# 3rd person limited point of view



## Dewgee (Aug 8, 2010)

What is you opinion of the third person limited perspective in a novel?


----------



## Ilasir Maroa (Aug 8, 2010)

A very common one, and just as enjoyable as any other.  I'm not sure what else to say without some context.


----------



## ArcThomas (Aug 8, 2010)

I am disagreeing.
Third person has no limitations. It is liek taking on the perspective of a higher being;
You know all they know; See all they see; and can go wherever.
The difference there is with third person you can extend inot the location, minds, and plots circumferencing and even distinctly separate from the protagonists.


----------



## badjoke (Aug 8, 2010)

It's as good as any other POV, in my opinion. What the best point of view to use is, however, depends on each individual book.



ArcThomas said:


> I am disagreeing.
> Third person has no limitations. It is liek taking on the perspective of a higher being;
> You know all they know; See all they see; and can go wherever.
> The difference there is with third person you can extend inot the location, minds, and plots circumferencing and even distinctly separate from the protagonists.



Not in the case of the third person *limited*.


----------



## Dewgee (Aug 8, 2010)

What I like about it is that it sort of combines the first person and third person. I see the first person narrative as more of a long dialogue and nothing more between the main character and the reader. It's cool in it's own way. It really forces the reader to be a sort of detective. And it allows the story be ungrounded and as far detached from reality as you want. I like those qualities of it but I think the limited gives you an extra dimension without giving all that stuff up as you would with the omniscient pov. It supplies an extra voice that's not just the main characters that can take you out of his/her head. It's sort of the subjective-objective argument. I tend to favor the subjective pov because I think it comes out more interesting a lot of times, but it's nice to have that voice there to ground you back to reality when need be. Anyways I wasn't writing for any particulars answers or anything, just thought I get some opinions on it. I'm about 50 pages or so in on a story I'm writing right now, and unlike the others I've started and never finished I find this perspective works and keeps me interested in writing it. Also what do you think about a story that starts off in the middle? I mean where half the story Is flashbacks... whole chapters of flashbacks, and the the present in other chapters? Can this get too confusing for the readers, or do you know some stories where its worked out well?


----------



## Sam (Aug 8, 2010)

Of course third-person can have limitations. You're thinking of third-person omniscient, Thomas. 

It's common. Usually most third-person novels are written in a limited viewpoint. However, there's nothing stating that you need to keep it limited all the time. You can switch between limited and omniscient in different POVs.


----------



## SoNickSays... (Aug 8, 2010)

It is less challenging for an author, in my opinion. When referring to a person in particular in third person (whether limited or omniscient) you can use he/she, their name, a description of them, a nickname, a preference, and a number of other things. With first person, if you need to address the main character, all you can really use is 'I' or 'me'. I'm sure someone will prove me wrong soon, by giving more examples.

It forces you to use detail so you are not blocked with repetition ("I walked down the road. I saw lots of people. I waved and said 'hi'").


----------



## Killer Croc (Aug 8, 2010)

SoNickSays... said:


> It forces you to use detail so you are not blocked with repetition ("I walked down the road. I saw lots of people. I waved and said 'hi'").



I don't know if I agree with that.  Someone said in a previous thread that the word 'said' to readers is invisible.  I think in first-person view, 'I' becomes invisible in the same way, or at least less noticeable to the reader.  

I think first person also gives more insight into the narrator's thoughts and mind.


----------



## Dewgee (Aug 8, 2010)

I sort of disagree, while you're right about how you only have the "I" and "me" pronouns at your disposal I think that can be overcome pretty easily. I think third person omniscient is probably the hardest writing style for an author because you have to develop so many characters and so many perspectives while at the same time keeping the narrator almost separate from them all. I mean it really just comes down to writing style, you can use any perspective however you want and like Sam W said you can even switch between pov's. But I think first person is on one side of the spectrum while omniscient is on the the other side and limited is sort of in the middle. It's all about what works for you the content of the story and what your trying to get across.


----------



## Ilasir Maroa (Aug 8, 2010)

Killer Croc said:


> I don't know if I agree with that. Someone said in a previous thread that the word 'said' to readers is invisible. I think in first-person view, 'I' becomes invisible in the same way, or at least less noticeable to the reader.
> 
> I think first person also gives more insight into the narrator's thoughts and mind.


 
It's not really the same.  The "I" is very visible to the reader.  But Nick is wrong in that it's hard to avoid using it.


----------



## Waste. (Aug 10, 2010)

I think third person limited is an extremely good way of telling a story. At least for me, I like to switch between characters when I'm writing so using first person isn't the best view for this as I think it adds to much of a jolt for the reader.


----------



## J.R. MacLean (Aug 10, 2010)

Waste. said:


> I think third person limited is an extremely good way of telling a story. At least for me, I like to switch between characters when I'm writing so using first person isn't the best view for this as I think it adds to much of a jolt for the reader.



Yes, that's a great feature of limited third. You can 'head hop' and give a contrasting POV more or less through the eyes of another character.


----------



## Ilasir Maroa (Aug 10, 2010)

Third limited is definitely great for a multiple viewpoint story, but it's really no better for head-hopping than first.  Third omniscent is the best pov for head-hopping.


----------



## J.R. MacLean (Aug 10, 2010)

Ilasir Maroa said:


> Third limited is definitely great for a multiple viewpoint story, but it's really no better for head-hopping than first. Third omniscent is the best pov for head-hopping.


 
Wouldn't that depend on the story? For example a limited third might serve satire better? I think any conclusions to be drawn here are qualified by the story at hand.


----------



## Ilasir Maroa (Aug 10, 2010)

Fair enough.  But in general, I would say close povs aren't the best for head-hopping.


----------



## J.R. MacLean (Aug 10, 2010)

Ilasir Maroa said:


> Fair enough. But in general, I would say close povs aren't the best for head-hopping.



I'll need to hop a good many more heads before venturing further comment.


----------



## mwd (Aug 11, 2010)

Well, if you're writing in third limited and you "head hop" (hate that term btw), then it means you're actually writing in third omniscient, you just didn't know it yet.

Third limited is basically like first person except with he/she instead of I.  You don't get to change POV characters mid scene in third limited.  Changing POV characters _between _scenes is another matter entirely, but that's not "head hopping".


----------



## Ilasir Maroa (Aug 11, 2010)

Hehe.  Yeah, well, if you're writing third omni, I suppose it's not really head hopping.  So:  

*No pov is good for head-hopping.*

But the issue does exist.  And it's as annoying as hell.


----------



## Motley (Aug 12, 2010)

Third person limited is my favorite POV. It allows for multiple POVs more easily than fist person, even with scene or chapter breaks. And I agree with Ilasir that head-hopping is bad no matter what. There is a difference between head-hopping and omniscient.


----------



## Waste. (Aug 12, 2010)

If I'm going to write in varying POVs I tend to use third person limited. I want to experiment with writing a story with my main character in first person but other goings on that are necessary for the reader to know in third person. I know of one or two writers that do this and I find it a very effective way of telling the story. What are your thoughts on that?


----------



## PSFoster (Aug 12, 2010)

Since we're discussing POV here, I have a question: When writing in first person, how do you avoid so many sentences that start with "I"? Some of them I can rewrite without much trouble, but others insist on starting with that first-person pronoun.


----------



## Ilasir Maroa (Aug 12, 2010)

PSFoster said:


> Since we're discussing POV here, I have a question: When writing in first person, how do you avoid so many sentences that start with "I"? Some of them I can rewrite without much trouble, but others insist on starting with that first-person pronoun.



The only sentences that _require_ the first-person pronoun are actions by the protagonist.  Anything else can do without.  In my experience, the vast majority of superfluous "I"s are in sentences involving sensory data, the five senses.


----------



## JosephB (Aug 12, 2010)

Well, I once posted a story on a couple of forums that had a number of sentences that began with "she." On one forum, someone made a big deal out of it and everyone jumped on the bandwagon. Then they really started to jump out at me too. I did make the effort to change up my sentence structure and eliminate some of the "she's" and I think that was good thing, but after perusing a few of my favorite short stories, I came to the conclusion that I was making too big a deal out of it. 

So really, I think it stands out to us more than it does to the reader. In one good sized paragraph in a Raymond Carver short story, just about every sentence started with "she." And I'm sure that prior to having the "she" deal brought to my attention, I wouldn't have thought twice about it.


----------



## PSFoster (Aug 13, 2010)

I understand what you mean, Ilasir.  The story in question has a lot of action in it, describing what the MC was doing.  In many instances the sentences have to start with "I", or else be run-ons using 'then' as a conjunctive. Or else using (I forget now what they're called) an -ing word to start the sentence.


----------



## The Backward OX (Aug 13, 2010)

A great many of the posters in this thread (you’ll know who you are) should put their money where their mouth is and give the rest of us the titles of their published stories. 

That would be vastly, vastly better than all the poncing about that’s gone on here about what is better or worse, what is right or wrong.

Put up or shut up.


----------



## caelum (Aug 13, 2010)

Let's try to keep the discussion on track, y'all.

I prefer the third-person omniscient to all others as it allows me to jump the perspective without utterly changing the voice.  Haven't had too much experience with the limited third-person.


----------

