I've been writing in what I think of as a variant on 3rd person limited, in that while we're limited to only one character's head (you hear his thoughts), I prefer to have the "camera" be perfectly capable of viewing anything, including things that the POV character is ignorant of. I feel that it works better, but doesn't hurt the feeling of POV. It feels quite natural, I think, but I was hoping for an opinion of fellow hatrackers.
How strictly do you stick to the "limits" of a POV.
One excellent example of this in my own story (summary only, not actual text from my WIP):
A young boy (POV character) is taking an oral mathematics exam. The proctor poses a multiplication question to the boy that he answers so quickly the proctor hasn't had time to multiply out the answer himself.
From the boy's absolutely strict POV, the proctor simply tells him that he needs to make a note of how quickly he answered. The proctor then pulls another sheet from his dossier and asks him a more difficult multiplication problem.
From a looser definition of the POV:
The proctor excuses himself to make a note of how quickly the boy answered. He writes out the answer himself to verify that it is correct on a sheet. He pulls an examination sheet out from an older student that has 113 * 327 worked out on it, and asks the boy to do that problem.
To me, the second version is more interesting than the first. You can't see into the proctor's head, but you get the sense of his amazement and how he is scrambling to keep up with the child. In the first, you might make the same deduction, but it is weaker and less fun. I don't think it is breaking POV to say that he has to take a second to figure out the problem for himself, and lies to the boy to cover up the fact that the child came up with the answer faster than he could. Nonetheless, the child is completely ignorant of what the proctor is doing -- he thinks everyone can to arithmetic like he can.
Thoughts?
A narrative point of view includes grammatical person and number, a narrator's and/or characters' attitudes (objective or subjective), and psychic access to thoughts. Add in tense, and that's a generally recognized comprehensive synthesis of narrative voice.
An objective narrator is an impersonal one, usually invisible or in an anonymous relationship to a story. A subjective narrator's attitude toward a theme, topic, or subject involves a narrator in a story.
An example of a narrative voice, first person singular, subjective, omniscient psychic access, present tense, as in Kurt Vonnegut's Breakfast of Champions. Though it incorporates, of course, auxiliary voices.
A significant fraction of modern fiction is in third person, objective, psychic access limited to one point of view character, past-present tense, generally considered the most plausibly authentic narrative voice.
The main features I've found for choosing a narrative voice are that a narrator not crowd a story's picture frame--I want to see the picture, not have a narrator blocking the picture by facing a reader and telling the picture rather than showing the picture--and I want to find the narrator as trustworthy and as reliably and authentically presenting a story. Even an unreliable narrator can show a reliable story, just that kind of narrator's assumptions are openly subject to interpretation.
[This message has been edited by extrinsic (edited April 22, 2009).]
I'd actually be curious to know what the boy thought the proctor was doing when he pulled out that second sheet. The boy's speculations might illuminate his character, which to me is more interesting than knowing what the proctor actually does.
JMHO
If your objective is to have the reader identify strongly with this character, then perhaps keeping the narrative limited will yield better results.
Don't feel that what you have is worthless though. You've established to yourself exactly what the proctor is doing, and why: This allows the interaction of the characters in the scene to be far more authentic.
I'd also recommend checking out some of the earlier discussions on pov (i searched hatrack for just '3rd person pov' and came up with quite a few discussions, ie 1, 2, 3, 4).
[This message has been edited by BenM (edited April 22, 2009).]
Which doesn't mean you can't jump from one head to another when you jump from scene to scene...I certainly enjoy multiple viewpoints and separate story lines featuring different characters...
(And it doesn't mean you can't get away with doing it...it's just not recommended practice.)
The proctor's emotional state might be shown externally through action, description, and/or sensation exposition in third-person objective (visually or perhaps through aural senses or even other senses). In a subjective attitude, for sympathy and resonance's sake, I'd want to see the proctor's frustration as pitiable in and of itself or as condeming of the exam taker's ability. Both of which are plausible simultaneously and reflect my experiences.
You can show the proctor's frown and show him writing out something on the paper, then show his surprise at the correct answer and his subsequent experiment to verify the first result.
Your student can wonder what's going on or not, but I'll (probably) assume correctly that the proctor realizes he has some kind of prodigy in front of him and judge his character based on his response.