Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/35972
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

[Celtschk's solution](https://writing.stackexchange.com/a/35968/24703) works well for an omniscient narrative, where the narrator can directly comment on the character's actions or imply their judgment through their narration. You can not only write third but also first person omniscient, for example when the narrator looks back on his life and knows in hindsight that they had made a mistake.

In a limited narrative this isn't as easily possible.

If you write from a limited personal perspective, where the viewpoint character lives in the present moment and the reader strongly identifies with him, then what you would commonly do is

- Convince the reader that the character's logic is correct.

- Later in the story, when the protagonist's plan has failed, the reader will realize along with the protagonist, that they (both) were wrong.

This is a much more satisfying outcome than observing the idiocy of a character that you know is wrong. Knowing the character's logic is wrong will make you impatient, irritated, and eventually give up on the story. But if _you_ (the reader) were convinced of the plan only to realize that _you_ were wrong – that is a suspenseful and interesting read.

You can do this in first- and third-person limited narration. You should avoid it in omniscient narration, because the reader will feel that the author artificially withholds information. But even that is often done.

Original score: 32