Anyone else's heart sink at yet another "split narrative"?

[gaelicsheep]

I shan't reveal the book for fear of spoilers, but I am now finding this an increasingly irritating and lazy device. I think it nicely avoids the author having to actually engage in character development and in this case it has really spoiled the flow of what was a very promising book.

I'm reading one like that at the moment Sophie's secret I think it's called. It's really pissing me off. I'm just getting into a bit and then it switches. Very annoying.

I should imagine it's popular because it doesn't demand any kind of attention span from the reader. In the case of a crap book that's quite helpful. I have to say I do like books with fairly short chapters so my attention span probably leaves a lot to be desired much of the time too. Depends on the book though.

I've nearly finished A Thousand Splendid Suns now and it is really very good. It also harmonised again after the blip at Part 2 and became a coherent novel. Only criticism is it is whizzing through the story too quickly!

Yy, to Game of Thrones having multiple point of view characters and being amazing (and having a lot of character development).

Are you sure you're not just fed up of books that do it badly?

Hang on. Novels have always done this. Wuthering Heights has lots of different viewpoints. Jane Austen jumps from character to character, in third person, true, but she doesn't focus solely on what happens to one character. I'd find that unbearably narrow in most books. I like the variety and layering you get with different voices.

Have you read any Jackson Brodie books by Kate Atkinson, OP? She flits in and out of viewpoints brilliantly. Is it just first person multiple narratives you don't like or are you looking for books that stick with one person throughout. Those are pretty hard to find, I think.

I think it depends. Some books I don't really even notice it, but more often it REALLY bugs me, as I hate to have to wait for the next part of that character's story... I guess it is OK when the same story is still moving along nicely (Jeffrey Deaver does it like this - focuses on one of a few central characters, but it is always still moving the same story in the same direction), but all too often you are flung halfway across town to a barely connected subplot and I end up skipping PAGES to follow the part of the story I am involved in. I do then go back and read the bits I have missed, but it just bugs the hell out of me.

To be honest when I started the thread I was thinking mostly of books where the actual narrator changes. Then I realised that this wasn't what actually happened here, it was just a different viewpoint about a different character (don't ask - tired, stressed, easily confused! ).

I think I mean I'm fed up with books that do it badly and clumsily and by doing so interrupt the story. Books like Wuthering Heights are entirely different because the book itself is a coherent whole, not like two or three different books stitched together. And of course books that focus on more than one character are the norm and that's totally fine, and generally the "narrator" is one-step removed from the action and you get a common tone and feel throughout the book.

I think it's like Oakmaiden said - if the story continues uninterrupted then that often works fine. But when the story itself gets interrupted that is irritating beyond belief.

Gaelic, that's really interesting. I'd not thought of it that way before. (That a single story continues uninterrupted, whoever it's told by, whereas a split narrative tells unrelated stories. Though I'd say A Thousand Splendid Suns is definitely one story.)

Yes, so would I now.

Reason for asking this:

So a story told from the perspective of different family members - each with their own piece of the jigsaw to add - would be too much? Four too much?

Not interrupting the story but mixing in their own ingredient creating a picture of events for the reader rather than "they did this, then this, then end."

???

Just finished The Slap and my heart sunk as I realised it was ANOTHER 'spilt narrative.'