POV: To jump or not to jump
November 6, 2011
Any one who engages in creative writing these days, be they student, amateur writer or novelist, knows the term POV, or Point of View. It’s the term which means, whose eyes are we seeing the story through while we read? Which character’s head are we in? Modern literary experts and novices alike would have us believe that we can only subject our readers to one POV in any given story. To do otherwise is called “jumping POV” or even “head jumping”, and it’s regarded as a capital literary crime.
Can anyone tell me when jumping POV became an offense? When did maintaining one POV become “The Law”? When did jumping POV fall out of favor, leaving readers to slog their way through too many novels that had the potential to be brilliant if only their authors hadn’t been so timid? Seriously, when did we stop taking a chance with our art and fall victim to the mundane rule of one POV?
One of the world’s best loved books is Pride and Prejudice and Austen is considered one of the finest authors of all time. Yet, in P&P, which many consider her master work, we spend time not only in Eliza Bennett’s head, but also Mr. and Mrs. Bennett, Charlotte Lucas, and to a lesser extend Aunt Gardiner. We even get to view the world from Mr. Darcy’s eyes from time to time.
Leo Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina is another example. The book is purposely divided into segments of Anna’s POV and Lenin’s POV, yet within these segments we jump heads into Vronsky’s arrogant, narrow little mind, and also into Kitty Levin’s and Stephan Oblonsky’s.
Stephen King is another great author who doesn’t tell a story from one POV. He head jumps and also offers the omniscient POV from time to time for good measure. I’d hate for one of the POV Nazis that I see on many online fiction sites take a blue pencil to ‘Salem’s Lot.
I will continue to write from whatever POV I choose, and if I decide to jump, I respect my readers enough to believe they’ll be able to follow me. And to my fellow authors who might be reading this, feel free to jump POV all you’d like. I’m pretty sure I can keep up.
Deborah Winter-Blood 
November 6, 2011 at 18:45
Well said Debi.
Congrats on the interview and your increasintg book sales.
November 6, 2011 at 19:30
Thank you, John! I’m so glad you agree with me about POV.
November 6, 2011 at 20:37
Completely agree. POV variety helps bring together all aspects of the story in my opinion.
November 6, 2011 at 21:33
I can’t pay attention to POV. It spoils my creativity.
Great post.
November 7, 2011 at 15:59
I think the distinction at staying with a single POV lies in the convention that the short story being so SHORT that inserting multiple viewpoints can be confusing. A novel or novella is a different story entirely, and almost demands various POvs. But I get really vexed with my writing group that swings wildly among POV and is blissfully unaware that it’s even something to consider.
November 14, 2011 at 12:21
Well said Deborah, I completely agree.
November 23, 2011 at 16:53
One of the best things (for me) about Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina was the multiple POVs — I remember very clearly the brief scene where the POV shifted to Levin’s hunting dog!
It is unfortunate that “jumping POV” is nowadays regarded as a capital literary crime. That greatly limits creative options, in my humble opinion.
I think this quote brings up a good point:
“When God went out of fashion in the first part of the twentieth century, the omnisicent point of view, which was so common, went with Him, to be replaced by the nicely psychological subjective point of view. This is when the author is as close to the character – one character – as in first person. This is the most common PoV used today…”
(from http://lindaproud.wordpress.com/2011/02/08/a-chameleons-eye-view/)
I’m glad to read that you (and others who have commented here) will continue to write from whatever POV you choose 😉
Real writers are able to utilize any device in order to further the style/structure of a story.
November 23, 2011 at 16:58
Wow, that IS a marvelous quote and rings so true! Thank you, Jess!