Who will tell the story? The author’s answer to this question determines the story’s point of view. Once a decision is made, that point of view must be maintained if readers are to follow the action easily. The omniscient third-person narrator can delve into any character’s mind to reveal information the first-person narrator cannot know. The third-person point of view works well for J. K. Rowling in her Harry Potter series because it enables her to show the reader things about the mystical world of Hogwarts that Harry Potter could not know.
Many authors employ the limited-omniscient first-person narrator. This narrator can reveal only information that one character, usually the protagonist, can know. For example, the narrator in my novel Thief! is Claire, the protagonist. The entire story is told from her point of view. The narrator telling the story can tell the reader only those things Claire sees, hears, or thinks. Claire cannot see into the minds of other characters or know their actions unless someone tells her or she sees them.
Malcolm was walking up and down the aisles when Claire and Ralphie entered the drugstore. He waved when he saw them. “You’ve heard?”
“Yeah, we heard,” Ralphie answered him.
Malcolm looked worried. “There was $300 in that safe. How can I explain that to Dad? You know the sheriff thinks you two are guilty, don’t you?”
This point of view serves both writer and reader well. The action lets readers know that a robbery has taken place and that Malcolm is worried about more than just the money. However, if Claire had not come into the drugstore with Ralphie, then he would have had to tell her about the incident if readers were to know of it. That’s how readers learned of the murder:
“She’s got a gun. And they say she killed William Golightly and buried him in her yard. He just disappeared and they say she killed him.”
This point of view doesn’t work for every story though. Lois D. Brown uses two first-person points of view to tell her story Cycles, the protagonist Renee and her friend Sam. This strategy could be confusing, but Brown separates the action into chapters that switch from Renee to Sam.
After the accident, Renee:
Renee didn’t recognize anyone. Somehow she needed to tell them she was alive, but she couldn’t move, let alone talk.
We don’t have time for this. We’re losing her.” The urgency in the woman’s words was clear.
A few pages later, Sam:
The voices became audible, and he recognized one of them—Dawson! Sam stopped a few feet short of the office door. Through the crack, he saw a pinch-faced woman sitting across a polished mahogany desk from Renee’s neighbor. Dawson’s hands twisted around each other like two hyperactive rattlesnakes doing the Salsa.
This is information that Renee will need to know, but she is not in the room when these two characters are talking. Sam eavesdrops and tells Renee later about the conversation he overhears. By giving Renee and Sam their own chapters, Brown keeps readers from becoming confused.
Brown even manages to weave into the book some essential backstory information that occurred many years previously. She is successful here because she inserts individual chapters as journal entries written in italics to show the reader that this material predates the story being told. These portions are told in the first-person point of view of someone who lived the actions described in an earlier time:
Helen’s Journal, July 25, 1960
In the middle of nowhere, California
My contractions hurt. The humidity doesn’t help. Lost and alone. This is not how I wanted to give birth, but it’s beginning to look like I have no choice. I know if my mother were here she would tell me to be calm. People said she was the best midwife in all of California. But she’s not here. She’s dead.
These illustrations demonstrate several ways to treat point of view, but there are others. Just be certain that you always help the reader follow the action of your story. Think carefully about your point of view, always keeping in mind who is telling the story.