I need an authourly question answered

[rgraham666]

I know we've discussed this before but I can't find the threads on this topic.

The question I need answered is, "Is there a standard or widely used method of distinguishing a character's internal thoughts from other dialogue?"

I've been through the style guides here, somewhat, and if they answer my question it's well hidden under a cloud of verbiage.

I want to be a writer, not an expert grammatician.

I did appreciate WhisperSecret's little essay on the use of its and it's, though.

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

I know we've discussed this before but I can't find the threads on this topic.

The question I need answered is, "Is there a standard or widely used method of distinguishing a character's internal thoughts from other dialogue?" ...

HERE is that thread you were looking for ... or one like it.

What I got from the consensuses was:

"I'm talking to you, jerk!" he said.

But he's not a jerk, he is a moron," she thought.

They both agreed that he was not the brightest bulb on the tree.


The MOST IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION is that once you decide upon your format, stick to it throughout the entire composition.

 

[Rumple Foreskin]

I know we've discussed this before but I can't find the threads on this topic.

The question I need answered is, "Is there a standard or widely used method of distinguishing a character's internal thoughts from other dialogue?"

I've been through the style guides here, somewhat, and if they answer my question it's well hidden under a cloud of verbiage.

I want to be a writer, not an expert grammatician.

I did appreciate WhisperSecret's little essay on the use of its and it's, though.

rgraham,

In twenty-five words or less, the answer is, NO. In sci/fi and fantasy, there is a tendecy to use long blocks of italics to indicate internal monologue. However, editors in most other genres seem to be down on blocks of italics. Some don't even like them used for a sentence or two.

If quotation marks are used correctly, that is, only to indicate spoken words, it's usually not that big a deal to indicate something is a character's direct thought.

Some writers using word processors put direct thoughts in italics for two, very practical, reasons. It makes them easier to spot during edits. And it's easy to change them back to regular print in case they annoy a particular editor, while doing the opposite would be a time-consuming drag. If in doubt, be consistent.

Rumple Foreskin

 

[china-doll]

However, if using italics, keep one thing in mind. If you compose your stroy in Word or some other processor and then download the file to Lit, someone must process it and convert it by hand.

The last time I did this there were many, many problems with the italics in the version that got posted on the site. I went back and checked my original, it was fine. It was all when it was converted.

If you paste your story to the upload page, then you will have to use the vB code (ie. bla bla bla[/i ]and so on) and do it all yourself.

 

[cantdog]

However, if using italics, keep one thing in mind. If you compose your stroy in Word or some other processor and then download the file to Lit, someone must process it and convert it by hand.

The last time I did this there were many, many problems with the italics in the version that got posted on the site. I went back and checked my original, it was fine. It was all when it was converted.

If you paste your story to the upload page, then you will have to use the vB code (ie. bla bla bla[/i ]and so on) and do it all yourself.

Actually, there's a how-to on italics from Alex de Kok. The paste-it-in box accepts not vB code, but HTML.

That means carets instead of brackets.

<i> </i>

The vB code had to be converted, as well, in reality. But it will go through much more smoothly than a Word document! I mean, all they have to do is replace the brackets with carets in a text editor.

So the brackets work fine, but still require an extra step for the site; the carets are the native format for the paste-it-in box.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Another option Rg, is to use the ' internal thought' single and "spoken word" double. I tend to not set my internal thoughts off with more than attributing the first sentence as She though. I assume the reader will realize the rest of the monologue is internal. the only real rule I know of is be consistent in how you do it.

-Colly

 

[CharleyH]

I agree with everyone that you need to be consistant.

I particularly agree with Colly on the single quotes though. There is nothing that turns me off more in writing than italic after italic of thought. I can see it being used effectively for certain things, but I don't count internal thought among them.

 

[cantdog]

I agree with everyone that you need to be consistant.

I particularly agree with Colly on the single quotes though. There is nothing that turns me off more in writing than italic after italic of thought. I can see it being used effectively for certain things, but I don't count internal thought among them.

Oh dear. I'm so sorry. I cut my teeth reading sci-fi, and absorbed that convention there. As rumple suggests, though, the wider market generally doesn't tolerate them well either.

It does allow a person to leave off a lot of attribution, though. Paragraphing alone indicates attribution if you are using italics for interior monologue.

But I agree, there is more elegance, if more "she thought" and "She told herself" attributions, to the straight quoteless monologue. It confuses the voice of the narrator with that of the character, though, if not done carefully indeed.

cantdog

 

[rgraham666]

Thanks all.

I don't do a lot, meaning paragraph after paragraph, of internal thought, but I've yet to have no characters thinking.

I was asking because one story where an editor lost whether a character was speaking out loud or thinking. I couldn't see it myself, and my attempts to make it clear with just writing weren't successful.

So now I put thoughts in italics.

I'm going to be fucked though if I have some huge internal soliloquy to write.

Thanks again.

 

[CharleyH]

Oh dear. I'm so sorry. I cut my teeth reading sci-fi, and absorbed that convention there.

cantdog

I have never read sci-fi. Perhaps this is why?

 

[Edward Teach]

I have never read sci-fi. Perhaps this is why?

Stup Dity

 

[Pure]

OK, let's get picky, besides italics,

Quotation marks? Before and after? None?

Or like Virtual's example, after only:

But he's not a jerk, he is a moron," she thought.

I'm not keen on Colly's idea, since the single/double issue is in British/American language divide,

Also within American, sometimes the single is used for 'scare quotes', so it has uses not connected with thoughts.

Further, single is used within double, for quotes inside of quotes.

 

[Evil Alpaca]

The one I disagree with most is not having any differentiation (sp?) for internal dialogue. Using italics can be confusing because I'm used to those being used for narrative blocks or author's quotes. I actually started using the one-quote/two-quote system a ways back and it is much easier for me to keep track of. I think the most important thing though is just to remain consistent throughout the entire body of work, and hope the reader can keep up.

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

Just to be perfectly honest, that quotation mark is a typo. I would not have used it, except I sometimes get sloppy.

NOT: But he's not a jerk, he is a moron,” she thought.

BUT: But he's not a jerk, he is a moron, she thought.


And incidentally, I would never consider large blocks of ANYTHIG to be ideal.

RATHER:

What a moron! he thought. It wasn’t just that she stuck in her oar, answering a question she had never been asked. On top of that mistake, she had messed up her example with a typo. What a mental case!

 

[gauchecritic]

Being consistent is probably the best advice. Did I say that out loud? [Did I say that out loud]. "Did I say anything at all? I asked myself.

 

[Guest]

 

[cantdog]

I gotta woof about that one, gauche.

Do you rent out sardonicism? I have a very earnest young friend who could use some.

He's got wit, too. A little of the sardonic would make him.

I see the single quote thing put forth here a lot. It seems revisionist and modern to me, but I'm fifty. I can't think of a book I've ever bought with singles used for interior monologue.

When I considered and rejected it, it was exactly on Pure's bases:

that a British reader would have yet another hurdle to leap if he used them the opposite way at home. (Although not all British authors seem to use singles for quotes. Maybe American publishing houses are "correcting" them?)

that singles already have conventional functions, which I'd then have to avoid. I can write without quotes-within-quotes, but I think, if I were to use them for a character's thoughts, I'd be bound to stop using them other ways.

How widely used is this idea with the single quotes, anyhow?

 

[gauchecritic]

The main problem I have with italics for thought is reading emphasis as unitalicized. V.weird.

 

[cantdog]

Emphasis is overdone sometimes. I'm chary of employing it except within citations to highlight a sentence or phrase. That's in situations like a post here or an academic paper. Coversational stuff I try to leave alone.

But you are right, there are conventional uses for italics as well.

 

[Rumple Foreskin]

As Cantdog noted, the "approved" use of single quotation marks in the US is as an indicator that something is a quote within a quote. If a writer feels a need to use something other than prose to let readers know a passage is internal monologue, IMHO, they're better off using italics, if only because that's easier to change in a word processor.

But as everyone seems to agree, it's better to be all wrong all the time, punctuation-wise, than it is to be half-right some the time. In other words, being correct is important, but being consistent is vital.

Rumple Foreskin

 

[Guest]

Oh dear. I'm so sorry. I cut my teeth reading sci-fi, and absorbed that convention there. As rumple suggests, though, the wider market generally doesn't tolerate them well either.

It does allow a person to leave off a lot of attribution, though. Paragraphing alone indicates attribution if you are using italics for interior monologue.

But I agree, there is more elegance, if more "she thought" and "She told herself" attributions, to the straight quoteless monologue. It confuses the voice of the narrator with that of the character, though, if not done carefully indeed.

cantdog

It's the same with Horror, Cant. Italics is almost always used for internal thought. So, it's the way I do it!

----------------------------------------------

The car sped along the dirt track and Kim tried to brace herself. She’d already banged her head twice and the nearside rear light console was a worry. She felt uncomfortable, rather shocked, but most of all, angry.

What the fuck is he playing at?

-----------------------------------------------

That's the way I do it, nine times out of ten, unless it's not clear which character was having the internal thought. I don't use internal thoughts a lot, though, just now and again.

Lou

Edited to add a note: Every publisher that I have come across always asked italics be used (but this is mostly those within the horror genre), and for formatting and type-setting reasons, they always ask that italics be replaced with underlining, when submitting manuscripts to them. This is replaced with italics at the type-setters. Piece of trivia there.

 

[Rumple Foreskin]

Thanks for the factoid, Lou. So we can add Horror to Sci-Fi and Fantasy as genres that are italics friendly.

Rumple Foreskin

 

[gauchecritic]

So should we have a new Italics category?

 

[Guest]

Fake orgasms should be put in italics.

Perdita

 

[cantdog]

beautiful, Perdita.