Whose Head is it Anyway? Understanding Omniscient Point of View

By Janice Hardy, @Janice_Hardy

An omniscient point of view can be tricky to write if you don't know who your narrator is.

One of the more challenging point of views to write is the omniscient point of view. You'd think it would be easiest, since it's "someone outside the story telling the story," and the author fits that description, but an omniscient narrator makes it easier to fall into a common writing issues, such as infodumping and telling.

For those unfamiliar with the term, third person omniscient point of view is when someone other than a character in the book is telling the story. This outside narrator knows things the characters don't, can make comments about what's happening (or about to happen) or see inside the heads of other characters.

That's the key to omniscient point of view: it conveys things the characters don't or can't know.

Seems easy enough, right?

The trouble is, a detached third person limited can sound a lot like third person omniscient, especially if it's not changing characters. So much so, that sometimes it's hard to know the difference.

The Ambiguous Omniscient Point of View

Let's look at some examples:

From John Scalzi's The Android's Dream:

Harris Creek sat across from Lingo Tudena, the Kathungi Cultural Attache, and performed his role for the State Department. He delivered bad news.

"I'm sorry, Mr. Tudena," Creek said. "But I'm afraid we can't let your spouse on planet."

Tudena's vestigial shoulder wings, which had been fluttering excitedly in anticipation of his wife's visa, halted mid-flutter. "Begging pardon?" he said, through his vocoder.

"Your wife, Mr. Tudena," Creek said. "Her visa has been denied."

On its own, it's hard to tell exactly whether this is third person limited or omniscient, because it really could go either way. It's clearly Creek's point of view, and that's obvious in the full scene. But look at the line I bolded.

This line refers to the emotional state and motivation of the other character in the scene. It's possible that Creek has such a great handle on alien behavior that he deduced this emotion from watching Tudena, but it's also possible this is an outside narrator who knows more about how the non-point of view character feels in that scene. Is that a point of view shift or an omniscient narrator?

(Here's more on Stepping Out: A Look at Point of View Shifts)

After reading the entire novel (which I recommend by the way) this strikes me as more omniscient narrator than third person limited point of view. Scalzi sticks to one point of view character per scene, but he also conveys a lot of additional information throughout the novel. Those details could be the POV's knowledge, but the narrative distance suggests an outside narrator filling in the blanks. The stinker of it all is only Scalzi knows for sure which one it really is. This is what makes this so hard sometimes. It's also a good indicator of well-done omniscient.

A word of caution: An invisible omniscient narrator can come across like author intrusion. In the above Scalzi example, the bolded line could feel like a point of view shift, and the asides for additional information could feel like infodumps.

They key difference, however, is the omniscient information is information that is needed to understand the scene and it moves the story forward. It stays in character (whether a clear narrator or an invisible one), the voice is consistent, and the information relevant. It’s not explaining why/how/what so the reader “gets it.” Facts are stated as that narrator would state them and then moves on.

The Obvious Omniscient Point of View

A full-on outside narrator is fairly obvious when we read it. Now let's look at something that's absolutely third person omniscient.

From P. Bosch’s, The Name of This Book is Secret

On the evidence of the items on her backpack, you might guess that Cass had led a very adventurous life. But you would be wrong. The truth is, up until the time this story begins, none of the disasters she predicted had befallen her. There’d been no earthquakes at school – none strong enough to shatter a window, anyway. The mildew in her mother’s shower turned out to be just that – not the killer mold Cass predicted. And that child spinning around on the grass did not have mad cow disease – he was just having a good time.

It's clear someone else is telling this tale. Cass is one of the main characters (her and her friend Max-Ernest) and the narrator is an outside person who knows everything that has happened and has an opinion about it. The bolded sections also talk directly to the reader, as if the narrator knows he’s telling a story to someone. This is omniscient narration in the classic sense. An outside narrator telling a story and interjecting their opinions on the topic at hand.

(Here's more on Are You Talking to Me? Addressing the Reader

Tone and Voice Can Change How "Omniscient" a Point of View Feels

The gray areas of point of view are when the tone and voice of the narrator resemble the character's voice so much it tricks you into thinking it’s from their perspective.

You can have an omniscient narrator who is fairly invisible and lets the voice of the characters come through (as in the Scalzi example), or you can have a narrator who has a strong voice and takes over for the main voice of the story (as in the Bosch example). If the point of view is an omniscient third, with an invisible narrator, it can indeed feel very much like limited third (Scalzi again).

I'm a firm believer in never trying to trick your reader, as they can lose faith in you and stop reading, so I'd suggest not trying to do that. But it would really depend on what you wanted to accomplish by being sneaky. Fight Club is a good example of a narrator who isn’t what he seems. But that tricks not only the reader but the narrator as well, so it’s not like you’re trying to pull one over on your reader. That makes all the difference. Never play your reader for a fool.

The Narrator's Attitude Affects How Obvious Their Presence Is

In Markus Zusak's The Book Thief, Death is the narrator and he has quite the attitude. Ally Carter's Heist Society is quieter, but it's clear there's someone outside the story telling this tale.

From Markus Zusak’s The Book Thief (formatted same as the novel):

First the colors.
Then the humans.
That’s usually how I see things.
Or at least, how I try.

*** HERE IS A SMALL FACT ***

You are going to die.

I am in all truthfulness attempting to be cheerful about this whole topic, though most people find themselves hindered in believing me, no matter my protestations. Please, trust me. I most definitely can be cheerful. I can be amiable. Agreeable. Affable. And that’s only the A’s. Just don’t ask me to be nice. Nice has nothing to do with me.

That’s attitude. Even though this seems like a first-person novel, the bulk of it is in third person as Death follows the life of Liesel, his book thief. But he pops in to share his thoughts from time to time. It’s a brilliantly done point of view, and it takes skill to pull something like this off well.

Let’s look next at a quieter omniscient point of view.

From Ally’s Carter’s Heist Society:

There had been a time when the girl responsible--the very one who had lucked into that last-minute vacancy only a few months before--would have had the decency to admit what she'd done and quietly taken her leave of the school. But unfortunately, that era, much like the headmaster's car, was finished.

Two days after the Porsche-Gate, as the students had taken to calling it, the girl in question had the nerve to sit in the hallway of the administration building beneath the black-and-white stare of three senators, two presidents, and a Supreme Court Justice, with her head held high, as if she'd done nothing wrong.

You can hear a third party here, and the information given is outside one character's perspective, but the judgment is softer, not so in your face. The narrator is clear, but they don’t have quite as much to say as Death or Bosch’s narrator. But there's still a personality there, with phrases such as:

• would have had the decency to admit 
• that era, much like the headmaster's car, was finished.
• had the nerve 

These all show an opinion about the events in this situation, they aren't just describing those events. And that makes a huge difference with how an omniscient narrator works.

(Here's more on Do You Know Who Your Narrator Is?)

The Difference Between Limited versus Full Omniscient Point of View

A limited point of view stays with one point of view character per scene. In a full omniscient, your narrator can head hop and show the thoughts and feelings of everyone in the room, and judge what they think and do. In limited omniscient, your narrator would follow one character only.

So why would you use omniscient to follow only one or two characters? Why not just use third limited?

Omniscient vs. limited third allows you to pull back and be more objective. You might want to focus the story on a few characters, but have a more detached "in the know" narrator to achieve an effect.

Heist Society is a good example of this. It follows one character, working almost in a voice over fashion that adds to the nature of the story, but it does pull away in certain scenes to give a more general overview or to dip in another head at certain moments. This perfectly mirrors the traditional heist movie format, so it serves a purpose and adds to the fun of the novel.

Carter could have easily told this just from Kat’s point of view, but you’d lose that sense of mystery as to what was really going on, because being in her head full time would tell you too much.
A separate narrator gives you just enough without giving the secrets away. Just like any good jewel thief. The format fits the genre.

In some novels, the narrator is as much a character as the protagonist, as in both The Book Thief and The Name of This Book is Secret. The narrators are people telling a story about other specific people.

While Death may take a break from Liesel and visit some other characters in the novel, the focus is usually on her because she’s the book thief. She’s the one who catches Death’s eye and the story is just as much about why she did as what happens to her. Why Death finds her and her tale fascinating is what makes the entire novel fascinating.

(Here's more on Lost in the Crowd: Working With Multiple Point of View Characters)

And Now, a Warning

Tastes vary on this, but I find what really makes an omniscient point of view sing is the narrator. An invisible narrator has a much harder time avoiding a told feel, because it can easily come across as author intrusion.

If you write in third omniscient, keep an eye on your voice.

Staying in the voice of the novel and characters will go a long way to keeping that omniscient style feeling like your narrator and not like you’re butting in or telling. Maintain judgment on what’s said, so it’s not just infodumps or backstory. Someone anonymous just “telling” the story often feels like someone telling the story. Put a soul behind your narrator – whoever they are.

(Here's more on How Far is Too Far? Far Narrative Distance vs Telling) 

Which point of view style you use is up to you. Some genres lean toward particular ones (such as YA and first person), but any style can work with any genre. It's more important to use the point of view style that suits the story and fits your voice than which style you use.

Juliette Wade over at TalkToYoUnivrse has a great post on POV , so if you're hungry for more, pop on over.

How do you feel about omniscient point of view? Love it? Hate it? Somewhere in between?

Find out more about characters, internalization, and point of view in my book, Fixing Your Character & Point-of-View Problems.

Go step-by-step through revising character and character-related issues, such as two-dimensional characters, inconsistent points of view, too-much backstory, stale dialogue, didactic internalization, and lack of voice. Learn how to analyze your draft, spot any problems or weak areas, and fix those problems.

With clear and easy-to-understand examples, Fixing Your Character & Point-of-View Problems offers five self-guided workshops that target the common issues that make readers stop reading. It will help you:

• Flesh out weak characters and build strong character arcs
• Find the right amount of backstory to enhance, not bog down, your story
• Determine the best point(s) of view and how to use them to your advantage
• Eliminate empty dialogue and rambling internalization
• Develop character voices and craft unique, individual characters 

Fixing Your Character & Point-of-View Problems starts every workshop with an analysis to pinpoint problem areas and offers multiple revision options in each area. You choose the options that best fit your writing process. It's an easy-to-follow guide to crafting compelling characters, solid points of view, and strong character voices readers will love.

Available in paperback and ebook formats.

Janice Hardy is the award-winning author of the teen fantasy trilogy The Healing Wars, including The Shifter, Blue Fire, and Darkfall from Balzer+Bray/Harper Collins. The Shifter, was chosen for the 2014 list of "Ten Books All Young Georgians Should Read" from the Georgia Center for the Book.

She also writes the Grace Harper urban fantasy series for adults under the name, J.T. Hardy.

When she's not writing novels, she's teaching other writers how to improve their craft. She's the founder of Fiction University and has written multiple books on writing.

Website | Facebook | Twitter | Pinterest | Goodreads | Amazon | Barnes & Noble | iTunes | Indie Bound