‘The Elements of Fiction 43 each of the gentlemen in that private room was of the changes and promotions it tmight occasion among themselves or their aequaintances, fic isc 1 ish concisely the nature ‘The use of omniscient narration allows Tolstoy toestablish concisely of the “official,” bureaucratic world in which Ivan Ilych has lived anatearbed, dnd how that word responds both tothe news ha hei incurable then to the fact of his death. ; evi) Some critics draw a distinction between omniscient methods that, permit their narrators to comment freely in theit own voices, using “I” or the'editorial ~we," (editorial omniscience) and those that-present the thoughts, andactions off charactets without such overt editorial intrusions (neutral of, impartial orani- science), Crane and Thackeray in the examples cited are clearly, among the former; Tolstoy, at least in the passage here, is. among the latter. «a: + - Although there is an observable direction in modern literature away. from using omniscience—in, part because of an intellectual temperament that tends to-distrust, and even deny, absolutes, certainties, and all-knowing attitudes— twentieth-century authors continue to debate its value and to exploit.its advan- tages. Like so many of the critical choices that the writer of fretien:is called on to make, however, the chioice of point of view is finally a matter of appropri- ateness. The omniscient point of view, while inappropriate to.a Hemingway story, is certainly very appropriate. to.large, panoramic novels like Tolstoy's national epic War and Peace, in which an omniscient mode of narration is use¢ {0 suggest the complexity and scope of Russian life itself. 00-1 i. ‘The great advantage of the omniscient point of view,,sheny;ts-the flexibility ‘it gives its “all-knowing” narritor, who carr direct thie rexder'¥-artention,and control the sources of information. As we.move away from omniscient,telling in the direction of dramatic showing, the narrator progressively urrenders these advantages. In choosing.to move inside the framework.of the work to merge his or her identity with that of one of the characters (limited omniscient or fie-person point of view) or t0 give up all idetitly (dramatic point of View), the narrator restricts the channels through-which information can be transmitted to the reader, as a re it ‘sult, the reader is involved more and more directly in.the task of interpretation... ~ 2. LIMITED OMNISCIENT POINT OF VIEW. With a lit referred to ai third-person or selective omniscient) point of view, the narrator limits ‘is ability to’ penetrate the minds of characters by selecting a single character foract as the center of revelation. What the reader knows and sees of events is always restricted toumbat this focal character can know or se€=This point of view differs significantly from the first-person point of view, which we: will discuss later. At times the reader may be given direct access to this fosal char, {cts own “voice” and thoughts, insofar as these are reproduced through dis. logue or presented dramatically throtigh monologue or stream of ‘conscious- ness: On all other ogcasions, the reader's access is indinect: it is the narrator's Woice, somewhere on the sidelines, chat tells the story and tranawant the action, heteetgtization, description, analysis, and other informing details upon which the reader's understanding and interpretation depend, Although the focal cea, Scter is a visible presence within the story in a way that a fully omniscient to drs not, at afty moinehe thiat character is'only as available and accessible to the reader as the narrator will permit, wit © character chosen as natrative center, and often referred to through ited omniscient (sometimesFicnoy jan as he*ok she, may’ be the ‘protagé. the use of a third-person pronol 2 arles’Marlow-in Cotiad’s jor character, a8 is es'M A may be some other malo’ Cr tye assighment is given (© a minor chit Of Darkness.” Often, ; hor chitacter fpDarkness." Ofien: fole of an onlooker, watching and speculating’ fo who functions in 2 cab ‘8 om the D only'minitnally involved, if-at all, in its acy seh oe ls become te ap Sangh cuaiof vision and the point of entry for:thie reader. Henry James’ apily ana this character in his critical essays arid prefaces as “the reflector’? or “initro ~ie this character in his ov! consciousness,” for it is through i and reflected. sf : : eo tne lavantages of the limited omniscient point of view are the tightnei ebrof focus and-control that it provides and the inten: of treatment that it makes possible. "Thiese“advantages: explain'why'thé limited ontiniscient poin, of view is so admirably suited to the short story, whose restricted’ stope can accommodate full omniscience only with great difficulty: The limited oftitscieny point of view predominates in Hawthorne's “My'Kinsman, Major’ Molle as’seen,-for ‘example, in the previously quoted passage describing’ Robin's physical appearance and clothing. It is used with good effect as well in Haw. thorne’s “Young Goodman Brown,” in' which the author is interested in the way in which the conviction of sinZan totally influence and distort an individual's outlook. In order to chronicle Goodman Brown's progressive disillusionment ‘bu: with the’ world, climaxed by his conviction that his fellow townspeople, and even his wife Faith, are numbered among the Devil's disciples, the marrator ‘sitions :himself at Goodnian's shoulder-and reveals: the WOHE”as-it takes ‘before Goodman's innocent eyes. Whether or not Goodman Brown's right inthe Torest iz dream or reality finally makes no difference; Goodman + is convinced beyond redempiion that the Devil is correct: that “Evil is the nature of mankind.” Goodman's naive anid untested ‘faith is destroyed; his yision of life is darkenied; and he’ goes to his grave a gloomy, distrustful, and Jonely man. The limited omniscient point of view serves Hawthorne's purposes ‘well, for it is Brown's pérsosal vision of the way that things: appear to be— ‘Father than the way that things detUaityetharisaede eenter of Hawthorne's story. ‘The limited omniscient point of view also works iil ns of creating and sustaining irony, because it can exploit gary wel 28 3 MeN that the focal character thinks he or she knows and the irae any bewme=” Henry James, whose novels and stories make heavy use ofa third-persom “tn, tor’ in the form of a “finely aware and richly responsible” character wh? ae foaph on these traits, is an excellent case in point. In “The Tree of Kforiledge,’ for example, a story that, as its title suggests, tums on “know Who has dedicated ne tte Feflector is the middle-aged bachelor. Peter Brench are kept ieeeated his life to making sure that Mrs. Mallow and her son Lance! kept perk of the “Master's” lack of artistic talent. Brench, James er Mal who.“had judged himself once for-alP™= #It was one in neck Peter Bretich that his main success in life would Marg taving committed himéelf about the work, a ‘organ Mallow.” As it turns Peter Brench’s hero ture: been ar a oe the Meeess2FY One, for Mrs. Mallow and Eancelot kno™ successfully kept from Piast talent is impoverished. For years they ‘The irony of the situarnech the very knowledge he would keep from is made possible by James’ ability to narrate “4 ist op the prism of his'or herconscious mind ihe~~ ThesEloments of Fiction 45 story from Feter Brench's point of view while slowly revealing to the reader the-extent of Peter’s false, assumptions, \y. g. FIRST-PERSON POINT OF VIEW. The use’ of first-person point of view places still another ‘restriction’ on the voice that tells the story. As already. noted, “the movement from full to limited omniscience essentially involves the narra! tor's decision to limit his omniscience to what can be known by'a single charac! tcr,