Omniscient Voice

[Malik]

I never said you were naive.

Whenever a writer says that their first foray into omniscient is coming easy, I feel a grave disturbance in the Force. This could just be me being grouchy, though, because it took me about twenty years of hard writing to get a handle on omniscient and my editor still gigs me on lapses in narrative voice. (It's entirely possible that I suck at writing, though. I have not ruled it out.)

Discworld and the Guide are great examples. I look forward to seeing what you produce.

 

[TheCrystallineEntity]

I feel naive.

We're probably both right, in our own ways. Reality is in the eye of the beholder, as I'm fond of saying.

 

[Svrtnsse]

I mentioned that I've been 'studying' by reading Discworld, Hitchhiker's series, and The Lord of The Rings. Any suggestions for others?

This is a step away from the beaten path, but you should check out Finnish author Tove Jansson (Tove Jansson (Author of The Summer Book)).

Her most well known books are technically children's books, but writing is very good, and books have a quirkiness to them that even adult readers can appreciate. I recall you mention you read Diana Wynne Jones, and if you enjoyed that, you shouldn't have any issues with Jansson.

I suggest you disregard the numbering on her author page and start with these three.
Finn Family Moomintroll (The Moomins, #3) by Tove Jansson
Comet in Moominland (The Moomins, #2) by Tove Jansson
Moominland Midwinter (The Moomins, #6) by Tove Jansson

If you want something that's not a children's book, go with The Summer Book by Tove Jansson

 

[TheCrystallineEntity]

I have a fair number of children's books on my shelf. I'll be sure to check them out. In fact, I'll take a peek on Amazon to see if I can find them.

 

[Svrtnsse]

I have a fair number of children's books on my shelf. I'll be sure to check them out. In fact, I'll take a peek on Amazon to see if I can find them.

They're there. I've recommended them to a number of friends over the years.

 

[TheCrystallineEntity]

I never said you were naive.

Whenever a writer says that their first foray into omniscient is coming easy, I feel a grave disturbance in the Force. This could just be me being grouchy, though, because it took me about twenty years of hard writing to get a handle on omniscient and my editor still gigs me on lapses in narrative voice. (It's entirely possible that I suck at writing, though. I have not ruled it out.)

Discworld and the Guide are great examples. I look forward to seeing what you produce.

I could post the opening bit of book 1 of my omniscient series, if you'd like, but I think I would be too nervous to post it. I react badly to criticism, even when helpful. [Why am I a writer if I have such abysmal self-esteem, you ask? Well, for one thing, my drive to dream and imagine and discover is infinitely greater; for another, I don't plan to read the reviews. Ever.]
For some reason I keep expecting beta readers to, critically-speaking, tear apart my books, rant about how terrible they are, and vivisect them with butcher knives. Sometimes I don't quite understand why they praise me instead, since the above is exactly what I do nearly every day.

 

[Chessie2]

I never said you were naive.

Whenever a writer says that their first foray into omniscient is coming easy, I feel a grave disturbance in the Force. This could just be me being grouchy, though, because it took me about twenty years of hard writing to get a handle on omniscient and my editor still gigs me on lapses in narrative voice. (It's entirely possible that I suck at writing, though. I have not ruled it out.)

Discworld and the Guide are great examples. I look forward to seeing what you produce.

Yes. Omniscient feels natural to me but it is far from easy. In fact, it is really challenging for me but I like it. It's the style I prefer to write but yeah, I definitely still mix up my perspectives. I side with Malik on this one, if it's coming easy then it's probably not omniscient.

 

[FifthView]

I keep having to remind myself that I have great freedom and that I'm not locked into one character's viewpoint.

For me personally, this is the most difficult thing when writing in omniscient. Freedom, you say? Yes, too much freedom. At least for me, sometimes. As the omniscient narrator, you may know:

1. what all the characters are thinking, feeling, planning, scheming
2. what events are happening all over the limited set for a scene AND
3. what events are happening off-stage AND
4. what events happened in the far recesses of history
5. what the hidden elements are, like ongoing historical realities, cultural influences, the zeitgeist of the world -- AND, how these are or have been limited, filled with irrational bias, wrong, erroneous, petty or else beyond-human grand, perhaps sublime
6. and so forth.

When sitting down to write in omniscient....I have a cornucopia of info—but how to weave it? What to add in any given paragraph or sentence or chapter? What to leave out? Too much freedom sometimes; I have easily gone astray, I've discovered after the fact. The desire to go into long stretches of exposition or offer a wealthy bit of info dump is strong in me, heh.

So it has to be reined in. Doing omniscient well means knowing how to rein it in for the best effect. The best effect can be defined as what will engage and/or excite readers best—and not just in this moment, these paragraphs or chapter, but for the flow of the whole story.

Another, but related, issue with omniscient third is that it really does, or ought to, come naturally to most of us. Ought to. In theory. This is because first person and third omniscient are the most natural for us.

First person is something we do all the time. Speaking to a friend,

OMG I went to the supermarket last night to get some sugar—I had to make Bobby's pies, that he's taking to the fundraiser at his school, and just like Bobby, he didn't tell me until a couple days before the fundraiser!—and you'll never guess who I ran into! Selena.....​

We do this all the time in our lives. But we also do third omniscient quite a bit.

Debra went to the supermarket last night—she was still out of sugar and had Bobby's pies to make for the fundraiser—and she ran into Selena. Selena's David's ex; she's always hated Debra for "taking her man," and also open-carries...
​

This ^ example would be you, as narrator, telling the story about two people after-the-fact, i.e. after it's been related to you. Maybe Debra told you what happened, or maybe some other third party was at the supermarket and saw the whole thing and has told you about it, and you, as narrator, have spent the intervening time piecing together the details. In real life, perhaps someone might have approached you and asked, "Did you hear about what happened at the supermarket last night? Why would someone do such a thing?" and you, to oblige, begin to relate the story that you've heard.

So...Third omniscient ought to be natural. I think it is natural for us. But casual conversation is not the same thing as written fiction. The context is very different. At this very moment, I feel obliged to launch into a long dissertation on the differences, because I find all of this intriguing. But maybe I've written too much already, and I'll just leave it, heh.

 

[TheCrystallineEntity]

Now I'm really doubting myself. Thanks anyway.
I'm well aware that first person asides are a big no-no for Omniscient; I'm including them anyway. I know that I probably have no chance, that getting something as complex as Omniscient right on the first try is not only clearly cheating, but also about a one in a million chance. Though, according to Discworld logic, one in a million chances crop up nine times out of ten, but whatever.

I'm the sort who can write a 30,000 word book in two weeks if motivated [usually by NaNo], and a 50,000 word book in three [though that really exhausted me, doing that last November NaNo, so let's say four weeks instead]. I have this irritating thought that creeps up every so often that what I am doing is somehow wrong, even though I know full well it's not.

 

[Chessie2]

The goal isn't to make you feel bad. We're all here to learn. No need to be ashamed.

 

[TheCrystallineEntity]

I know. I just happen to be a self-depricator of rather large proportions. It's an ongoing issue.

 

[Malik]

First-person interposition in omniscient third is usually done as framed narrative. In framed narrative, you need to work in a break between scenes to shift back to telling the story. Think of the first-person scenes in framed narrative as the narrator getting up to grab another couple of beers from the fridge and explaining a thing over their shoulder as they do so.

We had this discussion in another thread, I think. Rothfuss's The Name of the Wind and Mary Shelley's Frankenstein are both written in framed narrative. As will be the final book in my series; at least, if sketched drafts and orphaned scenes are any indication. After four books told by the same narrator, I plan to bring him face-to-face with the reader at long last.

Some parts of this are really good, and I think I see what you're trying to do. It's hard to tell from such a small sample, but I think I get it. I think you're shooting for framed narrative. It would just take some shuffling.

 

[TheCrystallineEntity]

Who [or is it whom?] Dream is telling the story to is meant to be a surprise until the end, in which the true purpose of the heroes' quest is revealed, but if that doesn't work, then I'll change it.

My other series, of seven books, is either in third person limited [most of Book 1, most of Book 2, almost all of Book 3, and all of 6 and 7], or fully first person limited except for a few flashback third person perspectives near the end [Book 5].
For some reason they became pretty dark despite my best efforts, and so for my new series I was determined to make it as funny as possible.