
Today’s post is by editor Tiffany Yates Martin (@FoxPrintEd).
Choosing the most effective perspective from which to tell your story is a combination of both the technical and the creative. It’s useful to consider the benefits and limitations of each POV, the feel that each POV might lend, and how well it fits the tone and tenor of your story— as well as its genre. Let’s look the most common POVs today and what each offers you.
Third-person omniscient POV
In clarifying the conventions of each point of view, I find it useful to imagine the author’s perspective as that of a fly.
In third-person omniscient, the fly is untethered, able to flit anywhere in time and space, privy to all knowledge and information that ever existed in the world, and even able to eavesdrop on characters’ thoughts. The fly is all-seeing and knows things the characters may not.
This gives the author enormous leeway in presenting information. Nothing is off-limits, including how every character in the room thinks and feels. But only from an external point of view. The omniscient fly is still separate from the characters. It may be a witness to what’s going on inside of them, but only as if overhearing it, not experiencing it firsthand.
Omniscient can be a difficult POV to work with because it can feel formal or distant or dry. It’s more common in certain genres than others—like fantasy, science fiction, and literary novels—and can work well if handled skillfully to offer readers almost a panoramic view of the world of the story and its characters.
But it is also one of the easiest points of view to go careening off the rails if misused, resulting in head-hopping that may leave readers feeling disoriented or confused.
Third-person limited POV
With third-person limited, the fly is on a leash attached to a single POV character. The fly can report on anything within its purview, including things the character may or may not notice, like someone sneaking up behind her.
It’s also privy to the character’s thoughts and feelings and reactions in the same way that omniscient POV is, as if eavesdropping on what’s going on inside a character, but it’s still a separate entity and not directly enmeshed with the character’s firsthand thoughts or feelings.
This limits what you as the author are able to report on, so to speak, but it also offers a somewhat more intimate perspective than omniscient in that it sticks with the perspective of a single character at a time (per scene or separate section).
This is also a very common voice in the current market. This point of view is easily adaptable to various genres and tones, from highbrow literary to more accessible popular fiction.
“Deep” third-person limited POV and first-person POV
Even more popular lately, it seems, is a version of third-person point of view often called deep or close third-person. This follows all the conventions of regular third-person limited, with the addition that the fly actually is, for all intents and purposes, the character. They are as one. The fly thinks the character’s thoughts, feels his feelings, reacts directly as if it were the character. The fly—meaning you as the author—is essentially a window into the character’s soul.
In this regard it’s very similar to first-person point of view: Basically there is no fly. As in deep third, the fly lives inside the character’s heart and head and behind her eyes (also, ew, sorry for the visual). And every single thing the character experiences, feels, knows, etc., is filtered through the fly.
First-person is increasingly popular, especially in genre fiction, but it also has a fine strong legacy even in literary fiction—authors ranging from Dickens to Fitzgerald and Hemingway, Kazuo Ishiguro and Margaret Atwood, E. L. James and Stephanie Meyer have written novels in first-person POV.
It is the most intimate of all voices, having a confidential, come-sit-next-to-me feel that brings the reader directly into the world of the characters and story. It can allow for the deepest direct view into a character’s perspective, and carries a sense of informality.
First-person (and deep third) still allows the author to withhold information for “reveals” and suspense, or make ambiguous certain information that can call the character’s authority and translucency into question, as with the “unreliable narrator” device. Just because we’re directly privy to the character’s inner life doesn’t necessarily mean we’re allowed into every shadowed corner.
This point of view can be limiting, though, as with deep third and limited third, because the author is able to report only on the point-of-view character’s direct purview. And it can slip into a common trap of “reporting”—as if the character is retelling a story from a remove, rather than as if readers are living it with them directly.
Choosing POV: the intangibles
Deciding which point of view you want to use is also a factor of personal preference and comfort level. Many authors have a natural voice that they often write in that feels most organic to them, and most if not all their stories will adopt that point of view. Many also change it up from story to story depending on their intentions for it, and the desired “feel” and tone.
If you aren’t sure which point of view feels right to you or a particular story, I often suggest a simple exercise: Take a pivotal scene or two and try writing it from several different points of view—not necessarily different characters, but different voices: omniscient, limited third, etc.
Often one will immediately feel like the right choice to you, or will allow you to bring the story most fully and impactfully to life in the way you imagined.
If you’ve already chosen a POV and are rewriting a scene in a different point of view as an exercise, you may find a different POV feels more comfortable or lends itself better to the story’s tone and feel, or opens up a perspective that adds depth or impact to the story.
Or you may confirm that your original choice was the best one.
The main thing to remember? There is no right choice or most correct point of view. Like everything in writing, it’s subjective.

Tiffany Yates Martin has spent her entire career as an editor in the publishing industry, working with major publishers and New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, and USA Today bestselling and award-winning authors as well as indie and newer writers. She is the founder of FoxPrint Editorial (named one of Writer’s Digest’s Best Websites for Authors) and author of Intuitive Editing: A Creative and Practical Guide to Revising Your Writing and her latest, The Intuitive Author: How to Grow & Sustain a Happier Writing Career.She is a regular contributor to writers’ outlets like Writer’s Digest, Jane Friedman, and Writer Unboxed, and a frequent presenter and keynote speaker for writers’ organizations around the world. Under her pen name, Phoebe Fox, she is the author of six novels.
Excellent overview. Thanks for posting this.
Glad it’s helpful! Thanks, DP.
Tiffany, terrific breakdown of a hard-to-grasp subject.
In my thrillers, I use deep 3rd POV from the protagonist, antagonist(s), and selected minor characters. None of them has full knowledge of what’s going on, yet each has pieces of the puzzle to contribute that the other characters don’t know about. Only the reader has full knowledge and can see the convergence as the various characters move on a collision course to the climax.
Thanks, Debbie–nice to hear when posts land and are useful.
Your description of why you choose deep third is such a perfect example of the advantages of it–how it contributes to the storytelling, and the genre for that matter. Thanks for sharing!
Thank you for this overview–but I have a question. :o) What happens if the main character (written in deep third person) dies and changes form — as in reincarnated as an animal but maintains a sense of who she was before? It would seem silly for the story to continue in the same vein, narrated from a deep third person… goat, for instance. Meanwhile, the other characters don’t realize she’s still with them but in another form. This is more complicated because I really don’t want the reader to discover the truth until the very end.
Well, this is a very unique and specific case indeed. 🙂 Honestly I think you could go any direction you like, from your description–stay in deep third for both “characters,” or switch for the goat. (I must confess I’m intrigued by your originality…..) It depends what suits the story, the character, the way you want to unspool the story, etc. That’s the most annoying answer in writing craft (“it depends”), but the most frequent, I’m afraid. At any rate, experiment with whatever POVs call to you and see what seems to work best. Good luck!
Hello,
I have a book about 90% done and I changed the style halfway through and am about to finish and then go through and edit all once I figure this part out.
When I started the main character, Vic is left a rundown tavern her father owned and shut down before he passed. She opens it and it takes off. I started writing in third person limited from Vic’s point of view. However, it was difficult to get a lot of the humor in because there was humor among the customers, and I had to keep finding a way to get Vic over.
About halfway I figure out I would from then on, I would do it from “the tavern walls” point of view. The walls see everything that’s going on all the time and can share what they see, hear, etc. at more than one place at a time and not need to go there. Now don’t take that wrong the walls are not talking. But using “the walls” I can have a deep, intense scene going and suddenly have a fight start at another section of the tavern, without Vic having to be in both spots to talk about it, but she does react to both. Hopefully, this makes sense.
My question is, since I really am not in Vic’s mind or anyone else’s what POV do I use? Is it 2nd person? What is the POV of “The Walls” use? Any suggestions?
This sounds like omniscient POV to me, Christina, if I’m understanding you correctly: the ability for the narrative to take a big-picture overview of everything happening, rather than being confined to a single character’s perspective.
Hello again Tiffany. One thing I do not understand… How or why, in indirect limited 3rd person, is the author allowed to reveal what the character cannot know—the person sneaking up behind her? Wouldn’t that be drifting into the omniscient perspective?
Limited third is a separate narrative perspective, but tethered to the character. So it can’t see what’s happening out of the room where the protagonist is, but it *can* observe what’s happening around the character, within their immediate purview, even if the character doesn’t see or notice or know it. I think of it kind of as an omniscient-type perspective, but one that’s confined to only a single character’s radius at a time.
POV is challenging and sometimes arcane! And there are plenty of examples of how it’s breached in published works, with varying degrees of effectiveness. The only hard-and-fast guideline, to my mind, is to ensure the reader has a clear and seamless experience of the story. POV slips and breaches can risk disorienting or confusing the reader as to the narrative perspective.