internal thoughts

[Jo Zebedee]

how do we best show internal thoughts? Italics, by a he thought? or is there other ways?

so eg.

Please, he thought, not knowing where he was sending the thoughts to; he’d never been religious. Please, if there's anything there, amongst the stars, look after him.

or, Please, he thought, not knowing where he was sending the thoughts to; he’d never been religious. Please, if there's anything there, amongst the stars, look after him.

 

[Interference]

Usually italics, or sometimes a single quote, if you're already using double quotes, and vice versa.

'Please,' he thought, not knowing where he was sending the thoughts to; he’d never been religious. 'Please, if there's anything there, amongst the stars, look after him.'


Personal pref is italics, tho'.

 

[Susan Boulton]

how do we best show internal thoughts? Italics, by a he thought? or is there other ways?

so eg.

Please, he thought, not knowing where he was sending the thoughts to; he’d never been religious. Please, if there's anything there, amongst the stars, look after him.

or, Please, he thought, not knowing where he was sending the thoughts to; he’d never been religious. Please, if there's anything there, amongst the stars, look after him.

Ask yourself do you need to put, "he thought", as it puts the reader one step back from being really inside the character's head. If you are going to use italics, then that in itself shows the reader that these are thoughts. Also, without the second sentence it makes the scene tighter and stronger in emotion, and the sentence itself tells the reader the character is not religious, you have no need to tell them so as well.

i.e.
Please. Please, if there's anything there, amongst the stars, look after him.

 

[Abernovo]

I'm with Inter on this. I use italics, but try to make it sound like speech, to make it as obvious as possible that it's a thought.

I don't use quotation marks, as I keep them for speech or 'so-called' things.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Ok, I think I prefer italics, too; and if I use them, I'll try to break the habit of the I thought cos I think you're right Sjab, it lifts us out.

To check, though, this is different, right? It's not an internal thought.

“Eat your breakfast,” he told them. Karia took a spoonful of hers, but Kare didn’t and Ealyn wondered how the hell Jane managed to communicate with them.

 

[Abernovo]

That works for me. The other way of communicating a thought.

 

[Coragem]

Compare GRRM with Robin Hobb.

Both show internal thoughts extremely effectively. The former uses italics (i.e., monologue that works much like dialogue in construction) while the latter will just put "he thought, she reflected" etc. between commas.

Personally I save the italics for particular emphasis. Over-use lessens the impact. I also vary character-to-character -- with "open" characters I let them speak through dialogue, but with more underhand or more conniving POV characters I use a lot of monologue.

Coragem.

 

[AnyaKimlin]

I use italics for third person direct thought - in first person when I am parked right inside the brain of a character then it would be italic overkill. To be honest I just throw them in and hope it is clear that when it doesn't have speech marks it is a direct thought.

 

[Mouse]

I do both depending on the character.

 

[Glitch]

Italics look good if used sparingly I think.

 

[JandenHale]

I personally think the italics draw too much attention to it that isn't necessary. Because in almost every case, I as a reader get that it's internal dialogue. I'm with Coragem on this one. It's not necessary at all. It's just common because everyone (most writers) use it as a stylistic device, so that's what people understand. But in every work I've seen where it wasn't used at all, it seemed to come off much more effectively. Even so, it's not bad to use the italics, so long as you use them sparingly. I just think it ruins the flow of a good narrative when all of a sudden these italics present themselves and then I realize it was just internal dialogue, which I'd have realized anyway. I always give readers the benefit of the doubt. I assume they'll get it.

 

[Warren_Paul]

As long as the thoughts are actually needed to be voiced then I'd use italics. Internal thoughts are a good way to get across personality.

Joe Abercrombie does a good job of this.

Italics are the standard practice for internal thoughts, so you don't need to tell us he is thinking it, we already know, so don't worry about using the "He thought".

I always give readers the benefit of the doubt. I assume they'll get it.

I understand what your saying here Janden, and respect your opinion on it, but I'm not sure I completely agree. I've written scenes where I've left it up to the reader to understand what's going on, assuming they will because I could. But when I get critiqued on that scene the feedback is the reader didn't understand at all. Sometimes I think you need to lead the reader by the hand, just a slight bit so they don't get lost. The problem is: Just because we understand what's being said, doesn't mean the reader will.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Looks like italics then. thanks everyone. And any superfluous he/she thoughts creep in, they can be gleefully red penned...
I know with the reservations are but conventions are there to, maybe, make it easier for the reader, and since my ambition has always been to write a good story anything that makes it easier is good for me. If, perhaps, a little boring.

 

[Ursa major]

I tend to use italics, but if you're writing in third person past tense, a sentence in first person present tense (i.e. the same person and tense as you'd use for dialogue), might be enough to let the reader know what's going on.



I don't think italics draw too much attention, unless there's screeds of thought. And there needn't be:

Jake watched as Kate approached the guard. What did she think she was doing? She'll get herself killed. I must stop her!

The first sentence in this (clumsy) example is simple narration. The second and third sentences are, in effect, the thoughts of the PoV character, but here the PoV character is standing a little apart from the action. The fourth sentence is the PoV character becoming emotionally involved and ready to act.

The fourth sentence needn't be in italics, but I think it adds to the effect, that of the PoV character moving from being an observer of, to a participant in, the action. (It also separates the third and fourth sentences: the third sentence is a contraction of 'she will get herself killed' which has already strayed from the past tense of the narrative and could be placed in italics as a straight thought.)

Here's the same paragraph without the italics:

Jake watched as Kate approached the guard. What did she think she was doing? She'll get herself killed. I must stop her!

I don't think it generates as much momentum.

.

 

[JandenHale]

Italics are the standard practice for internal thoughts, so you don't need to tell us he is thinking it, we already know, so don't worry about using the "He thought".

Yeah, this is why I think everyone does it. It makes sense to use them in this case. I have a tendency to go against the grain when it comes to style, though. I question everything, so I don't do things just because it's how they've always been done.

I understand what your saying here Janden, and respect your opinion on it, but I'm not sure I completely agree. I've written scenes where I've left it up to the reader to understand what's going on, assuming they will because I could. But when I get critiqued on that scene the feedback is the reader didn't understand at all. Sometimes I think you need to lead the reader by the hand, just a slight bit so they don't get lost. The problem is: Just because we understand what's being said, doesn't mean the reader will.

I think I get what you mean here, and I agree to an extent. You gotta write so they understand what's going on, but I think my meaning was that you shouldn't sacrifice your style or voice to satisfy that. I get the impression that a lot of the authors I'm reading are doing this because they're afraid of losing the reader, and a lot of times it's obvious when they think the reader is stupid, which is what I'm cautioning against. I'd rather lose a couple slow ones than be condescending to the rest.

 

[Chaoticheart]

Compare GRRM with Robin Hobb.

Both show internal thoughts extremely effectively. The former uses italics (i.e., monologue that works much like dialogue in construction) while the latter will just put "he thought, she reflected" etc. between commas.

Personally I save the italics for particular emphasis. Over-use lessens the impact. I also vary character-to-character -- with "open" characters I let them speak through dialogue, but with more underhand or more conniving POV characters I use a lot of monologue.

Coragem.

I would've sworn GRRM used both: putting the thoughts in italics but also having the ', he thought,' attached to some of them.

I could be wrong though; it's been a while.

But more on topic, I personally favour writing thoughts as you would dialogue and just italicizing them. I find he thought/she thought to be rather irritating. Unless the author has swapped PoV mid-scene, I should already know who's doing the thinking, so the he thought is unnecessary.

 

[r_j_dando]

I treat thoughts with the same approach that I use for speech. The only difference is that instead of using "-", I italicise them. I sometimes put a 'he thought' afterwards, in the way that I'll sometimes put 'he said', but it's not constant. Sometimes it can be jarring to not have that clarification there, particularly if it's just a one word thought.

 

[Coragem]

I would've sworn GRRM used both: putting the thoughts in italics but also having the ', he thought,' attached to some of them.

Probably correct. That's what I do. It's like I said, the italics carry more emphasis so when less impact (less intensity of emotion) is required I'd stick with the "he thought, she reflected", etc., between commas.

Coragem.

 

[Gumboot]

I treat internal thoughts in two ways. General descriptions of what a character is thinking is treated as narrative. Direct thoughts are treated like dialogue, but in italics. I find the italics essential because I have unspoken conversations, and in some cases a three-way conversation that has both spoken and unspoken elements. Clearly distinguishing the internal speech with something like italics is pretty much essential, or the reader just wouldn't be able to follow it.

 

[Dermit]

My personal writing philosophy: if it requires formatting hijinx to read properly, it doesn't read properly. If your voice is consistent your reader will follow along just fine without italics.

Bit of a disclaimer, though: I tend to write third so tight the only thing distinguishing it from first are the pronouns. You're in the characters head the whole time. Italics would just get in the way. YMMV, of course.

Reading, honestly, I don't really care. If the author is doing his job it's not going to bother me either way. Seems like something for the publisher to worry about.