In a message dated 2/21/2004 10:48:08 AM Eastern Standard Time, "Iain E. Davis" <feaelin at kemenel.org> writes: > Why is multiple POVs an important criteria? I brought it up because I was trying to claim Robert Jordan as a Significant Author. > For the most part, I prefer NOT having multiple POVs, > unless they are very well done, I prefer not reading at all if the story isn't well done :) > I primarily find switching viewpoints (especially in books > that do it every chapter) annoying. I admit, that if > you're trying to paint on a large canvas (Tolkien & Brin) > and it is done well, it can give you a better picture of > "the grand scheme of things". But I certainly wouldn't use > it for a criterion for selecting books. Some people do like getting inside the heads of many characters. Authors use it as an easy way to show how a character appears to other characters. And if you're writing something truly epic with only one POV, you have to choose between the whole universe revolving around that person, or the reader missing out on a lot of stuff. > I also find it strange when people say "If you like > Tolkien, you'll like..." when the commonality they're > basing it on is that they both Fantasy, and attempting the > "World-Spanning Epic". But the writing is entirely > different. Don't get me wrong, I _like_ world-spanning > epic, but I don't think calling authors similar on that > basis is a good idea. Which brings us to my views on > Robert Jordan. Tolkien is a special case since everyone has heard of him, so publishers will do all they can to associate their books with him. Also, some people are explicitly looking for world-spanning epic stories. --KG