Timeline for Is it a bad idea to vary the voice of the narrator in third person (limited omniscient)?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 26, 2019 at 5:33 | comment | added | Ed Grimm | I've read a fair number of books where every chapter specified a narrator and told the story from that narrator's perspective, and found no real issue with this. There were a few of these where there was a narrator I'd learn to skip (I think David Brin's Uplift series), but that was about not wanting to see a disturbingly vivid view into the mind of a character I detested, depicted more artfully than I was prepared to handle. I actually preferred those stories that way rather than full omniscience so that I could avoid exactly those details. | |
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:40 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://writers.stackexchange.com/ with https://writers.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| May 20, 2016 at 13:46 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackWriters/status/733655065999839232 | ||
| May 18, 2016 at 2:16 | answer | added | L macdouglas | timeline score: -3 | |
| Jun 11, 2013 at 18:38 | comment | added | brianmearns | I believe Cryptonomicon does this to an extent. Contrast sections regarding Bobby Shaftoe, a US Marine Raider, and those regarding Lawrence Pritchard Waterhouse, a cryptographer and mathematician arguably afflicted with Asperger syndrome. I think it works as fine as long as you're actually shifting your POV (which it sounds like you are), as opposed to just focusing on a different character temporarily, but from the same POV. I think as long as the leader feels like they're looking over the character's shoulder for at least a couple pages, this can work ok. | |
| Feb 2, 2013 at 3:00 | review | Community Evaluations | |||
| Feb 10, 2013 at 3:00 | |||||
| Jan 2, 2013 at 15:35 | vote | accept | NateDSaint | ||
| Jan 2, 2013 at 15:35 | comment | added | NateDSaint | @Ash I came up against a similar issue as well, I just wasn't sure the best way to explain it. 3rd person limited omniscient in my case implies that yes, it's limited, but ultimately the narrator knows things the characters do not, but I want the reader to know. I like to think of it as the narration in comic books. But without the bombastic narrator from the Superfriends cartoon. =) | |
| Jan 2, 2013 at 7:33 | comment | added | Ash | I don't know why, but I've always disliked the term "limited omniscient". I think "3rd person limited" and "omniscient" as separate things is better. (Not criticising Nate, it's a widely used term these days.) | |
| Jan 2, 2013 at 6:42 | comment | added | SF. | I'd say most people won't even notice it - at least consciously. Which is fine, especially if it works at subconscious level. | |
| Jan 2, 2013 at 1:26 | answer | added | Lauren-Clear-Monica-Ipsum | timeline score: 12 | |
| Jan 2, 2013 at 0:53 | history | asked | NateDSaint | CC BY-SA 3.0 |