience and being black. Maybe a focus group on cultural sensitivity would help people to understand the "other side." This could also help in writing and style and connecting with your audience.

One person who pulled this off was James Patterson with his Alex Cross character. In reading his books, I was impressed that he “got it." But, I don't know how he got it, but he did.

Vikki
If you say that a white author can't write well from an African American perspective, does that mean conversely that an African American can't write well from a white perspective? I think writers can cross the cultural divide successfully if they navigate the waters very carefully.

There are a number of authors (in addition to Patterson) who have crossed the cultural divide and seemed to do it well. Three that I can think of are: Suzanne Brockmann, a New York Times bestselling author who is white and has written from an African American perspective; Brenda Jackson, a bestselling author and African American, who has written from a white perspective; and I don't remember the name of the white writer at the SC Book Festival last year who won a Newberry Prize for her children's book about an African American Little League team in the Jim Crow South.

I write from the male perspective occasionally, and when I bring my stuff to workshop for critique, I hope the group tells me where I'm going wrong and how to make my character more real. With one story, you told me that my 13 year-old boy should be a 13 year-old girl. That is honest and exactly the type of critique I look for.

Perhaps the same applies to writing from a different culture's perspective. Find people from that culture who will react honestly and tell you how to improve. Maybe this is where cultural sensitivity training comes in. Understanding how and what other groups think can only improve our writing.

I want my writing to reflect the real world (at least somewhat, since I like to write about supernatural beings) and it can’t do that unless I include people of other cultures. When I was writing my paranormal for the first time (I'm on my second version), a sexy male immortal witch, who happened to be African American, appeared unexpectedly in my story. I had to cut him because he was subverting my heroine, the vampire queen (she liked him too much), and she had to be the vampire hunter for the purposes of my story. I'm thinking that he is going to hook up with a merperson, but I'm not sure yet. I would be disappointed if I couldn't attempt to write his story.

DiAna
My comments were based on past experiences with other groups where individuals spoke up for people they knew little or nothing about. For instance, in an AIDS focus group, a white woman volunteered to represent the black, gay male perspective. I asked her what part of the black, gay male experience she could relate to. Was she black? Well, no. Was she a gay male? Well, no. And I asked her, "What part of the experience are you comfortable identifying with?” Naturally the discussion was wide open since the group had several white people who wanted to represent not only black, gay males, but Asians and Hispanics, with no point of reference to their experience or culture. We found this offensive and insensitive and presumptuous.

If Patterson can write about blacks, so can others. My point is that when you bridge cultures, you can not judge your success with your own peers. Since this is a writer's group, it might be nice to give yourself an edge and expose yourself to how others feel. My comments are for blacks who write as whites, as well as whites who write about being black.

I am of mixed cultures, but even with this birthright, I will never be black enough or Hispanic enough to fully speak up for either. And since I was raised in a town that was mostly white, my cultural exposure is very mixed and limited. I can probably relate to whites more than my own races.

Since my grandfather came to this country unwillingly, my thoughts may be different from those who owned him. You can't see something from another person's point of view and live through what they lived through. You can only write about what you think it was like, and that is what some people might find offensive.