Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/9704
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

I agree with [Lauren's answer](https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/9703/26); there's no sense in "balancing" things for the sake of one scene. There are a few ways I can see to handle this:

You can **encapsulate narrators** to keep a single viewpoint, sorta. I have an example from a friend named Joe, although I wasn't around when Phil told me about it. Phil says: "In response to my question, Joe looked up from his book. He said, 'It's okay to have a viewpoint encapsulated inside a retelling'. Then Joe looked thoughtful. 'Just make sure it's doubly clear who's talking to avoid confusing the reader.'" Phil nodded and said, "Joe was dead right. Recursive quotations can be damn tricky." And so they are. I've edited this paragraph twice and still may have gotten this wrong. So use this carefully.

You can **make an exception for one section** , carefully labeling it as an alternate viewpoint. This can throw the reader out of the story if you're not careful, but it may be easier to handle if it's, say, a prologue or an interstitial chapter in-between major sections of the book. (Dropping into omniscient viewpoint might be best if you're going to do this.)

Or you can just **embed what the viewpoint character needs to know in other scenes**. This is usually my preference and it would probably be easiest for the reader to handle, but will take you a bit of time to write/edit this. I suggest making a list of critical information and see where you can fit it in.

In the end, remember that the story and characters are the most important thing. Any method of including information needs to either move the story forward, add needed atmosphere, or build a character.

Original score: 5