Multiple POVs, good bad or indifferent?

[Fast Learner]

I love it, especially the way that GRRM handles it in ASOIAF. It's what makes Magnolia one of my all-time favorite movies. I'm almost never bothered by it, except in the rare case where I couldn't care less about a particular character and/or storyline that I'm repeatedly returned to.

In fact, it's one of the reasons that I like the second set of five Chronicles of Amber books so much, though neither set is actually mpov: you get a very different perspective on many of the characters once you get out of Corwin's head. Great stuff. I would have swapped my car for a set of mpov Amber books, had Mr. Zelazny been able to stay a while longer.

 

[Nifft]

That's the right story, but there are a quite a few times when important events are seen through the eyes of other characters; Duke Isgrimnur being a chief example (there are others, but I only have the first book in front of me now).

My memory may be faulty, then. Oh well.

Thanks, -- N

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

I think it is about execution. I've read several books where it works great, but I just stopped reading a book where it was done in such an annoying fashion that it drove me up the wall. The book was working from three main POVs in different locations, each chapter changed which POV. I think in order to try and create a sense of urgency, and to show that things were happening at the same time in each location, each chapter was about two to three pages long. It was very tiresome reading, and I hit the point where I couldn't stand it any longer (the fact that there were some massive plot holes that started showing up didn't help keep my interest).

To be honest, I've read some books that are entirely single POV that I think would have benefitted from being written from multiple POVs.

 

[Wombat]

There are times when it is handled well and times when it is handled poorly.

I am currently reading on the great examples of two PoVs in a single series -- Patrick O'Brian's Aubrey/Maturin series. By its very nature it requires two voices, two viewpoints, sometimes separated by hundreds of miles. In this series it works very well.

Another book that handled this astonishingly well was Jonathon Strange & Mr Norrell. You have in that book two major view points and a host of minor ones, yet the whole of the novel keeps everything neat.

On the other hand, I read Silence of the Lambs and found the shifting points of view extremely distracting -- they jarred and didn't ring true.

So, different authors, different tastes, and different experiences.

Done right, it is wonderful; done wrong, I get angry.

 

[ThirdWizard]

A Tale of Two Cities used it to great effect. Also The Stand. Personally, I enjoy it.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

LotR didn't really have different PoV's, as much as it had the narrator following two different groups.

Correct. It's been a while, admittedly, but I only recall one POV in LotR-- the narrator.

That the narrator focuses on different groups at different times is not a change in POV.

 

[David Howery]

like any other style of writing, it can be done well or badly. Cornelius Ryan did it extremely well in his three WW2 novels.... but Harry Turtledove doesn't do it so well in all of his massive alternate history novels...