Toggling Between Multiple Characters

Posted by

106

It can be easier to read (and write) a novel that continually concentrates on one or a small number of characters without leaving them for a while to rotate through other people.

Think Jane Eyre and Crime and Punishment, to name two books. The unbroken focus is on Jane and Raskolnikov, even as there are important supporting players in the mix.

Then there are novels that shift the focus to different people — whether every chapter or every few chapters. These books can be a bit more challenging, and even frustrating at times. We get accustomed to a character and then — boom — they disappear for a while. A certain rhythm is broken.

Yet this approach can also be satisfying as we get to know another character, and another character, and another… We see things from different perspectives, get all kinds of variety, etc. Then, in many cases, the characters — who might be family members, friends, or strangers — end up interacting with each other as the threads of the story come together. A thing of beauty when handled skillfully, whether the result is happy, tragic, or somewhere in between.

I happened to experience a rotating-character approach twice in a row last week with Kent Haruf’s Plainsong and Joy Fielding’s Cul-de-Sac.

Haruf’s exquisite novel tells the story of several residents in/near a small Colorado town — a pregnant teen, two teachers, the two young sons of one of the teachers, two elderly farmer brothers, a lonely old woman in ill health, a sadistic teen boy and his nasty parents, etc. We move from character(s) to character(s) as the chapters go on, gradually seeing the connections between many of them and the parallels between some of them as the multiple plots advance. Haruf’s spare, subtle writing is off-the-charts good.

Fielding’s Cul-de-Sac focuses on five families of different configurations who live on the same…cul-de-sac. As they gradually get to know each other, we see that a number of these neighbors have some major issues — one’s a prominent oncologist who sickeningly beats his dentist wife, another’s an infuriatingly meddlesome mother-in-law, etc. Plus some of these Floridians own guns in the weapon-saturated “Sunshine State.” We know from the start that someone’s going to be shot dead; the question is who will be the murderer and who will be the victim. There were certainly several people with enough anger and/or reason to kill in this very suspenseful novel.

In books that rotate characters, there often isn’t any one person who’s clearly more prominent than another; instead, there are roughly equal “co-stars.” But of course there can at times be “firsts among equals.” In Fielding’s novel, that would be Maggie McKay, a woman separated from her husband who tries to do the right thing and help others, sometimes at risk to herself. She also has the biggest arc in terms of maturing and changing her behavior.

Among the many other novels that very effectively switch from character to character are William Faulkner’s As I Lay Dying, Barbara Kingsolver’s Prodigal Summer, Margaret Atwood’s The Robber Bride, Liane Moriarty’s Nine Perfect Strangers, and George R.R. Martin’s A Game of Thrones, to name just five.

Your thoughts about, and examples of, this topic?

My literary-trivia book is described and can be purchased here: Fascinating Facts About Famous Fiction Authors and the Greatest Novels of All Time.

In addition to this weekly blog, I write the 2003-started/award-winning “Montclairvoyant” topical-humor column for Baristanet.com every Thursday. The latest piece — about my town’s firefighters voting “no confidence” in their chief — is here.

106 thoughts on “Toggling Between Multiple Characters”

  2. I prefer a single point of view. You get to know the character very well and even start to think like him/her. I’m reading Barbara Kingsolver’s Demon Copperhead and loving it. It would not have worked using a number of POVs. Maybe it’s just me, but I get too confused with multiple POVs. Unless each is given their own chapter like Kingsolver did with The Poisonwood Bible.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    • Thank you, Darlene! There are certainly some advantages to having a mostly single point of view in a novel. Heck, the two books I mentioned in my post’s second paragraph are both among my very favorite novels. 🙂 And, yes, when there are multiple POVs, it definitely helps the clarity if different characters are focused on in different chapters.

      I’m looking greatly looking forward to reading “Demon Copperhead”!

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  3. HI Dave, I like stories with multiple protagonists and like dual timeline stories too. I even wrote A Ghost and His Gold on a dual timeline and with four main protagonists. Some readers thought it was quite complex (me? complex? Never!) and suggested it would have been better as two books. You have left out the master of multiple viewpoints, Mr King. The Stand has numerous characters and POV, as does IT and Needful Things. To the Last Man by Jeff Shaara was also brilliantly told from the perspective of different men fighting for different countries. It was a fantastic book.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  4. More recommendations to add to the every expanding list! I’ve just read the terrific ‘Great Circle’ by Maggie Shipstead. A story told from the main perspective of two characters (although there are others) in two different centuries about the early days of aviation (amongst other things). A fabulous read!

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  5. Hi Dave,

    I saw the title of this week’s blog and had an automatic suggestion. As I read through I thought he’s not going to say it; oh my goodness he’s missed it, forgotten about it, but there it was, tucked in at the end – George R R Martin’s “A Game of Thrones”. I thought as the “A Song of Ice and Fire” series went on, some of the character POVs become a big convoluted, but the first book was very well done seeing the world through both the Starks’ and Lannisters’ eyes.

    I’m currently reading a romance novel by someone who I know but will remain nameless as I’m not enjoying it very much. In fact, it’s irritated me to the point that I’ve gone online to see if reviews match my reaction. Someone mentioned that they couldn’t follow it because of the rapid change of POV, however I think it’s one thing she’s got right. The main guy goes to kiss the main girl and has a few thoughts and then it suddenly switches to her view and you get a replay of the last few seconds from a different perspective. While I’m not loving the story, I’m not at all confused and think the writer has a good grasp on her two different voices.

    Thanks, as always, for a wonderful topic 🙂

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    • Thank you, Susan! Sorry I stole your thunder with “A Game of Thrones.” 🙂 (Which I liked a lot but not quite enough to continue with the series.) I enjoyed the droll way you mentioned my eventually mentioning George R.R. Martin’s novel. 🙂

      Also sorry you’re not enjoying that romance novel much, but glad it seems to handle different POVs well.

      Like

      Reply

  6. I’d be remiss not to mention “Grand Avenue” by Joy. It’s a contemporary epic of toggling between characters.

    Although very different stories, the multiple personas have had me describe “Cul-de-Sac”, as a mini “Grand Avenue”.

    Her ability to draw suspense out of the seemingly mundane every day lives of the middle classes is brilliant. To this regard, the title and opening lines of “See Jane Run” could not be more ordinary, yet………

    It blows me away how Joy Fielding can be such a successful writer, a NY Times Best Selling Author and yet few I know seem to have read her.

    I’m thrilled you read “Cul-de-Sac, Dave!
    I’m even more elated that you loved it enough to pen about it.

    In the end I must mention one of my faves, Agatha Christie. Her novels all have multiple characters, all suspects and always only 1 central character to rotate around.

    Of course rotating around is not the same as toggling between.

    Thank you, Dave!

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

  7. The first author that came to mind was James Michener, who takes readers back thousands of years in his massive narratives.

    For example in his book Texas, Michener weaves together the stories of various characters, from Native Americans and Spanish conquistadors to Mexican revolutionaries and American settlers. It is a gargantuan undertaking to read because he covers key events such as the Battle of the Alamo, the Texas Revolution, and the discovery of oil. But he also talks about the early days of Spanish colonization to the turbulent years of the Civil War and Reconstruction. His research is meticulous and his vivid descriptions give readers a feeling that we are witnessing the the events firsthand.

    I remember reading “Hawaii” and had to stop for a while because the stories had become so real to me that I felt that I was being immersed into an alternate time.

    Another great post and follow-up conversation!!

    “The world is a muddy place, and if good men don’t try to clean it up, bad men will make it a swamp.” James A. Michener, Texas

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

    • Thank you, Rebecca! Glad you mentioned James Michener! He did indeed juggle many a character in many of his novels. (I’ve only read three so far — “Mexico,” “Caravans,” and “Tales of the South Pacific,” with “Mexico” the only one long and multi-generational enough to be considered a Michener epic.) You described two of his books — and your reaction to them — VERY well!

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

    • John Stuart Mill: “Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”

      Turns out the more famous quote along these lines was never quite written or stated by Edmund Burke, though he is often misquoted: ““The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing,”

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

  8. By some fortuitous coincidence, I finished what Collins claimed in his preface to be the first of novels constructed in the form of various testimonies and written accounts of characters linked in order of events in the novel’s timeline– sometimes in the order received, and sometimes in the order they fit into the timeline. I refer, of course, to “The Woman in White”, one of the most satisfying and riveting popular novels of the mid-19th century.

    Wilkie Collins is a sort of avatar, appearing as he does at the height of the popularity of the novel, with prodigious narrative skill, and a fine sense of the reader’s hopes for the characters he has created. There is an inevitable happy ending, much as there had to be in “Wuthering Heights” and “Jane Eyre”, but it has no sense of being tacked on at the insistence of his publisher– Collins knows what is required, and provides.
    Since the novel is told by various characters, out of classes high and low, it must deliver separate and distinctive voices, and does so convincingly. The slippery mendacity and malignantly tender solicitousness of his most memorable character, the gargantuan Count Fosco is especially well-drawn, even if his end at the hands of a secret society of political radicals is a bit far-fetched– but just a bit.

    I must differ with Collins as to the originality of his form– Lermontov in “A Hero For Our Time”(1839) takes the written accounts of his main character’s doings from others beside his own, to make a composite study out of a few disparate points of view– but perhaps Collins had no acquaintance with the earlier Russian novel.

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

    • Thank you, jhNY! Terrific summary and analysis of “The Woman in White”! A magnificent novel — for the reasons you mentioned, and more. Count Fosco is certainly a great, rather complex villain, and Marian Halcombe is an excellent woman character for her time. I think it’s one of Wilkie Collins’ four best novels — also including “The Moonstone,” “No Name,” and “Armadale.”

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      • An unscheduled layover– and bad weather the cause– allowed me ample time to finish “The Woman In White”– a feat I expected to accomplish here at home, after landing. At the family manse in Nashvegas, I had begun it after first tearing through the first 2 Cormorant Strike/Robin Ellacott novels, and an excellent WW2 mystery– “The Man From Berlin”. I chalk it up to a limited cable menu, and a room of one’s own.

        Agreed- Marian Halcombe is a great character, though only slightly beyond expectation, given the era and the expectations of contemporary readers. But that Fosco– he is realized in all his sentimental and facile monstrousness, and though I am no expert in English 19th century novels, there is no one quite like him I’ve run onto to date.

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

        • You’ve done some excellent recent reading, jhNY! Yes, Count Fosco is quite an original. Marian Halcombe struck me as perhaps a closeted LGBTQ character, but that might be my 21st-century sensibilities imposed on a 19th-century novel. And, as we’ve discussed, I love J.K. Rowling’s Strike/Ellacott series!

          Like

          Reply

          • Could be, but Marian finds Fosco hypnotic and irresistible before she manages to steel herself against his many wiles and self-regarding graces, and Fosco himself is smitten with her– or at least with the power of her intellect and temperament, so much so that he does not kill her when he might have, and should have, to secure his trickery from discovery.

            Liked by 1 person

            Reply

    • I enjoyed The Woman in White but, I must confess, I did think it went on a little longer than it ought to have done. But, I suspect that was more to do with the serialisation process of the novel. Perhaps Collins needed the money and thought to eek a bit more from his characters, but relied maybe too heavily on the goodwill of his readers! I should get to some of his others at some point.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      • Thank you, Sarah! You’re right that “The Woman in White” was somewhat longer than it had to be, but I didn’t mind because it was so engrossing. 🙂 And, yes, serialization might have had something to do with the length — not to mention that the 19th century was a time of quite a few “doorstop” novels. 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

      • Several of the English and American 19th century classics may be fairly accused of going on more than a little long– and serialization may well be one big reason why. Also, in some cases, being paid by the word.

        But, there were plot points in “The Woman in White” which required some pages, for example, in the the laying out of the complicated conditions of inheritance, which would ultimately serve to raise the fortunes of the Marian Lara and Arthur and, most of all, son.

        And there was the necessity of reeling out the means of their plans and their execution by which Sir Percival and Count Fosco left themselves vulnerable to detection— over many pages.

        Finally, there was the necessity, given the conventions of the time, for the destruction of Fosco and Percival to by made by means of their own actions– Arthur, whatever his stated intentions, could not murder and remain free, or the proper sort of man he was conceived by the author (and his vast readership) to be.

        The self-inflicted vestry fire, and the betrayal of the secret society sealed the fate of the demonic duo– while Arthur’s hands remained unsullied by the blood of his enemies. These events, and how they came to be, also took up many pages.

        The “Woman in White” pays some homage to verisimilitude, but retains the rights to Gothicism and romance, while over all those pages, somehow keeping readerly suspense at a proper tension. It is, more than anything else, a thrilling entertainment made for an admiring public. And a long one!

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

        • Your analysis is, as ever, fascinating and on a level that I certainly wouldn’t arrive at – which is why these discussions are so good! So thank you for your words.
          It’s interesting your point about the explanation of inheritance. It implies that the audience wouldn’t know/understand – therefore is this explanation for an American audience for example. Did Dickens publish his weekly journals/periodicals further afield than Britain?. Although I appreciate the complications of the legal system probably went above the heads of many people in this country (UK).
          Ultimately though, yes, it’s a tremendous gothic novel that does stand the rest of time.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

          • I wonder if the installments of the magazine aren’t noted somewhere– but I haven’t looked. Were some larger than others? Were there any breaks? Did Collins deliver on schedule?

            And I don’t know whether Dickens’ magazine, or an American magazine, first published the novel here in the US before it was gathered into one fat book, either.

            You may well be right about the inheritance explanation– I’d guess English readers would be more generally familiar and conversant on the topic of property and titles among the nobility there– so maybe the careful laying out of terms was mostly more for us.

            Also, I’d guess that readers of the entire book in published form were of a different breed than those who read by installments– like watchers of a weekly series might today be compared with those who binge a series all at once.

            Yes, these discussions we all have here are among my favorite features of Dave’s site.

            Liked by 2 people

            Reply

  9. I enjoy a multiple-character approach as long as it is presented without confusion, as you say. Afterall, in our real world we interplay with many personalities that affect our decisions, and so that can trulhfully be used in skillful fiction. To go a bit further, I like to read, write, and experience different character viewpoints within a single scene, as long as it’s clear who is thinking and speaking. Love your always interesting references, Dave!

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    • Thank you, bahelberg1! Great point — if the multiple-character approach is confusing, it negates a lot of the benefits of that approach. And, yes, a multiple-character approach feels like real life in its way. To do it within a single scene? Very skillful!

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  10. Thanks once again . Concentration essential, but I enjoy multiple character narratives and and their different perspectives. Hard to imagine, say, Bleak House just as Esther’s story
    Currently re-reading The Woman In White, in which Wilkie Collins effectively allows Walter Hartright to have two very different women.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    • Thank you, Esther! Yes, concentration is key when reading multiple character narratives.

      Hard to imagine almost any Dickens novel without a large cast. 🙂

      I LOVE “The Woman in White”! Such a great novel, and mystery.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

  11. I suddenly thought of Grace Metalious’s book “Peyton Place”; Jacqueline Susann’s “Valley Of The Dolls”; Alice Walker’s “The Color Purple” and Amy Tan’s “Joy Luck Club”(seems like the generational thing is always chunked full of characters) which reminds me of another and/or Ken Kesey’s “Sometimes A Great Notion”. To name a few. Ha. Great theme, Thanks Dave.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  12. Dave, don’t forget Kingsolver’s The Poisonwood Bible! Also Louise Erdrich’s Love Medicine series and others of hers as well. I see Steinbeck’s East of Eden was already mentioned. Dostoevsky’s The Demons employed this technique as well. And Pushkin’s Eugene Onegin. It’s really rare to read a book these days with only a couple characters and single timeline. If I recall correctly James Joyce wrote multiple characters’ stream of consciousness…a definite challenge to read.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  13. I love this topic! I’m currently reading Ruth Hogan’s The Keeper of Lost Things. I love the characters and the premise of the book. Ruth Hogan made each character so distinct that it’s easy to remember each one.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    • Thank you, Shehanne! Novels with many characters can be very appealing, as can those with few characters. I like numerous examples of both. 🙂 And you’re right that quite a few classics have large casts. One modern classic that comes to mind is “One Hundred Years of Solitude.”

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

      • I must check that one out. What I am reading just now is by a best seller, has a big cast and is an absolute bore. I don’t think I am going to finish. I’m toiling at page 40. One of the reasons I cbhose it was cos it has a big cast. Lol.

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

        • Sorry about the absolute bore of a book, Shehanne. It happens sometimes. I’ve reached the point where I’ll drop a novel if it’s not working for me after 50 or so pages. I used to struggle through almost every book I didn’t like until finishing. Well, except for “The Sound and the Fury.” 🙂

          In the case of “One Hundred Years of Solitude,” the big cast is a bit intimidating at first — partly because some names are similar. But things get sorted out eventually.

          Liked by 2 people

          Reply

          • I used to read everything cover to cover regardless, thinking, it’s me who’s ebeing awkward or picky here. But these days are done. I can see that the gaping problem here in sticking rigidly to the timeline of historical events is meaning that page after page is now papered over with descriptions of buttons and going for washes in rivers. . . .

            Liked by 2 people

            Reply

  16. As you mention, novels with multiple characters, each with their own story line, “can be a bit more challenging, and even frustrating at times.” Nevertheless, I find them a very rewarding read for, after all, they best reflect our real world lives of connectivity with others. As a lover of crime mysteries, I am impressed by Dan Brown’s technique in The Da Vinci Code in very effectively switching from character to character without losing engagement and tension.

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

  18. Immediately thought of Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina which I read for the first time this year, and the extraordinarily modern style of entering the thoughts and feelings of a handful of characters and sometimes even exploring the subconscious although I don’t think that word had even been invented yet. I may be mistaken but I found it to be a breath-takingly brilliant piece of writing nevertheless

    Liked by 5 people

    Reply

    • Thank you, Ralph, for the “Anna Karenina” mention! Very well said! I agree that Tolstoy’s style of writing was ahead of its time — not only in his long novels but also in his novellas and short stories.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  19. Some novels that move between different characters rather than concentrating on one protagonist that I’ve read include “A Tale of Two Cities”, War and Peace”, “Anna Karenina”, and “East of Eden”.

    Liked by 7 people

    Reply

Leave a comment