# Alternating character chapters... your thoughts.



## leadbelly (Aug 27, 2011)

I'm currently reading a book that has 5 or 6 characters that alternate chapters. Chapter 1, character 1, etc. I find myself having a hard time getting into the story, having any interest beyond a few characters. What are your thoughts on this approach? Is it as stilting for you as it currently is for me?


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

I'm with you. I don't like it at all. Alternate between two characters, maybe, but more than that and I go on to something else.

Mike


----------



## MLPMom (Nov 27, 2009)

I recently read a book that did this with three characters and it was very well done.
I have read others though were it was multiple characters and it was just confusing and not well done at all. In fact, I almost didn't even finish the book and I will not be buying the second in the series. I think there were around 5 characters as well.

I really don't know if it matters how many characters they are or if it is just how it is executed.


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

Probably depends on the book - normally, I'd probably say I don't like it if it's as high as 5 or 6... but it works well enough in A Song of Ice and Fire. As long as it's written in third person - I don't like books which alternate different first person points of view.


----------



## KateEllison (Jul 9, 2011)

I typically don't like more than 3, and even that's pushing it, because I usually end up most interested in 1 or 2 characters and if there are too many arcs it gets annoying flipping between them. But that's just me ... my husband loves books with tons of character POVs, like _Game of Thrones_ or _Wheel of Time._

*shrug* To each his own.


----------



## J.R.Mooneyham (Mar 14, 2011)

I've seen this in quite a few books. At least several big name authors do it quite a bit (although a bit more randomly, rather than in rigid alternating 1, 2, 3,...fashion). This may often work well in complex tales, with heavily fleshed out characters, both good and bad. Like anything else though, a lot depends on how well the author executes it in practice.


----------



## balaspa (Dec 27, 2009)

It doesn't bother me, really.  I kind of like it.  As long as it clearly states at the beginning of the chapter which person we are "with" then I don't have a problem with it.


----------



## Danielle Kazemi (Apr 2, 2011)

Depends on the style. Third person flip flopping I really like. It gives me more angles to look at the same story. If the book is first person, stay with one person. It drives me crazy reading as Joe Blow and next chapter Mary Sue.


----------



## ToniD (May 3, 2011)

I'm fine with it if it's done well.

One done-poorly example: a mystery which I won't name with the protag's POV only in the first third of the book, and then sudden  shifts, introducing five new POV chapters. One of them was a truly minor character whose only presence seemed to be to explain a tricky plot point.

Done well: the one that jumps to mind is Barbara Kingsolver's THE POISONWOOD BIBLE. Five different POVs, all unique, all necessary to the story, all adding layers of characterization and information. Just beautifully done.


----------



## mattlynn (Jun 10, 2011)

It is best to stick to two or three characters, and make them really distinct....


----------



## SimonSmithWilson (Jul 26, 2011)

When I was published under an old pen name one of my novels had eight main characters, first person POV, I told each characters story. Readers loved it, as you gave a different take on the same situation/event with an ever evolving story. I don't really do it now, but I still write with a massive cast and the stories are constantly overlapping and winding together. If the story makes sense and flows nicely then I am fine with it. I think when the story doesn't flow it doesn't matter how it is written. It is going to be sucky and hard to get into. lol... sucky is a word!


----------



## Iowagirl (Jul 17, 2011)

I like alternating chapters as long as the "voice" of the different narrators is, well, different. When they all sound the same I wonder why the author didn't just tell the story from one POV. 

Tracey


----------



## Sean Cunningham (Jan 11, 2011)

Three main point of view characters with their own storylines is my preferred limit, but I'm always willing to make exceptions. _A Game of Thrones_ springs to mind. It was a sprawling story, but I still became invested in all the charcters enough to want to shake some sense into one of them by the end of the book.

(Never felt inclined to pick up the rest of them, mind you.)

The most evenly structured three alternating characters/chapters book I've ever read is _Feersum Endjinn_ by Iain M Banks. One particular character was written in first person and spelled phonetically, so everee therd chaptah wuz ritten lyk this. It was a bit of work, but fortunately he was also funny and it's quite a good sci fi novel.


----------



## kisala9906 (Sep 4, 2011)

If it is done well I sort of like it but it can be done very badly and I have not been able to finish a few books that have done that and I just got utterly lost or disinterested.


----------



## Sean Cunningham (Jan 11, 2011)

Iowagirl said:


> I like alternating chapters as long as the "voice" of the different narrators is, well, different. When they all sound the same I wonder why the author didn't just tell the story from one POV.


Joe Abercrombie's First Law trilogy does that fairly well. The inquisitor Sand dan Glokta and the barbarian Logen Ninefingers both have distinct voices. It made them far more entertaining to read, and helped establish which strand of the story you were in at any given time.


----------



## Austin_Briggs (Aug 21, 2011)

It was done quite well in Terror. 

I normally don't have an issue with it, as long as the author knows what s/he's doing. It's damn difficult to do it well, though. 1


----------



## The Hooded Claw (Oct 12, 2009)

I doubt I would be willing to deal with alternating between five or six characters.  I've read books alternating between two characters, the one that most sticks in my mind is Fred Saberhagen's "The Holmes-Dracula File", where the viewpoint shifted between Doctor Watson (yes, THAT Doctor Watson) and Dracula. In at least one case he described the same confrontational scene through the eyes of both Dracula and Doctor Watson, and the differences were interesting--For instance Dracula described a flirtatious remark he made to an English woman, but Watson made no mention of this!

Saberhagen had yet another way to alternate viewpoints that he used in his Dracula stories.  He would have two story threads, one in the present and one in the past.  They would typically be related, for instance the past thread would be Dracula (who was a heroic, though violent and stubborn character in these stories) having his first encounter with someone who would end up as an avowed enemy, and the present-day thread would be when they encountered each other again for the first time in a century or more.  His chapters would alternate between Dracula's viewpoint in the past, and Dracula's viewpoint in the present.


----------



## leadbelly (Aug 27, 2011)

I'm obviously reading one that hasn't been done well 'cause it's taking me forever to slog through the 769 pages (that's iPhone size).

I don't mind 2 characters, that kinda seems natural in a way but 5/6 characters is just too much and I have to agree with what someone else said, I wonder why the author didn't weave all these characters together instead of doing it this way.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

I think it started when movies that do that became popular again, like Love Actually. However, most of the time as a reader, I can recognize that there is one dominant voice the author is most comfortable writing in, and other POV's that the author is just doing because he or she wants to show this cool scene over here ::waves hand:: but the main character wasn't there. To me, that needs to be very carefully evaluated, most of the time the reason the MC isn't there is because it doesn't ACTUALLY affect the main character. 

Writing in third person, there isn't as much of a shock to the reader to shift view points for a new scene, or chapter, but writing in first person, it takes a few chapters for me to get to like the character who's head I'm seeing everything from. To constantly change that up makes it really tough for me to identify with any of the characters. 

I really don't like books that tell a scene from one character's POV in first person then RETELL the same chapter from the other character's POV in first person. That's an interesting writing exercise, but not pleasant to read, at least to me.


----------



## GerrieFerrisFinger (Jun 1, 2011)

leadbelly said:


> I'm currently reading a book that has 5 or 6 characters that alternate chapters. Chapter 1, character 1, etc. I find myself having a hard time getting into the story, having any interest beyond a few characters. What are your thoughts on this approach? Is it as stilting for you as it currently is for me?
> [/quote
> 
> It works with skilled authors. But...five or six characters can be cumbersome. There are those you're not fond of and a whole chapter on their point ofview can be irksome.


----------



## Gertie Kindle (Nov 6, 2008)

Susan Howatch does this beautifully. She doesn't switch back and forth between chapters, but each novel is made up of a series of "books," each one dedicated to one character. Sometimes, a particular character will get more than one "book" such as _Dinah Losing_ and _Dinah Winning_. I'm reading one right now and loving it.


----------



## WriterCTaylor (Jul 11, 2011)

I've been complimented for this exact thing, but I'm well aware it is not some readers cup of tea. Some stories call for it and the story wouldn't be as good if this wasn't done. I think the trick is to not make it too complicated. Keep it simple if you are going to alternate like that. As a reader I like it as long as the characters don't take too long to make their reappearance. What I can't stand is alternating between first and third person with each new chapter, but once again, some people love that.


----------



## Ty Johnston (Jun 19, 2009)

Doesn't bother me, but I tend to read a lot of epic fantasy, which is often longer works with lots of characters. Author Steven Erikson takes it too far, in my opinion, at least in his later Malazan books, with seemingly dozens upon dozens of viewpoint characters, but for the most part I can still follow what's going on.


----------



## Adele Cosgrove-Bray (Sep 11, 2011)

As others have already written, it depends on how well it's done.

Too many characters can get confusing, especially if the plot isn't strong enough to support a large cast. However when Paulo Coelho used multiple characters, each with their own section in _The Witch of Portobello Road_, I think it worked really well - but each section was determinedly plot driven.


----------



## Ben White (Feb 11, 2011)

Generally I prefer scene-by-scene rather than chapter-by-chapter.  And, of course, it depends on the characters.  With Game Of Thrones, for example, I just skipped the Dany chapters because I found her irritating and dull.


----------



## John Blackport (Jul 18, 2011)

I've mostly tried alternating in time (MC's childhood, MC's adulthood, back again) . . . I was never happy with the result, and never published those attempts. I didn't like it very much, and I think I'd like alternating POVs by chapter even less.

Still, some people _love_ this stuff.

I think it falls firmly into the category of writing that appeals strongly to less than 35% of the population, so mainstream publishing's fixation on the illusionary "sure thing" has conditioned editors and agents to reject it as "unmarketable". It's not of course, it's just _harder to market_.

Since the new business model makes it easier to make a profit, you can probably make a profit with a story like that. Your initial quest for an audience will be harder than normal, but you might be rewarded with greater-than-normal customer loyalty once you hook up with them.


----------



## Tony Richards (Jul 6, 2011)

5 or 6 is way too many ... even the most skilled author would have trouble keeping all of those plates in the air. When I'm writing a novel, I have small interludes seen through the eyes of minor characters, for sure. But those are mostly one-off scenes. I certainly don't keep on switching between major characters. It sounds annoying.


----------



## Guest (Sep 23, 2011)

This seems like a lazy, somewhat canned approach, but to be honest, if it works, I don't object. It only becomes a problem if the reader notices and decides it feels too formulaic.


----------



## Sean Cunningham (Jan 11, 2011)

The Hooded Claw said:


> Saberhagen had yet another way to alternate viewpoints that he used in his Dracula stories. He would have two story threads, one in the present and one in the past.


Actually I really enjoy stories of this format as well. I read a lot of syndicated fiction when I was a uni student, including Star Trek novels back in the days when the Next Generation was still on TV. There was a novel called Federations which was set in the Next Gen period, the Original Series period and the time in which the warp drive was invented. A lot of those books I read were mediocre and I bought it because I thought it would be easy to put down and get back to studying, but I couldn't stop reading this one. Superseded by a later movie, I think, but I still loved the book.


----------



## Geoffrey (Jun 20, 2009)

Tony Richards said:


> 5 or 6 is way too many ... even the most skilled author would have trouble keeping all of those plates in the air. When I'm writing a novel, I have small interludes seen through the eyes of minor characters, for sure. But those are mostly one-off scenes. I certainly don't keep on switching between major characters. It sounds annoying.


Harry Turtledove has made a career out of novels written from multiple perspectives. His Worldwar, Southern Victory and Days of Infamy series each have 9 or 10 perspectives per book ....


----------



## emilyward (Mar 5, 2011)

If it's done well, I like seeing different perspectives. Especially when the characters are keeping secrets from each other or there's certain info only one character has. 

I think it works best in fantasy, and I can't recall any other genre that did it well. No, I take it back--Amy Tan can juggle alternating viewpoints pretty well.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Seems to have worked for GRR Martin. I've lost count of his PoV characters in SoIaF. I seem to recall reading that it is in the twenties, but he is a better writer than most.  

Million ebooks sold, Mr. Martin? Not too shabby.

Edit: Emily, I don't think the technique is limited to fantasy. It is often done in historical novels and "family saga" novels. The thing is that it is best in novels with complex plots that cover a large landscape or time frame. You are more likely to find that in fantasy, historical, and family saga novels than other genres.


----------



## lisarusczyk (Jan 16, 2011)

I'm a fan of Ken Follett's historicals and he has gobs of characters. He does it so well I can actually keep up with all of them throughout. I think the trick is to give each character distinction and a good, long chapter to let the character's qualities sink in and make her unforgettable before moving on to more characters.


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

I rarely care for such an approach. The only way it can work for me is if (a) I am more or less equally interested in what happens to each such character (i.e.: I don't find myself wishing certain characters' chapters would hurry up so I can get to the next one), (b) each such character is a distinct individual with something special to bring to the story, so that it is easy to keep in mind whose perspective I'm viewing at any given time and my effort to keep track of them all is worth it, and (c) the story truly benefits from all those viewpoints.

Part of the reason I gave up on Robert Jordan's "Wheel of Time" series is that somewhere around the 4th or 5th book, item "a" came into effect, as I started to find myself not caring about some of the characters' stories and wishing less time were devoted to them. GRR Martin's "Song of Fire and Ice" series started out that way for me, and I did not get past the first couple hundred pages. (I tried to like it, but couldn't.) That's not to say a single-character viewpoint always works, either, but at least I usually know within a chapter or two if I'm going to be interested in finishing it, in such a case.


----------



## Nicki Leigh (Aug 25, 2011)

I'm not big on point of view changes in the book where chapter 1 = character 1. I can see why authors do it, but as a reader, I don't like it so much. I'm in the process of slowly reading Shiver. I've heard great things about the series, but I find myself skimming through some of Grace's chapters because I'm more interested in what Sam's doing.


----------



## Tamara Rose Blodgett (Apr 1, 2011)

While writing the second book in my Savage Series I use the beginning of some chapters to switch the POV from one character to another. Since I'm writing in third, it is a terrific "perspective-deepener." However, it seems to make the most sense for flow when the MC is the main perspective and about every several chapters the beginning of said chapter starts with a supporting characters perspective. If it's every other chapter it would feel shifty and confusing ( I'd think). Much of the time, the perspective of the "supports" add depth to the MC. In this way, the character that should be receiving the most book time and interest is allowed to be understood in a greater capacity. It is sure more challenging than first!

J.R Ward does this pretty effectively in her Black Dagger Brotherhood Series. I've really enjoyed hearing the males' perspectives interspersed equally. My only complaint was the _lesser_ and some back story sections. They were too involved and protracted for my taste. But she was terrific at keeping everything straight for the reader and deepening characterization in this way. Multi-faceted to be sure. Probably, there must be a certain balance struck for it to be effective, which is subjective based on the individual reader.


----------



## rmbooks (Sep 19, 2011)

I'm reading a book now that is the same way.  I find it difficult to get into a character for a short time, then on to another character.  I almost feel like I'm reading several short stories.  I'm hoping that when I get to the end, I'll see how they all relate, but right now, I seem to be losing interest.


----------



## Tommie Lyn (Dec 7, 2009)

Ben White said:


> Generally I prefer scene-by-scene rather than chapter-by-chapter.


I prefer scene-by-scene, too. Tom Clancy is a master of multiple-POV-storytelling, and he does it scene by scene. I read a book by another author that was done chapter by chapter, and it was deadly dull and irritating. But maybe if Clancy had written that book, even in chapter-by-chapter-POV mode, it would have been great.


----------



## KTaylor-Green (Aug 24, 2011)

It's great if it's well done. Steven King does it beautifully in The Stand. And it all comes together in the West! But I can see where it could get confusing if an author isn't equipped to handle that format. Lets face it, not every author can handle every style. Each has strengths and weaknesses.


----------



## jimbronyaur (Feb 9, 2011)

I enjoy it BUT to an extent.  Three, four characters tops.  Also, the writing has to be good... the author must convey each character so that they stick in your mind.

The master at this is Dean Koontz.  He could write 50 characters in a book and make each one stick in your mind... you could go 100 pages without reading one of his characters but once you see their name, you're hooked... you remember every detail.

-jb


----------



## Julia444 (Feb 24, 2011)

I agree that it works well in the hands of a competent author.  I really enjoyed the changing characters in Rosamund Pilcher's THE SHELL SEEKERS; in fact, I thought it was actually quite a clever way to advance the story and to reveal the layers of family conflicts.

Like Ben, I think it works well in GAME OF THRONES (which I am currently reading), but I don't mind Dany's character that much.  

Julia


----------



## Ben Dobson (Mar 27, 2011)

Totally depends on your taste and the type of story you like. Fantasy and other stuff with big twisty plots does tend to depend on it though--it's hard to stick to the rule of 'show don't tell' when there's a lot of moving parts and you only have one set of eyes to see them through.

I don't mind it myself, and often quite like it. Song of Ice and Fire works for me, and there's no character I don't enjoy. There have been books where there's a character I find weaker than the others, and don't like their chapters. So I guess for me it's not whether or not the author should write multiple characters, but whether or not they can write _good_ ones.


----------



## Kimberly Llewellyn (Aug 18, 2011)

Jumping into a head of a different character can momentarily "break the dream," so doing that every chapter for five or six characters would be jolting for me. I prefer two or three characters, tops.

If the writer is going to use five or six characters in that way, he would have to do it well by (1) resetting the mindset of the reader to be absolutely clear whose head he is in _every single time _ and (2) every character's individual voice would have to be so _distinctive _ that the reader immediately knows who it is. Can it be done? Sure. Is it a tall order? Heck, yes.

I prefer to be mainly anchored to one or two characters to really get into the heart of the story, a third character is okay, but it's not usually as deep.


----------



## barbarasissel (Jul 4, 2011)

I share the opinion of others here who've said it depends on how well it's done. Some authors like Stephen King have a real knack for it. I think John Hart does too, and Jodi Picoult, although at times, in certain of her books the switches are kind of abrupt. What confuses me sometimes is the author who jumps from head-to-head in the same paragraph, but it doesn't stop me if the story is compelling. I just have to pay attention. I guess it's good brain exercise!


----------



## gsjohnston (Jun 29, 2011)

this is a really hard thing to do.  I'm reading The Eye of the Storm at the momrnt and White is able to move from character's head to head within a scene - I guess that's why he won a Nobel Prize for lit.


----------



## Guest (Sep 29, 2011)

dkazemi said:


> Depends on the style. Third person flip flopping I really like. It gives me more angles to look at the same story. If the book is first person, stay with one person. It drives me crazy reading as Joe Blow and next chapter Mary Sue.


In third person, it seems fairly normal and done properly it's a useful way to get more perspectives on a situation. I've only seen it done well with first person once, and that was Andre Norton's The Crystal Gryphon, which had alternating chapters from the point of view of the two leads. However they spent most of the book apart, observing the same events from different locations with supporting cast crossing over, which made it work.


----------



## jmoralee (Sep 6, 2011)

Some of my favourite books use alternating chapters - but I don't like it if one of the characters is boring or the author writes in a strange experimental style.  I also dislike it when an author spends a long time writing about a minor character they intend to kill off at the end of the chapter.  Why bother telling anyone about the childhood of a character about to be murdered unless it has relevance to the plot?  That often happens in horror novels.  It always makes me feel like I've wasted my time.

I prefer it if the alternating chapters relate to the main story, adding something to what happens in the other story strands, such as in the excellent novel Hyperion by Dan Simmons.  Then I enjoy reading the current chapter and look forward to the next one, knowing it will be from another interesting POV.

JM


----------



## S.M. Boyce (Sep 13, 2011)

@*ToniD *Thank you for that reminder! Poisonwood Bible is really the exception. It is incredibly well written, either because of or despite having so many points of view (not sure which it is, really). While I might not have agreed with or _liked _every character, I could at least sympathize with them and that's what gave the story its power.

There are pros and cons to multiple character perspectives. The technique does add a dynamic to the story that you just can't get with one character - you see so many different sides of the story's players and it allows for a better sense of dramatic irony. However, it can cloud a story, especially if the characters have similar names. And if a reader decides they don't like a character, they become annoyed every time that perspective pops up in the narration. It's an easy way to lose a reader.

The rigid style of switching between characters once each chapter also has its pros and cons; while some readers might like the guaranteed rhythm of switching every chapter, you run the risk of cutting the story short to fit the pattern. In doing this, you lose key details or alienate a character just because you didn't have the time to develop them properly.

So the short of it is that I agree that multiple character perspectives should be very carefully done. If you as the writer are stilted with the story line because of the switching perspectives, you might want to try a different approach and slim down your character list. If you're having trouble getting into it, your readers probably will, too.


----------



## DYB (Aug 8, 2009)

Multiple POVs don't bother me at all.  It's an author's tool - how well they use it is entirely up to them.  Some are better at juggling than others.  Some are better writers than others.  Whether it's one POV or a dozen - makes no difference if the writer has written an interesting story about people you want to know more from.  A rotten book from one POV isn't improved by the fact that it's one POV.  A few writers, like Martin, have already been mentioned as masters of juggling.  I'd add "Dangerous Liaisons"  by Choderlos de Laclos to the list as well

At the moment I'm reading "Dark Places" by Gillian Flynn.  She alternates first person narration in the present with third person narration about individual people (so it's almost like separate POVs) set in the past that shed light on the events the first person narrator is trying to unravel.  Flynn handles it very well.


----------



## Harry Shannon (Jul 30, 2010)

I enjoy it when properly handled, but it takes a lot of discipline and skill to "tag" multiple characters in a seemingly casual way so that the reader than make the connections. King did that brilliantly in Salem's Lot. As an author, I've enjoy having two people on a collision course neither one can see coming. Making each of their worlds as real as possible increases the tension.


----------



## CNDudley (May 14, 2010)

Harry Shannon said:


> I enjoy it when properly handled, but it takes a lot of discipline and skill to "tag" multiple characters in a seemingly casual way so that the reader than make the connections. King did that brilliantly in Salem's Lot. As an author, I've enjoy having two people on a collision course neither one can see coming. Making each of their worlds as real as possible increases the tension.


Funny you say this, Harry, because I get impatient with the collision course novels. Hurry up and come together, already, plot points! I'm thinking of SARAH'S KEY. Which leads me to my other quibble, already mentioned (Dany in GAME OF THRONES): what if one of the characters annoys you, and one you love? You just want to get back to the character(s) you like.

Must say, William Faulkner's AS I LAY DYING is one of my all-time favorite, multiple POV books.

Thank God books where one or the entire POV is from a dog are going out of style.


----------



## Linda Andrews (Aug 16, 2011)

I don't mind it as long as they're not first person. But much of it does depend on the talent of the writer. As for liking one character more than others, I think that's only natural. Maybe it's just not as noticeable with fewer characters to choose from.


----------



## ◄ Jess ► (Apr 21, 2010)

barbarasissel said:


> I share the opinion of others here who've said it depends on how well it's done. Some authors like Stephen King have a real knack for it. I think John Hart does too, and Jodi Picoult, although at times, in certain of her books the switches are kind of abrupt. What confuses me sometimes is the author who jumps from head-to-head in the same paragraph, but it doesn't stop me if the story is compelling. I just have to pay attention. I guess it's good brain exercise!


Jodi Picoult is the first one I thought of and I typically like it in her books. I agree that it can be irritating in others, so I think it really depends on the characters and the writing style.


----------



## Tommie Lyn (Dec 7, 2009)

CNDudley said:


> Thank God books where one or the entire POV is from a dog are going out of style.


One of my favorite books is _Dragon Tears_ by Dean Koontz. And the main reason is because of the scenes written in the dog's POV are so brilliant. I LOVED them.

I could just see a dog having those reactions/thoughts...the distraction of encountering the scent of a rodent "Rodent. Interesting." ...seeing a cat and thinking that cats have sharp claws and should be avoided...then remembering he was trying to find the boy...it was marvelous.


----------



## Tony Rabig (Oct 11, 2010)

A nice example of this approach working well is Robert Silverberg's chiller The Book of Skulls. William Goldman has used this method in a number of his books and it works to wonderful effect in his thriller Marathon Man (the moment when Goldman brings together the graduate student and super-spy sequences just knocks you out of your chair, a moment that couldn't be as effective on film as it was in the novel) and in his big book Boys and Girls Together. Don Robertson's MYSTICAL UNION uses the technique as well.


----------



## mdotterer (Sep 18, 2011)

I enjoy books like this, but only up to three or four characters. The problem is that unless all the characters are compelling, the reader feels like he's suffering when reading about the characters he doesn't like. I often find I skim through those parts to get back to my favorite character. But you know, that's all right. We all get what we want out of a book.


----------



## Debra Purdy Kong (Apr 1, 2009)

Alternating characters is okay for me provided the story is compelling and the change in POV is clear. Also, pacing's important, as I wouldn't want the changes to be so choppy that I couldn't get to know a character.


----------



## HeidiHall (Sep 5, 2010)

jmiked said:


> I'm with you. I don't like it at all. Alternate between two characters, maybe, but more than that and I go on to something else.
> 
> Mike


I second (or 20th, this) . I have read a few where I connect with multiple characters in alternating chapters, but it takes so much longer to get into the story when an author does this, inevitably the ending feels rushed. I much prefer one or two points of view, max.


----------



## stu_noss (Oct 1, 2011)

Not sure if anyone has mentioned Sebastian Faulk's 'One Week in December'. Just finished it and he uses an alternating character focus approach very well indeed. Its a bit of a slow burner but perservered and by the middle of the book its very very engaging. Even though one of the characters (I wont give it away but he's the main financial character) could have been the book on his own, he had the makings of an arch-evil character!


----------



## LaraLouise (Mar 12, 2011)

When I first started writing, I wrote POV by scene to ensure the reader did not get confused.  I then wrote entire books from one POV, which was a great work-out on every level, from pacing to keeping the suspense building throughout, to what information gets discovered, etc.  Then I started alternating POVs by section or chapter, depending on what I thought would create more suspense.  Conflict, conflict, conflict.  So now it's all about telling the best story!


----------



## AnnieOldham (Sep 1, 2011)

I don't mind it as long as it is chapters. When it happens more frequently than that, it gets to be too much trying to keep up with who is doing what. And as well as the character voices are very distinct. If they start to blend together, it gets too confusing.


----------



## Stacey Joy Netzel (Aug 3, 2011)

I tend to agree with Lara, but truly, if it's a great read, it doesn't matter to me.  If it's not so great, then frequent POV switches gets really annoying.


----------



## JuliaJamieson (Sep 19, 2011)

It depends for me. If the POV is third and the author is skilled, I don't mind it. Stephen King is the master of multiple PsOV in the third. 

That said, I don't like it in the first and I it takes some skill to pull off.

Julia


----------



## Chris Barraclough (Jan 25, 2011)

Just finished Porno by Irvine Welsh, I thought he did a great job alternating between a few different characters, showing some scenes from some very different perspectives. Although Renton was a bit of a boring prick and Begbie didn't get enough chapters.


----------



## Moppet (Sep 30, 2011)

I don't mind if I'm engaged in all the POV's.

I particularly hate villain chapters, though.  You know, three or four chapters in the book where they tell you what the villain is up to?


----------



## Tim C. Taylor (May 17, 2011)

Generally, I don't like cycling through half a dozen character points of view, because by the time I've read the last character and cycle back to the first, I've forgotten much of the detail for the first character. I have read a few like this but, to be frank, I've started reading more books with this framing style than I have completed.

Critics seem to like it, though. Hyperion from Dan Simmons takes this idea further with a whole part for each character in turn. People rave about that book; it won the Hugo; I found it overly complex and gave up. 

Greg Bear cycled through a half dozen characters in '/Slant'. I did finish this, and I get that /Slant is kid of about disconnection (I made that word up  -- there's probably a much better one), but I found the long wait for each character to get the point of view back ruined what was otherwise a good story.

So I guess I like having lots of point of view characters where that adds to the storytelling (Tolkien uses a lot of characters in LOTR, but the scale warrants this and he builds them up steadily). I don't like having lots of point of view characters when their purpose is to deliver some literary cleverness at the expense of good storytelling.


----------



## Rashaad Bell (Oct 7, 2011)

the author, Dan Simmons is really good at pulling this off. he will have about three different stories going on all at once that are unrealted until the very end of the book. then they all tie together in one awesome narrative. his books are extremely massive however. each viewpoint is like a book unto itself...


----------



## JuliaJamieson (Sep 19, 2011)

rashaad bell said:


> the author, Dan Simmons is really good at pulling this off. he will have about three different stories going on all at once that are unrealted until the very end of the book. then they all tie together in one awesome narrative. his books are extremely massive however. each viewpoint is like a book unto itself...


No kidding! I bought the book DROOD, and while I love it and will definitely go back to it someday, I had to take a break from it. It was just way too ponderous in the middle, at least for a straight-through read.

Julia


----------



## Amera (May 22, 2011)

There's a difference between several PoVs that are going in unrelated storylines (sometimes for entire books at a time) and several PoVs in the _same _storyline. In other words, two people are traveling together and one chapter might be from person As PoV while the next is from person Bs. I don't tend to like the former unless they intersect reasonably often, but I definitely enjoy the latter.


----------



## normcowie (Jun 21, 2011)

It would bug me.

Lisa Lutz and her ex-boyfriend wrote a book (Heads, You Lose) where they alternated writing it. They didn't decide up front what to write and didn't even discuss where they wanted the book to go. So one of them would kill off the other's characters, etc. 

The concept was pretty cool, the book was okay, but the really interesting thing was at the end of each chapter included the email where they forwarded the chapter to the other. They were hilarious, with insults, complaints and just general fun. They made the whole book worthwhile reading.


----------

