Deep POV--Lesson 2.1 Narrative Distance and Immediacy
Jun 30, 2021 16:26:23 GMT -6
Post by ScienceGirl on Jun 30, 2021 16:26:23 GMT -6
In the intro posts, there are two terms I referenced that Jill Elizabeth Nelson explains in greater detail as we move into chapter 2.
Narrative Distance
Nelson defines this as a consciously or unconsciously conceived spacing. When a writer creates greater narrative distance, they literally "insert an invisible narrator between the POVC and the reader." This is called "author intrusion" and is not considered a strategy or technique for writing good story. A lot of novice writers might claim, "Oh, I'm trying to achieve a greater narrative distance" meaning they want to write from Omniscient POV. This is not the same thing, which I'll explain more below.
When they eliminate narrative distance, the reader will go through the story as though they are in the character's mind. They will feel what the character feels and see what the character sees. This will make the book feel alive to them Adding a third party will stall out the action and make the book less interesting.
Nelson gives a few examples of writing WITH a narrator (distant) and without (better).
And...
Do you notice the difference between these? "She wished she could" and "Jason's scowl caused" coming from someone different from the characters vs. the thoughts coming directly from the characters.
This is definitely something worth practicing.
2) Immediacy
Readers like stories that are "anchored in the now," as Nelson puts it. She describes this as flowing "in the psyche" during what she calls contemplative moments. This means that events and thoughts happen in sequence. For example, you wouldn't have pain before actually having the action where a character is hurt. By embedding thought WITH action, readers get a better sense of the here and now. Show the story as it happens.
Omniscient POV vs. Narrative Distance
Narrative distance is like an interjection. The author lets a narrator step in and interrupt the story so they can tell something about the characters. Omniscient POV tells the entire story from the viewpoint of the narrator. A lot of writing instructors will refer to it as "bird's eye view POV" because the narrator has the privilege of knowing everything that has happened, will happen, and is happening about the story the entire time.
Note that writing in Omniscient POV is a course unto itself. It's tricky, with many intricacies that make it stand out as phenomenal when it's well done. However, when it's not well done, it can stand out as terrible.
A classic example of omniscient POV is Breakfast at Tiffany's by Truman Capote. Here's a sample from its opening lines:
Granted, Breakfast at Tiffany's is an old book, written mostly in passive voice, and a lot of modern readers struggle to get through its pages. That disguises the brilliance of the story and the use of the narrator, because everything was/were/is through the whole book. That's really the trouble with modern writers trying to do omniscient POV. You'd still want to include the action and dialogue, but you'd have to keep those inner thoughts inside your narrator's head. So what Capote might have done is something like this:
Holly Golightly, a tenant in the old brownstone occupied the apartment below mine. Joe Bell ran a bar around the corner on Lexington Avenue; he still does. Both Holly and I used to go there six, seven times a day, not for a drink, not always, but to make telephone calls, since we lacked a private telephone. Moreover, Joe Bell took conscientious messages, which in Holly's case was no small favor, for she had a tremendous many.
Not perfect, but doable.
Why is this POV omniscient?
1) The narrator knows Holly's and Joe Bell's intent. He can relate to the readers why she went to the bar. He can explain what kind of person Joe was. In third person, he wouldn't know intent. He could only assume it from the actions he observes.
2) The narrator knows what every character is doing from every angle. He doesn't have to worry about what's behind doors or in different rooms. He sees Joe Bell take the messages, he sees Holly go to the bar. There's nothing he can't see.
In my humble opinion, tackling omniscient POV is something that should be reserved for a master of the craft. For someone who understands character and plot development like the back of their hand. For someone who doesn't trip readers up with minor grammatical and spelling issues. Because if it's going to work, it needs to be your very best.
That's why most readers these days prefer first and third person stories. That said, the Harry Potter series was entirely written in a subtle form of omniscient POV, and it's beloved by many. So not to say it can't be done. Just make sure you know what you're getting into if you try.
So, back to deep POV
Why Narrative Distance Does Not Work in Most Stories
This is an aside from Nelson's book, but I'd like to introduce the topic of Filtering.
In fiction, this is when you rob your reader of all those rich character and setting details to plummet them into your story and replace them with "fly-by" descriptions. Filter words include examples such as looked, saw, noticed, gazed, realized, understood, believed, knew, decided, hoped, etc.
Suppose you are writing a story about a character walking into an antique store and noticing a beautiful vase. Nothing exciting there, right? Why? Because we don't know ANYTHING about this beautiful vase. As soon as you say she noticed the vase, you take away the ability of your character to see its shape and colors. It could be expensive, exquisite, or intricate, but readers only picture in their minds whatever a vase is to them. If it's me, I'm probably seeing a clear glass thin-necked vase because that's what my husband always uses when he gives me a single rose, which is usually what I get from him on special occasions. You might be thinking something that's more ceramic with a copper-glaze finish. But how would I ever know.
Filtering means that readers never access the full picture of what you're trying to paint for them. This is where confusion comes in to your stories. What's meant to be your story and your interpretation becomes their story and their interpretation.
Writing in deep POV reduces narrative distance by eliminating filters and revealing your vision through the character's thoughts. That's why it's such a compelling tool for story.
Narrative Distance
Nelson defines this as a consciously or unconsciously conceived spacing. When a writer creates greater narrative distance, they literally "insert an invisible narrator between the POVC and the reader." This is called "author intrusion" and is not considered a strategy or technique for writing good story. A lot of novice writers might claim, "Oh, I'm trying to achieve a greater narrative distance" meaning they want to write from Omniscient POV. This is not the same thing, which I'll explain more below.
When they eliminate narrative distance, the reader will go through the story as though they are in the character's mind. They will feel what the character feels and see what the character sees. This will make the book feel alive to them Adding a third party will stall out the action and make the book less interesting.
Nelson gives a few examples of writing WITH a narrator (distant) and without (better).
With the narrator: She wished she could whisk back in time and redo the last few minutes.
Without the narrator: Too bad life didn't come with an undo button like a computer.
With the narrator: Jason's scowl caused Meg to sigh on the inside.
Without the narrator: If Jason's scowl turned any blacker, lightning would strike her dead. A silent sigh left Meg's lips.
This is definitely something worth practicing.
2) Immediacy
Readers like stories that are "anchored in the now," as Nelson puts it. She describes this as flowing "in the psyche" during what she calls contemplative moments. This means that events and thoughts happen in sequence. For example, you wouldn't have pain before actually having the action where a character is hurt. By embedding thought WITH action, readers get a better sense of the here and now. Show the story as it happens.
Omniscient POV vs. Narrative Distance
Narrative distance is like an interjection. The author lets a narrator step in and interrupt the story so they can tell something about the characters. Omniscient POV tells the entire story from the viewpoint of the narrator. A lot of writing instructors will refer to it as "bird's eye view POV" because the narrator has the privilege of knowing everything that has happened, will happen, and is happening about the story the entire time.
Note that writing in Omniscient POV is a course unto itself. It's tricky, with many intricacies that make it stand out as phenomenal when it's well done. However, when it's not well done, it can stand out as terrible.
A classic example of omniscient POV is Breakfast at Tiffany's by Truman Capote. Here's a sample from its opening lines:
I am always drawn back to places where I have lived, the houses and their neighborhoods. For instance, there is a brownstone in the East Seventies where, during the early years of the war, I had my first New York apartment. It was one room crowded with attic furniture, a sofa and fat chairs upholstered in that itchy, particular red velvet that one associates with hot days on a tram. The walls were stucco, and a color rather like tobacco-spit. Everywhere, in the bathroom too, there were prints of Roman ruins freckled brown with age. The single window looked out on a fire escape. Even so, my spirits heightened whenever I felt in my pocket the key to this apartment; with all its gloom, it still was a place of my own, the first, and my books were there, and jars of pencils to sharpen, everything I needed, so I felt, to become the writer I wanted to be.
It never occurred to me in those days to write about Holly Golightly, and probably it would not now except for a conversation I had with Joe Bell that set the whole memory of her in motion again.
Holly Golightly had been a tenant in the old brownstone; she'd occupied the apartment below mine. As for Joe Bell, he ran a bar around the corner on Lexington Avenue; he still does. Both Holly and I used to go there six, seven times a day, not for a drink, not always, but to make telephone calls: during the war a private telephone was hard to come by. Moreover, Joe Bell was good about taking messages, which in Holly's case was no small favor, for she had a tremendous many.
It never occurred to me in those days to write about Holly Golightly, and probably it would not now except for a conversation I had with Joe Bell that set the whole memory of her in motion again.
Holly Golightly had been a tenant in the old brownstone; she'd occupied the apartment below mine. As for Joe Bell, he ran a bar around the corner on Lexington Avenue; he still does. Both Holly and I used to go there six, seven times a day, not for a drink, not always, but to make telephone calls: during the war a private telephone was hard to come by. Moreover, Joe Bell was good about taking messages, which in Holly's case was no small favor, for she had a tremendous many.
Holly Golightly, a tenant in the old brownstone occupied the apartment below mine. Joe Bell ran a bar around the corner on Lexington Avenue; he still does. Both Holly and I used to go there six, seven times a day, not for a drink, not always, but to make telephone calls, since we lacked a private telephone. Moreover, Joe Bell took conscientious messages, which in Holly's case was no small favor, for she had a tremendous many.
Not perfect, but doable.
Why is this POV omniscient?
1) The narrator knows Holly's and Joe Bell's intent. He can relate to the readers why she went to the bar. He can explain what kind of person Joe was. In third person, he wouldn't know intent. He could only assume it from the actions he observes.
2) The narrator knows what every character is doing from every angle. He doesn't have to worry about what's behind doors or in different rooms. He sees Joe Bell take the messages, he sees Holly go to the bar. There's nothing he can't see.
In my humble opinion, tackling omniscient POV is something that should be reserved for a master of the craft. For someone who understands character and plot development like the back of their hand. For someone who doesn't trip readers up with minor grammatical and spelling issues. Because if it's going to work, it needs to be your very best.
That's why most readers these days prefer first and third person stories. That said, the Harry Potter series was entirely written in a subtle form of omniscient POV, and it's beloved by many. So not to say it can't be done. Just make sure you know what you're getting into if you try.
So, back to deep POV
Why Narrative Distance Does Not Work in Most Stories
This is an aside from Nelson's book, but I'd like to introduce the topic of Filtering.
In fiction, this is when you rob your reader of all those rich character and setting details to plummet them into your story and replace them with "fly-by" descriptions. Filter words include examples such as looked, saw, noticed, gazed, realized, understood, believed, knew, decided, hoped, etc.
Suppose you are writing a story about a character walking into an antique store and noticing a beautiful vase. Nothing exciting there, right? Why? Because we don't know ANYTHING about this beautiful vase. As soon as you say she noticed the vase, you take away the ability of your character to see its shape and colors. It could be expensive, exquisite, or intricate, but readers only picture in their minds whatever a vase is to them. If it's me, I'm probably seeing a clear glass thin-necked vase because that's what my husband always uses when he gives me a single rose, which is usually what I get from him on special occasions. You might be thinking something that's more ceramic with a copper-glaze finish. But how would I ever know.
Filtering means that readers never access the full picture of what you're trying to paint for them. This is where confusion comes in to your stories. What's meant to be your story and your interpretation becomes their story and their interpretation.
Writing in deep POV reduces narrative distance by eliminating filters and revealing your vision through the character's thoughts. That's why it's such a compelling tool for story.
You add them to your profile as you do them around the forum.
