Omniscient narrator with personality

[Gryphos]

So for my latest story I'm deciding to try my hand at 3rd person omniscient. Usually I write in 1st person, mainly because I feel it allows me to inject so much more personality and attitude into the narration. And I'm wondering if it's possible to maintain this kind of personalised narration with a nameless omniscient narrator.

For example, this is currently my opening line:

Such a pity that the Empress should have fallen to madness (for naturally, it was madness).

And I'm wondering whether it would perhaps jar a reader to have an omniscient narrator, who usually don't show any emotion or attitude, narrating like this. Using sarcasm, expressing emotion and concern, perhaps even mocking certain characters, etc.

 

[Russ]

Not for me. I quite like that style. It feels old, quaint and famaliar, like a wise old friend telling me a story with a wink and a nod now and again.

 

[Trick]

Isn't this what Tolkien did with a more modern twist? I think an omniscient narrator with personality can work - like so many techniques, it just needs to be done well.

 

[Ireth]

I'd say it's closer to C.S. Lewis' style than Tolkien's.

 

[Legendary Sidekick]

I don't see that harm in this. I mean, to a degree your narrator has a personality, a voice. If that voice happens to be opinionated and a bit sarcastic, it's fine.

I always think of the narrator as being a character. Unnamed, but (s)he has a voice. Sometimes I can put a face to the narrator. It's easier to keep the language consistent if the narrator has a personality.

 

[Gryphos]

Thanks for the feedback, guys. I'm glad to know what I'm doing isn't too unusual.

 

[ThinkerX]

For some reason, the Op's opening line reminds me of Lemony Snicket.

Also reminds of a Simmons's 'The Fifth Heart,' a strange sort of Sherlock Holmes story.

In both cases the narrators know a great deal, but fall well short of 'all-knowing.'

 

[K.S. Crooks]

It sounds like a fun way to read a story. I think it might feel like it was being told be a friend or grandfather or whatever style of voice you chose to give the narrator. This is how it is to watch The Princess Bride.

 

[Caged Maiden]

I hated omniscient whenever I read it for other writers, until I had a friend do an omniscient narrator who was really funny and sarcastic. I LOVE the concept of a humorous narrator who is telling the story with a distinctively amusing style. So much more fun to read than a bland "this is what everyone's doing" omniscient narrator.

 

[Zephyr]

Reminds me of the books of Victorian and early 20th century writers. They were often written in a format that included a narrator indulging his desire to express an opinion of the characters and scenarios involved.

 

[Russ]

Reminds me of the books of Victorian and early 20th century writers. They were often written in a format that included a narrator indulging his desire to express an opinion of the characters and scenarios involved.

Moorcock does that from time to time as well.

 

[Mythopoet]

Thanks for the feedback, guys. I'm glad to know what I'm doing isn't too unusual.

No, quite honestly, that used to be the norm. And, in my opinion, it never should have gone "out of style", by which of course I mean that the gatekeepers of literature suddenly decided it was wrong. Personally, I do not like the modern, impersonal type of omniscient. I can tolerate it if the other aspects of the book are particularly compelling, but I have set aside a number of books because the omniscient narration is so appallingly boring it utterly fails to draw me in. Narration should, in my opinion, have some level of personality, which is of course what people mean when they say a book has a great "voice".

 

[SineNomine]

The novels that immediately leap to mind that use it are of course The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy series and the Discworld novels. Both are incredibly popular and quite enjoyable to read. I'd say the biggest trade-off for using that style is that it tends to push things to a more comedic, light-hearted storytelling. You could perhaps avoid that by fleshing out the omniscient narrator'a personality that will SOMETIMES be snarky and other times be serious, but at that point people start to wonder who this narrator is because you have functionally made them a character in the story.

You can absolutely work with all of that to great effect, you just want to be aware of what it is doing to the story.

 

[stephenspower]

Vonnegut was like this to such an extent that he actually put himself into this books, which is great fun, like Vonnegut showing up at Rodney Dangerfield's door in BACK TO SCHOOL.

John Irving's authorial voice is also very present, but in a more moralizing way, which I found offputting once I noticed it in WIDOW FOR ONE YEAR, then realized the moralizing had always been there when I read 158-POUND MARRIAGE. I'm scared to read OWEN MEANY again, the greatest novel ever written, lest the voice undercut my appreciation of the book, despite it being in first person.

 

[Androxine Vortex]

I personally think it would be interesting, you don't see too many stories doing this. Most of the time I feel like the narrator doesn't have a voice or style, that he/she is just saying things how they happen and are but doesn't have an opinion on things or individual emotion. I would actually really love to read a story that was told by a sarcastic narrator. Even if the story being told was serious, that added flavor could really hook readers. Not everyone is going to like it but it would be fresh imo.

 

[Arranah]

We write because we want to or need to or a story won't leave us alone. So, one of the things I'm thinking is that I should do this however I please. If no one else likes it, so what? If I'm satisfied, that's my first goal. Then if I find bugs in it, I fix them. I remember talking to Bill Downey at the Santa Barbara Writers Conference. He was a workshop leader and taught writing at UCSB. His book, Right Brain, Write On was helpful to me. He said that the writer is the authority on the subject. No one else is. So the writer needs to do what the writer needs to do. It's not up to anyone else.

 

[Gryphos]

I considered making a new thread for this, but figured it kinda falls under the subject of a personality-filled narration.

What about purposefully vague analogies? Take this example from the same WIP as the OP.

Jonwick could very much sense the hostility aimed at him in those stares. But he was nothing if not headstrong, though, in a subtler sense than one might imagine. Jonwick wasn’t strong like a brick wall, or a slab of stone, which could be pummeled again and again with the only thing breaking being the assaulter’s fist. No, Jonwick was strong like … grass, perhaps. Something like that.

First off, I'd like to know what you see in this description, because I've honestly only a vague idea, much like the narrator. And secondly, how do people feel about this as a technique? Is it cheap? I feel as though some people might see it as cheap.

 

[Legendary Sidekick]

Grass is resilient. It gets stepped on a lot, but it survives though it may be ruffled for a while. And yes, that was my immediate thought though in the form of an image. The image cut from character to grass, to character reacting to ridicule.

An interesting visual, since normally I don't visualize the analogy as a literal cut scene.

How I feel about it? I personally find in interesting. I don't think it's cheap. Cheap would be if you said he's "like grass, or steel, or a drum." Because then the narrative would lack meaning. "...grass, perhaps" gives me something to work with. The narrator didn't make up his mind, but at the end of the paragraph I knew (or felt like I knew) that Jonwick isn't a tough guy, he takes crap, but he can take it and that makes him… kinda tough.

 

[Legendary Sidekick]

I just wanted to add…

Between playing Wind of Ysgard and this thread, I've had a thought to narrate Addison's stories in third-person with a narrator who is actually a character. It's an idea I had some time ago, but it made less sense to have the character narrator come in for a chapter intro only for me to shift to first-person. (Currently, I have chapter intros to set the scene, and they're done with a regular narrator voice.)

The character is a valkyrie who is with Addison's friend, and I imagine the friend prays a valkyrie will watch over Addy. The idea—not one that's initially communicated to the reader—is that the valkyrie really is watching over Addison. All she can do is watch, in fact, but anyway her personality/voice would show in the narrative.

Maybe after the valkyrie is portrayed as a character in later stories, readers would realize it was her. Maybe I'd hint at that, maybe just keep it to myself and not worry whether readers figure it out.

First, I need readers. Then I can worry about what readers figure out.



Anyway, Gryphos, the point of whatever I just said up there is that I think your narrator with personality hints at ways to make my valkyrie narrator work. (I won't rip you off and make her sarcastic with vague analogies. I know Nissa as well as I know Addison—I'm pretty much set on their voices.)

 

[Gryphos]

Grass is resilient. It gets stepped on a lot, but it survives though it may be ruffled for a while. And yes, that was my immediate thought though in the form of an image. The image cut from character to grass, to character reacting to ridicule.

Good, because I'm definitely feeling this is the angle I'm going for for Jonwick's character. A dude who's been walked on for almost all his life, never looked twice at, but never broke or made any noise or fuss or did anything extraordinary ... until now...

An interesting visual, since normally I don't visualize the analogy as a literal cut scene.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this.

How I feel about it? I personally find in interesting. I don't think it's cheap. Cheap would be if you said he's "like grass, or steel, or a drum." Because then the narrative would lack meaning. "...grass, perhaps" gives me something to work with. The narrator didn't make up his mind, but at the end of the paragraph I knew (or felt like I knew) that Jonwick isn't a tough guy, he takes crap, but he can take it and that makes him… kinda tough.

Yeah, I see what you mean. Cheap would be giving the reader no direction, saying something like "he was like a dolphin, or a lightbulb" If I read that I'd be like 'WTF, pick one, dammit'. But what I'm doing is more just not enthusiastically committing to the analogy. The analogy is still certainly the correct one, but the sense of vagueness adds to the subjective tone of the work, which is what I'm kinda going for.