Thursday, February 28, 2008

Mini Fiction Seminar--Point of View

Well, I was supposed to be in Florida this week, teaching the advanced fiction track at the Florida Christian Writers' Conference. Unfortunately, pneumonia set in last Wednesday, so here I sit, still at home in Oregon. Since I've got the materials all prepared, thought I'd share them with you!

Here's the first session, which I would have taught today.

Are Your Characters Out of Their Heads?
The Elements of Point of View


Okay, first, what is POV (point of view)? Anyone? Yes! That's exactly right. (Hey, I'm a novelist. If I want to hear my imaginary class answering, I can." Point of view is the "eyes" through which we're seeing the story. It's also called Character Voice.

There are three common forms of POV:

  • Omniscient
  • First person
  • Third person
Let's hit the least popular first: Omniscient POV. Know the most famous example of this? Simple, Charles Dickens's A Tale of Two Cities:

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness. . . .

Omniscient POV means you're writing from inside everyone's head, and from the outside. You hope into whomever's head you choose, or you speak as a disconnected narrator. This form of POV is more archaic. It worked way back when, but not so much nowadays. Why? Because you lose so much connection and intimacy with the characters. Readers can't get as invested in what they're reading because it's being reported more than experienced.

Are there benefits to Omniscient POV? Sure:
  • It's an easy way to introduce information
  • Unlike first person, you can see everything that's happening.

But the limits outweigh the benefits:
  • Lack of intimacy. Fiction is all about making a connection. You don't do that with Omniscient POV.
  • You get the information, but not the emotions. Actually, you can tell what the emotions are, but the reader doesn't really feel them.
So, how about First Person? First person is the most intimate of the POVs. In first person, the narrator is one character, speaking in terms of I. Here are two great examples of First Person POV:

The first is from Francine Rivers's marvelous books, which is also a movie now, The Last Sineater.

The first time I saw the sin eater was the night Granny Forbes was carried to her grave. I was very young and Granny my dearest companion, and I was greatly troubled in my mind.
"Dunna look at the sin eater, Cadi," I'd been told by my pa. "And no be asking why."
Being so greviously forewarned, I tried to obey. Mama said I was acurst with curiosity. Papa said it was pure, cussed nosiness. Only Granny, with her tender spot for me, had understood.


The second is one of my all-time favorite beginnings for a novel, from Andrew Greely's The God Game:

It was Nathan's fault that I became God.
It is, as I would learn, hell to be God.
Nathan, to begin with, is as close to a genius as anyone I expect to know. If this story has any moral at all, it is that you should stay away from geniuses.

Both of these example drew me in right away. But why? Why does first person work?

The benefits are evident. First person POV is:
  • Emotive
  • Immediate, and
  • It really gets you into the character and the story. You're inside the character's mind, under his/her skin, right from the get-go.

But there are limits to First Person POV:
  • You can only tell what that one person sees, thinks, feels. Everything must go through the filter of that character's understanding and perspective. Think about it. Look at the room around you. If you're the POV character, you can only see what...well, you can see. You can't see what's behind you, or what's happening outside. And if someone comes in the room, you can guess what he or she is thinking or feeling, but can't know for certain. That smile could mask anger or sorrow. Those wrinkles on the forehead could be confusion or brewing rage. You can only know what you know. Period.
  • Your character must be strong enough to carry the story.
  • Writing first person POV is far more difficult to pull off than writing third person. You have to maintain that character's voice pitch-perfect, and that's tough.

Which brings us to Third Person POV, which could be viewed as kind of a compromise on the previous two. It gives you both intimacy and perspective. Third Person speaks in terms of he or she, and allows the writer to go into several characters’ heads (preferably in separate scenes. Please don't head-hop...). How many heads, you ask? As many as the story needs, but be sure the story really needs them. Usually you see anywhere from two to four or five. Sure, you lose a bit of the intimacy of First Person, but you still feel a great deal.

An up-and-coming technique is to have the best of both POV worlds: to combine first person with third person. Generally, this is done by choosing one character to write using first person POV. Everyone else is written using third person. One scene is written in first person, then several in third person. I wasn't sure about this first time I saw it, but you know what? It works, as long as it's written well. I'm editing a book right now that does that, and I've been trying it in the book I'm writing, too. It's a lot of fun. There's something exciting about writing first person, but it's less restrictive when you also use third person.

Now that we've identified POV, here are some common POV misteps.

What's My Line?: When POV/voice doesn’t fit the character.
Here's an example. The POV character is male and a construction worker. So is the following appropriate for his POV?

She walked toward him, wearing a white organza dress with a white dimity underskirt. Both were hand-embroidered with yellow sprigs and her matching yellow satin sash was tied into a swag at her left hip.

Yeah, not so much. Not unless he's on one of those Style channel design shows. Make sure your character's voice matches who and what he is.

I'm Gettin' Dizzy: Head hopping.
This one drives me nutty. The rule of thumb? Stick with one POV per chapter or scene. Hopping heads at will ends up being confusing and frustrating for the reader. And the last thing you want to do is give said reader a reason to put your book down--or throw it. Now, I know head hopping tends to be more common in romances, which jump from the hero to heroine. But even in those cases I'd urge writers to stick to one POV per scene.

Here's an example of head hopping:

Sarah knew Charles was angry. She could see it in his eyes, his stance, the way his fingers opened and closed. Tense. White knuckled.
He turned away from her, wondering how she’d gotten to him. She was making him crazy.
Sarah wanted to stop him, but she couldn’t. All she could do was watch him walk away.

Where’s the jump? Yup, when we get inside his head and have him wondering. Stick with one POV per scene or chapter. Your readers will thank you. So, for that matter, will your editor.

To See the Impossible Scene: Things POV character can’t see or know
I see this most often with desciptions. Writers want to sneak in physical descriptions of their characters, but end up doing so in ways one normally wouldn’t think. For example, this is from the Third Person POV character in the scene:

She pushed back her sumptuous, curly hair, a glint in her eyes.

Looks good to you? Well, try this trick to see if you've gone outside of POV. Put the section into first person:

I pushed back my sumptuous, curly hair, a glint in my eyes.

Yeaaahhh...not so great now. Unless your charcter is a narcissist, having her describe her own hair this way doesn’t work. And unless she's staring into a mirror (please don't use that old ploy)
she sure can’t see there’s a glint in her own eyes.

So, to recap:
  • POV is the eyes through which you're seeing a scene. Also called character voice.
  • There are three types of POV: Omniscient, First Person, Third Person
  • Omniscient POV is where you're not in any particular head. This POV lets you tell and know all, but lacks intimacy.
  • First Person is where you're in one character's head, and speaks in terms of I. This POV is immediate, emotive, and intimate, but can be limiting and difficult to write.
  • Third Person can be in a limited number of heads, and speaks in terms of he/she.
Last but not least, here's an exercise for you to try, if you're so inclined. Write one of the following scenes from all three POV angles:
⇒ Someone sitting by a loved one’s bedside, waiting with that person as s/he prepares to meet the Lord.
⇒ Someone waiting for a letter bearing the answer to an important question
⇒ Someone driving a car who just manages to avoid a collision with a semi

Feel free to post a short scene or two here so we can comment.

Have fun!

Karen

Thursday, February 21, 2008

What's in a Genre?


I received an interesting question from a reader (thanks, Nicole!):

"The genre thing is so confusing at times. The differences in classifications are often a confounded puzzle. Women's fiction as opposed to Romance? Mystery vs. Cozy Mystery vs. Suspense. Category Romance vs. Traditional Romance vs. non-traditional romance focused on relationship (between man and woman and man/woman and God).

Anything you can do to clarify these and other new and old genre classifications would be very helpful."

Okay, I'll take a shot.

Women's fiction as opposed to Romance. Actually, we started using the term women's fiction a number of years ago to signify fiction written primarily for women but that wasn't romance. Which, I've come to realize, is any most fiction. I mean, duh! The primary fiction reader in the CBA is a woman, so any of the fiction we write is, technically, women's fiction. So I think that's a genre that's mislabeled. However, since the category is still used, I think it's safe to say women's fiction is any fiction written primarily for women that isn't a straight romance.

So what's a straight romance? When I first started in publishing, I learned the following "golden rules" for romance novels:

  1. The hero and heroine meet early on, preferably on the first page.
  2. The body of the story is focused on working out the romantic relationship between the heroine and hero.
  3. There's a happy ending.
I realize those seem a bit simplistic nowadays, but in my experience they still apply.


Mystery vs. Cozy Mystery vs. Suspense. This is easier. A mystery is a story in which the protagonist doesn't know who the bad guy is; in suspense, you know who the bad guy is. That's the primary difference. As for cozy mystery, those are books in which the protagonists, who are solving the mystery, aren't involved in law enforcement or detective work of any kind. So stories where a novel writer (can you say Jessica Fletcher?) ends up solving mysteries is a cozy. They also tend to be a bit "softer" than some mysteries, with less intense murder and mayhem.
Here's an interesting place to check out the differences between mystery and suspense.
I don't agree with all of the points, but most seem on target to me.

Category Romance vs. Traditional Romance vs. non-traditional romance. Generally speaking, category romances are those identified by a line name, such as Harlequin Presents (which I read like crazy when I was young. LOVED Ann Mather and Ann Hampson...). Then there are mainstream romances, which are longer, standalone novels usually identified by the author (Debbie Macomber, for example.) But that's far from all there is. There are a host of other kinds of romances. Too many to go into here, but you can find some helpful descriptions on this page.

Wikipedia has a couple of interesting pages on genre fiction and genres in general.

So there you have it. Feel free to share your thoughts, explanations, or arguements. I'm always interested to hear what others have to say on these topics.

Karen

Saturday, February 16, 2008

Hope LIVES!


It's been a tough couple of weeks. I've been struggling with some deep issues and, quite frankly, they've been kicking my you-know-what. God's sense of irony is so...ironic. I mean, here are the lyrics to a trio I sang in church a week ago or so:

"How long has it been since you woke with the dawn and felt that the day's worth the living..."

Ummm...too long.

The weather lately hasn't helped. Loads of rain. Overcast skies. Gray, gray, gray. Perfect for my mood of late.

Then, this morning, I walked outside while on a phone call to a dear friend whose mother recently died. I was deep in thought, listening to her, thrown back to my own mom's death by my friend's words and pain, when I glanced down--and was met with this sight...



................................................................................and this one...



and this...

Suddenly, it was as though scales fell from my eyes and heart, and delight swept through me. My crocuses are here! Not just here, but blooming!! I looked up, and realized the sky was as clear as a child's smile and blue, blue, blue. And the sun was shining, sending warmth cascading down onto my upturned face.

Spring has come. Oh! Spring has come again! Just when I thought the gray skies wouldn't go away, when I let my heart grow so heavy with all the "stuff" I've been agonizing over, when I was so sure I'd never feel light again, spring snuck in, spread it's arms, and blessed the day with color and fragrance and warmth.

That's just like God. We get all caught up in whatever is dragging us down, tangled in the cords of sorrow or discontent or fear until we're sure we'll drown--and then suddenly realize Someone has reached out and taken hold of us. Not just that, but He's lifting us from the frigid, suffocating depths and setting our feet on the rock-solid ground of His love, peace, and provision.

The struggles aren't over. I know that. But today, for this moment, I'm smiling. Because those little flowers, poking their heads out of what yesterday was cold, dead earth, remind me it's never as bleak as it seems. God is always there, working just beneath the surface, bringing about growth and restoration and rebirth.

May your day be filled with God's surprises...


Karen

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

Takin' Back Valentine's Day!



I love Valentine's Day. Yeah, yeah, I know. It's become this commercial spend-fest, but you know what? It doesn't have to be.

I say we take back Valentine's Day. Make it what it used to be when I was a kid.

I remember, growing up, how my mom used to decorate the house top to bottom with cupids and hearts and lace doilies. Dinner was made up of red foods and liquids; each place was adorned with red napkins and a little gift wrapped in red. The centerpiece was red, red, red! It was great.

When I was a young newlywed, I invited our young couples' Bible study group over for a Valentine's Day dinner. Following Mom's lead, EVERYTHING was decked out in red, hearts, and lace. Don, my darlin' hubby, was good enough to help me both decorate and cook, which made the celebration all that much more special.

I still have some of the decorations Mom used to put up. Every time I pull them out, I can see her happy smile and see the delight in her eyes as clear as if she's standing in front of me. And I feel the joy of celebration all over again.

Nowdays it's easy to look on Valentine's Day as a ploy businesses use to get you to spend your money. But all I have to do is think of Mom and I remember...

Valentine's Day isn't about spending money, it's about spreading love. It's not about buying gifts, but about giving your heart and time to those you love. It's not about expensive cards or even flowers or dinners out, it's about celebrating the blessing of love God's given us, both in those around us and through His son, Jesus--who was the greatest Valentine of all time.

So this Valentine's Day, take a moment to share a smile, a hug, and a bit of love with those around you. Don't let the day go by without honoring the love God has lavished on you.

Oh, and if you feel like reading some fun Valentine's Day memories, check out this link: Valentine's Day Memories.

Peace--and loads of love--to you all.

Karen