marycatelli (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
marycatelli) wrote2023-01-11 11:04 pm
marycatelli) wrote2023-01-11 11:04 pm
Entry tags:
necromancers nattering
Should I put in a scene of the necromancers nattering about an important justification for certain events? Which also has philosophical implications. . . .
It's the point of view question.
The story is indeed multi-point-of-view, but there are different ways to arrange that. You can have multi-POV where the main character gets the lion's share with lesser shares to a few other major characters -- or to dozens of minor characters, who each get one. You can apportion them so that all the major characters get large shares. (I did that in Queen Shulamith's Ball. Only when I shoved it into a word-cloud thing did I conclude that Marjory had taken the position of "main character" so to speak.)
You need enough of a pattern to make it clear to the reader what is going on. If you only have major character giving points of view, you may convince the readers that you have a new important character if you introduce a waitress for a scene in the sixth chapter. It works better if you have a scene by a bit character every chapter to clue the reader in that some points of view will vanish. Assuming, of course, that the bit character's view is significant to the story. Or can be made significant. (It is amazing, BTW, how much a story can change when you get outside views on the main character, or major characters. Sometimes it's an improvement, sometimes not.)
It's not perfect, I have noticed that you can narrow down the number of points of view as you progress -- perhaps the breadth sets the stage, and then you can build up to a pointed climax -- but there needs to be enough to steer.
It's the point of view question.
The story is indeed multi-point-of-view, but there are different ways to arrange that. You can have multi-POV where the main character gets the lion's share with lesser shares to a few other major characters -- or to dozens of minor characters, who each get one. You can apportion them so that all the major characters get large shares. (I did that in Queen Shulamith's Ball. Only when I shoved it into a word-cloud thing did I conclude that Marjory had taken the position of "main character" so to speak.)
You need enough of a pattern to make it clear to the reader what is going on. If you only have major character giving points of view, you may convince the readers that you have a new important character if you introduce a waitress for a scene in the sixth chapter. It works better if you have a scene by a bit character every chapter to clue the reader in that some points of view will vanish. Assuming, of course, that the bit character's view is significant to the story. Or can be made significant. (It is amazing, BTW, how much a story can change when you get outside views on the main character, or major characters. Sometimes it's an improvement, sometimes not.)
It's not perfect, I have noticed that you can narrow down the number of points of view as you progress -- perhaps the breadth sets the stage, and then you can build up to a pointed climax -- but there needs to be enough to steer.