ext_5888 ([identity profile] green-knight.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] nancylebov 2010-03-11 09:45 pm (UTC)

That is a hair I will not split ;-)

I think there's a definitive continuum there, exactly how much the narrator knows, but I feel that the kind of first person who looks back on events, and who knows things that they could not have known in the moment is closer to omnniscient than it is to tight third/in-the-moment first, where you only put on the page things the viewpoint character knows.

'Omniscient' does not mean 'knows everything'. Well, it does if you take it literally, but not literarily - again, there's a spectrum. I use the term mainly to distinguish it from tight third (whether singular or multiple) - as soon as you describe events or give a non-POV character's thoughts, you have omni. You may have only a few diversions (the famous fox in LOTR), or the omniscient narrator may be able to delve into the minds of everything and everybody. It may be a narrator with a frame story whose knowledge it limited - or it may be a truly god-like voice that knows, potentially, _everything_.

And I think at this point the whole thing gets diverse enough that trying to classify it is probably pretty futile.

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting