Talk:Narration

shouldn't the perspective part have a criticism section

since songs being from other people's POV is subjective just to give you an idea magia by kalafina can resonate with ALL characters because its talking about the pain and confusion madoka deals with from the other characters and I believe what you said by asaka the lyrics are split between satoko and rika AnnJeanStuart (talk) 00:34, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi AnnJeanStuart. I'm having some trouble understanding what you mean. There are certainly songs that use narrative structures. Songs that do not ususally have narrative POVs can be given one by changing the context, such as in a jukebox musical. Covers of songs can also change their apparent perspective. For instance, Hurt (Nine Inch Nails song) aquired a more soulful context when Johnny Cash covered it.

The examples you gave appear to be directly connected to larger media properties. Magia by Kalafina is the ending theme to Puella Magi Madoka Magica and "I believe what you said" by Asaka and Yumi Matsuzowa is the ending theme to Higurashi: When They Cry-GOU.

Would you be able to elaborate more on the idea?

I tried looking up "contextual point of view" in Google Scholar, and didn't find any immediate good candidates, but I suspect I am using the wrong term. SenshiSun (talk) 23:15, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

i mean since there is no correct perspective there are some lines with exceptions that can refer directly to Rika and satoko and that person is like insert song title here from character x's perspective speaking as if THEY made the lyrics AnnJeanStuart (talk) 00:08, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

missing promise by konomi Suzuki from Rika's perspective the line "doshite kizu de tameshita" why did I test you with pain (satoko) why did you test me with pain (Rika) which is why Meera malhotra on the 07th expansion wiki struggled with the translation due to the lack of pronouns in the 2nd verse however it feels like a duet with satoko (people shouldn't go off the bat making assumptions like that whose perspective you think its from saying its evident and obvious because of the lyrics/words) AnnJeanStuart (talk) 00:12, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

btw what I was saying trying to say we add a criticism section because for the perspective section given there has been an ongoing debate as previously stated (by me) its subjective AnnJeanStuart (talk) 22:02, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Half-Blood Prince: not a good example of omniscient narrator

After seeing this page, I revisited the opening chapter of Half-Blood Prince and I don't think it's such a good example of an omniscient narrator. That chapter is exclusively from the perspective of the Prime Minister and never shows the perspectives of Fudge or Scrimgeour. Or does it qualify as omniscient simply because it adds a perspective other than Harry's? TornadoLGS (talk) 19:21, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

I tend to agree and I think most of the examples may have this issue. The chapter itself is very easily described as third person limited – limited to the prime minister's perspective and experience. The multiple person section after it seems like it would in some ways be a better fit.

I feel like this may even reflect a general tension or confusion in what people count as "third person omniscient". Or it's just that this article needs a lot of cleaning up. ~2026-37798-93 (talk) 06:56, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Article watching and help needed.

Is anybody working on or looking at this article? I've got a bit of a conundrum, mostly because I don't a have a clue what is going on. I've got these two definitions, heterodiegetic narrators and homodiegetic narration. I'm not quite sure where they are supposed to go. I also found this book "An Introduction to Narratology by Monika Fludernik", which lists a whole bunch of definitions in the glossary, none of which is Wikipedia. I see there is a Narratology article. I would assume they would go in there. I see there is a whole bunch of definition on Wikipedia that don't have links but don't. I'm suprised no section for them in Narratology since they are mentioned in Narratology book. I'm out of my depth here. Seems quite complex. Any help is appreciated. Ping me. scope_creep^Talk 18:52, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

The terms, heterodiegetic and homodiegetic, are defined in Wiktionary. It may be a good idea to link them in the Narration#Point of view section. However, they may be too specific to include there.—Anita5192 (talk) 20:15, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

These seem almost entirely synonymous with 3rd person and 1st person narration respectively?

"the narrator of a dramatic work is also the protagonist or other character in the work" sounds like the definition for 1st person narration.

I suppose "dramatic work" may suggest the difference is that the story may be physically shown to the audience through actors on a stage or camera shots and sound in a film or a television episode, or dialogue in a radio show. So narration would only be a small part of it unlike an oral or written story.

If that's the case then it may be harder to fit, since this article seems very focused on narratives that are purely delivered in words. ~2026-37798-93 (talk) 06:50, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Paragraph beginning 'In Indigenous American communities...' doesn't seem to relate to its section or subsection

It's under the section 'Alternating- or multiple-person' which is overall about mixing between different narrative points of view, e.g. 1st person and 3rd person, or 1st person with one narrator-character and then 1st person with a different narrator-character.

I believe this is the specific part of the source academic article the paragraph is referring to:

"In addition, it should be noted that stories are subject to change; narrators may introduce new elements into old stories. As Ong (1982) stresses, "In oral tradition, there will be as many minor variants of a myth as there are repetitions of it, and the number of repetitions can be increased indefinitely" (p. 41). In oral cultures, the telling of a story involves a particular interaction between the storyteller and the audience. Each telling corresponds to a unique situation."

This sounds fairly characteristic of folklore and orally told stories generally... but I don't think it really relates to the distinction between 1st and 3rd person. Or even what we call "narrative point of view" at all. A traditional story told differently by a differently storyteller, who personalises it, is not the same as an author choosing a different narrative point of view to tell the story in.

I think oral narratives could be worth devoting a section to, but I think having this paragraph in this section is misleading, making it seem like Indigenous American communities traditionally tell stories that change between 1st and 3rd person point of view or something. It doesn't seem like the source is making that claim.

I will remove it but I will leave this Talk section and the link to the source here in case someone finds a use for it elsewhere in this article.

https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/ajer/article/view/54968 ~2026-37798-93 (talk) 07:20, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Strange definition used for "true" second person narrative with no citation

Neither of these pretty counterintuitive claims are backed up by any kind of source:

"The narrator recounts their own experience but adds distance (often ironic) through the use of the second-person pronoun you."

"Mohsin Hamid's The Reluctant Fundamentalist and Gamebooks, including the American Choose Your Own Adventure and British Fighting Fantasy series (the two largest examples of the genre), are not true second-person narratives, because there is an implicit narrator (in the case of the novel) or writer (in the case of the series) addressing an audience."

It seems strangely prescriptive and arbitrary to call some second person narration "truer". And a very weird way to define 2nd person narrative overall.

In any other context, the whole point of 2nd person is that it's someone other than the narrator, and the claim that the narrator is "recounting their own experience" also seems impossible to either prove or disprove. You may as well say a narrator narrating in close 3rd person is actually "recounting their own experience but adding distance through the use of third person pronouns".

In any case, it makes it seem like the "true" 2nd person is actually less "true" (in the sense that it's less distinct from other narrative points of view), since apparently it's really just 1st person in disguise, unlike the other 2nd person narratives mentioned later.

I think the parts making strong claims about what should or shouldn't count as "true" 2nd person should be removed unless someone has a good source or two for this definition, and a way to demonstrate a work is "the narrator recounting their own experience". If there is a distinction, it would make a lot more sense simply to treat them as subcategories of 2nd person narration without the needlessly narrow definition. ~2026-37798-93 (talk) 08:01, 20 July 2026 (UTC)