Observation journal — some less common points of view

On this observation journal page, I was again playing with points of view from which a story could be told.

I’d made a list previously (it’s typed up at this post: By whom and to whom — there are some exercises there, too). But after reading Kim Scott and Maria Dahvana Headley close together, I wanted to add a few more to the list.

Here are the main categories of narrator I wanted to play with (I’ve listed them in detail at the bottom of this post).

  • Oracular/prophetic
  • Predecessors/ancestors
  • Land/elements of landscape
  • Plural (a group in the story’s present)
  • Plural (a group at some other point in time)
  • The tales themselves

I ran a few stories I was working on through each category. It was illuminating. The shift in perspective could be subtle or bold, playful or elegiac, but it usually revealed new angles and possibilities. This less-conventional (for me) points of view also made me consider the purpose of the story more, and created some interesting ways to riff on omniscient viewpoints and unreliability. There can also be a lot of charm in glimpsing the actions of characters/narrators who aren’t strictly individual players on the stage.

And several angles suggested shapes for future stories, once I find narratives to put in them.

Writing/illustration exercise (see also Viewpoints)

  • Choose a story you are writing/drawing, or one that you’d like to (a fairy-tale usually works in a pinch).
  • Consider briefly how the story would be told/viewed if it were framed by each of the perspectives listed above. How would “Little Red Riding Hood”, for example, look if it were illustrated from the point of view of the forest or the path, or told by all-grandmothers-after, or the-wolves-who-were-watching, or prophesied to occur at some future date?
  • Quickly sketch out (words or pictures) a quick treatment of a scene from a couple of these perspectives. Where does it shift the story for you, how does it change the emphasis or the imagery or the frame?

The full (but by no means exhaustive) list

I’ve typed out the full list below, for reference. If you want to play with another long list of potential tellers/audiences, see also the post By whom and to whom.

Continue reading

Bird’s-Eye View

I’ve been scanning in some sketchbooks and found this page. I was in a queue by an upstairs window, so I passed the time drawing people passing along the street outside, below, in the morning sun.

I often need to remind myself not to draw (or write) the obvious, eye-level view of things. When I actually do this, new details (the location of parts in hair or the structural role of boat-neck tops) abruptly become important. Sometimes the part of the sketch doing the heavy lifting (explaining where things are in space, hinting at movement, orienting the viewer) shifts from the figure to the shadow.

Some previous thoughts on viewpoints (and points of view):


(This follows on from yesterday’s post Thinking about points of view).

My only clear memory of reading Tirra Lirra By The River as an undergrad is of a scene where a character following the narrator up a staircase observes her new haircut:

'If you look at the underside of the cut,' said a man named Wallace Faulks, 'you can see the grain. Look, just like in a section of wood.'

It lingered. One reason is because it is so true and keenly observed, and every time I see a friend with freshly bobbed hair I think of this line. But I think it also stayed with me because it was such a wonderful example of viewpoint.

In writing, “point of view” usually refers to whether a story is told in first/second/third/omniscient point of view (“I”/”you”/”third”/godlike). But here I was thinking more about viewpoint in the artistic/perspective sense — literally where the viewer (whoever they might be) is physically standing, and what they can see from there.

For writers, in a broad sense, it can apply to temporal points of view, too (past? present? future? “The Present Only Toucheth Thee” was kind of all about that).

But to keep it simple: If I’m describing (or drawing) a person climbing a staircase, I can describe the scene several ways, including:

  • From their eyes, travelling with them: how the wallpaper gleams olive in lamplight, and where the carpet on the stairs is faded, which stairs creak, what is lurking on the landing.
  • From the top of the staircase: seeing their shadow climbing ahead of them, their eyes flicking from stair to stair, their expression as they get breathless, the way the buttons on their cardigan pull, the point at which their feet come into view.
  • From the foot of the stairs: the scuffs at the back of their shoes, the way their calves disappear in curved shadows under the hem of a skirt, the marks on the back of the cardigan, over the shoulderblades, where they leaned against a dusty wall, the way the lamplight pulls away from them as they ascend into darkness.

It’s easy to get into habits of describing things all one way, or from the most obvious viewpoint. I try to consciously play with this when I’m sketching, even sometimes building a reference piece that I can move around (e.g. the model library in this post). I do it when writing, too. Occasionally I will write out a scene from the other side of a room, or the level of the ceiling fan. Quite often the original viewpoint was sound (and style and purpose create their own restrictions), but seeing it briefly from another viewpoint will tell me more about the setting, and sometimes the character: Is there dust on the ceiling fan? What’s stored behind the door that was just flung open?

Writing/art exercise

  • Pick a scene (written or drawn). If you don’t have one in mind, choose a classic (for example, here, Cinderella running down the stairs) and do a super-quick stick figure or dot point sketch of it, as it first leaps to mind.
Sometimes it’s a classic for a reason. Cinderella front and centre, the prince in the distance, a shoe between them.
  • Identify where your viewer (the “person” describing the scene or holding the metaphorical camera) is located. In the sketch, they’re at the bottom of the stairs, or perhaps even driving her carriage.
  • Then consider some other potential vantage points — obvious or surprising.
  • Sketch those out quickly (words or drawings), and see what you find out about the scene.

The lower picture is from inside the palace, over the prince’s shoulder. Now the scene (and Cinderella) is running away from the viewer. There outside is dark, inside here is bright. Shadows stream away, opulence is everywhere, perhaps there is startled laughter nearby, or the clinking of glasses in the sudden silence of the orchestra.

The upper image is from the shrubbery below a curve of the staircase (might someone be lurking there?). Cinderella is obscured by balustrades — their design would now become important (a specific architectural era? carved with past legends of the realm?), as would the design of the gardens (ominous groves? brightly lit topiaries?). It also provides a particular staging: at least three distinct and separated levels of picture plane, story, and society.

Thinking about points of view

I was writing a post on viewpoint/point of view, but then I drew this, which I think expressed the idea concisely.

(I’ll still put up the full post later. Edit: Full post is here — Viewpoints.)

Introducing Characters – Bellwether

Gillian has started a series of posts on on how books introduce characters – beginning with Sheri S. Tepper’s The Fresco. I have not read this book, and am still recovering from Beauty, but I now want to read this solely because of Gillian’s post on how it introduces a character without actually having anyone on stage.

Posts and discussions like this make me want to read books from new angles, so instead of doing my January Movie Reviews or the summary of Travel Journal Practices as promised or introducing you to Yorick the Impoverished, or wailing about how devastated I am at the rejection of a story (well, more a sort of “I told you so” mood of fidgety discontent because I agree with the editor, but want to submit to something else now), I am thinking about Connie Willis’ Bellwether, which I reread last month and reviewed briefly in this post.

More below the cut:

Continue reading