Thread: Books with Omniscient Point of View?

Can anybody recommend any books with a 3rd Person Omniscient Point of View? I'm working out some problems with my own story and am looking for some examples...Any suggestions?

French Lieutenant's Woman by John Fowles - if my memory serves me well. It's been a while.

The Eyes of the Dragon by Stephen King. His only fantasy novel (that I know of) and, incidentally, the only Stephen King book I've ever liked.

Originally Posted by Tiamat10

The Eyes of the Dragon by Stephen King. His only fantasy novel (that I know of) and, incidentally, the only Stephen King book I've ever liked.

It's not his only fantasy book, because the Dark Tower books are all fantasy as well. And it's not even close to being his best book. You should read some of the DT books. Just brilliant.

But that's a little off topic.

My reply will perhaps show that I don't know anything; I thought the vast majority of stories were written third omni. If I'm wrong - and from the tone of the OP it would seem maybe I am - can someone enlighten me as to the POV in which a large percentage of stories are written?

Catch-22 by Joseph Heller.

Satanic Verses by Salman Rushdie.

Gravity's Rainbow by Thomas Pynchon.

White Teeth by Zadie Smith.

I am with Ox on this one. Someone please explain.

A lot of literary fiction is written in the first. Genre fiction tends to be third.

an omniscient narrator stands overtly outside the events of the story and takes no specific character POV. S/he may reveal the unspoken thoughts of a multiplicity of characters and have knowledge of events happening simultaneously in different places. This differs from regular third-person narrative, which will often take an intimate POV position and unfolds the story as a character journey. You will often be unaware of the presence of a third person narrator, but an omniscient narrator has a distinct voice.

Originally Posted by mybigboots

S/he may reveal the unspoken thoughts of a multiplicity of characters . . . an omniscient narrator has a distinct voice.

To my tiny mind these remarks appear contradictory.

Originally Posted by The Backward OX

To my tiny mind these remarks appear contradictory.

Imagine God telling a story to his mates: he knows more than the sum of all the characters and does not belong to the time-frame of their story.

In John Fowles FLW, mentioned in previous posts, the narrator tells us what the characters do and what they're thinking, whilst making the reader aware that the narrator is telling the story from a period of history in the future of their own. He uses the device to highlight the fact that the characters are period-bound in their choice making and behaviour.

I don't know how else to explain. Sorry.

Originally Posted by strangedaze

A lot of literary fiction is written in the first.

And most isn't.

Confederacy of Dunces is a good example of what you're talking about.

coincidentally, I just bought that and plonked it in my reading pile. It's underneath Siddartha and The Glass Bead Game and on top of The Blair Years. I wish I had four brains.

Glass Bead Game is delightful. It's not the most fun thing I've ever read, but it's great. On the other side of things, Confederacy of Dunces is quite possibly the most fun thing I've ever read.