Thinking about mainstream writers who made it to the top and realized I am making one mistake: I don't attend book launches; I don't rub shoulders with other writers (except on social media). I feel I'm missing out on so many opportunities by not attending book launches because it's there I can meet the publishers and maybe stand a chance of getting "in" so to speak. Sigh! So, starting Monday I will be contacting publishers to get dates for upcoming book launches. I feel that's the only way.

Revision is a personal thing. Some writers tend to revise once the first draft is done. That's Writing 101, I guess. I revise every day. The moment I open the manuscript I immediately go to the previous day's work and edit and revise. I do this every day while writing. Takes me about an hour. Once the draft is finished, I read it in its entirety and make notes as I go along, then start the bulk revision. Once that's done, I close the manuscript for a week or two and when I come back to it, revise once again through fresh eyes and a clear mind.

Third-person POV is a narrative perspective in which the narrator describes the events in the story without being present themselves. The narrator references the characters with their names and third-person pronouns. This perspective can lock the ‘camera’ onto the main character, but can also follow all characters. In literature, third-person point of view follows multiple characters and narrative arcs, zooming in and out of a story the way a camera does in movies. Wow! Chasing this topic's hate mail on social media is like going to a funeral. Here's what I found: 1. Given the fact that we know what everybody is thinking, it becomes hard to keep secrets from the reader. 2. Because its extremeley hard to use right and often there are better povs to use 3. This narrative style gives too much away and spends too much time head hopping that the story becomes 1, distracting, 2, way too slow and 3, rather boring because we know too much. 4. It also feels a bit dated because the old 18th and 19th century novelists wrote in that voice. 5. There is nothing wrong with omniscient narration, and if a group of people are telling you it's wrong, you can safely ignore them, because they don't know what the hell they're talking about anyway. 6. Third-person omniscient is tough to pull off. If done badly, then it's bad. 7. It’s not like it’s rare in published works, either. So what’s with the hand-slapping? 8. Today there's also greater emphasis on relatability in books, and 3rd person omniscient perspective doesn't reflect how we experience life and can limit attachment/empathy by putting distance between the reader and the character. 9. A god's eye view just makes everything coherent and easy to understand, for me at least. I like it 10. It’s what publishers prefer because it’s easy to read and the reader can get into it instantly. This then trickles down to agents to the point where they reject books if written in 3rd POV. 11. It is the fashion of the age. No more, no less. Excellent books were written in the 19th century using 3rd person omniscient. 12. I don't hate it. Many of my favorite books are written in it. 13. Third person omniscient is violative of the “show, don’t tell” style that’s en vogue right now. 14. Sometimes the real gripe is with head jumping, not third-person omniscient. Some readers just don't know the distinction well enough to pin down exactly what they don't like. 15. To me third person in general is the best narrating style, first and second person feel odd in someway. 16. People tend to hate poorly done 1st person and 2nd person. I've never heard of anyone hating any form of 3rd person before. 17. Dune is probably one of the most loved books of all time...Yes, but according to quite a few responses on here, it’s old and obsolete and nobody reads stuff like that anymore, and nobody would publish Dune if it had been written this year. 18. It’s a tool, it’s a perspective, it’s a style. If you want to do it own it. 19. I use third person limited because it allows readers to feel close to the main perspective I’m on in that chapter. 20. I've tried omniscient writing and found it to drone on and slow the story pacing. This may be wrong on my part, but I prefer first person present and draw the reader into the scene as it unfolds and just as unaware as the main character. 21. A lot of people write it as: "Person a did this. They thought this." "Person b did this." "Person c thought this. They did this. Then they did this. Wow, thought person c. This nation style is kinda of jarring and annoying. 22. To me it just seems like OP just wants people to tell them what they want to hear: the reviewers don't know shit so OP is justified in ignoring their critiques. I always think theres nothing with "unpopular" style of writing, just do your thing if it's good enough it will get the attention and appreciation it deserves. I mean Sally Rooney pulled off nonexistent punctuation. 23. I love it. I don’t think it’s hard to pull off like many others do, nor do I think it gives too much space from the main characters. I am more likely to think first person is often lazy writing because just using first person allows for more immediacy (though I’ve seen it done well a few times). There are a few thousand more opinions, but you get the drift. Personally, I love this kind of POV, I like 3rd Person Limited, I have dabbled with omnicient, and have not explored narrative. What do you think?