Thinking to one's self

Heijan Xavier

nathanjessehoffman.com
Supporter
Joined
Apr 17, 2016
Messages
409
Location
Raleigh
If you're writing a third person POV and want to convey that they are thinking to themself how do you write that? It seems that if you constantly do something like:

Jan gave a quick wave and a forced smile and quickly looked away.
"Why is she acting like that?" he thought. "Did I do something to upset her?"


It could get really choppy.

If you're really in a character's head can their thoughts be just part of the narration?

Jan gave a quick wave and a forced smile. Why was she acting like that? Had he done something to upset her?

It seems like less punctuation flows better but what are some do's and don'ts here?
 
I don't quote thought speech myself, i've seen writers who do though.
although I do say so and so thought to make sure the reader knows it is thought speech
 
I use italics to define what someone is thinking. But avoid head hopping. One person per break, or you'll be switching pov.
 
OK thanks. If you're doing one POV per chapter, then the italics are obvious. If your POV is third person, would you italicize in third person or in first person, as if it's a quote?
 
If your POV is third person, would you italicize in third person or in first person, as if it's a quote?

First (direct thought, like speech but without quote marks). I have seen people italicise in third (i.e. reported thought) but I don't like it. If the thoughts are reported, there's no need to italicise.
 
I just never come out of their head: direct thoughts are just part of the narrative. As a result it’s rare for me to resort to italics, although sometimes I do.

So would the thought be in third person or first if the general narrative is in third?

Jane pointed the rifle. Why am I doing this? She pulled the trigger, despite her misgivings.

Jane pointed the rifle. Why was she doing this? She pulled the trigger, despite her misgivings.
 
First (direct thought, like speech but without quote marks). I have seen people italicise in third (i.e. reported thought) but I don't like it. If the thoughts are reported, there's no need to italicise.

I think I get it but can you give an example?
 
So would the thought be in third person or first if the general narrative is in third?

Jane pointed the rifle. Why am I doing this? She pulled the trigger, despite her misgivings.

Jane pointed the rifle. Why was she doing this? She pulled the trigger, despite her misgivings.
If I’m writing in third if the thought moves to direct first then I italicise but if third is close enough then I rarely have the need to:

Rain again. It’s done nothing but rain. Jo threw her Easter bonnet down and pulled on her coat. Nothing else for it but to brave it.
 
I think I get it but can you give an example?

Direct thought (going with Jo's topical subject matter ;)):

It was raining again. Why does it do nothing but rain?

Indirect thought (I called it "reported" before but I'm not sure now that's true):

It was raining again. Why did it do nothing but rain?

For me, italicising the second example looks wrong, because it's unnecessary and confusing. You could have:

It was raining again. Why did it do nothing but rain?
 
I do both, italics and just thoughts direct in the narrative (as Jo says). So this is an example from my WiP:

Max snorted himself awake and sat up in bed, going over the events of the night before. He'd gone clubbing, got very drunk, and ended up pulling some bird and going back to her flat for a shag. He scratched his head and squinted towards where the ratty curtains let in the daylight. The bloody kids would come looking for him soon, badgering him to get back to work. Well, he was bloody working – Jacob wanted a demon baby and that meant shagging mortals.

I could've done it like: "The kids'll come looking for me soon, he thought" and "I am bloody working" but it disrupts the flow and there's no need as the POV's close.
 
One can use italics for extra emphasis (on top of the change in tense**), as shown in the following short paragraph of close third-person, past-tense narrative, which I think I may have posted before:

What was wrong with civs? And civ officials in particular? Is there a gene for pettiness?



** - Obviously, there wouldn't be a change of tense if the narrative was already in the present tense.
 
For me, italicising the second example looks wrong, because it's unnecessary and confusing.
It mainly looks wrong because, being in italics, it looks as if it ought to be the PoV character's thoughts, but it's in the past tense, yet it would be more natural for this thought to be in the present tense**.


** - Many uses of the present tense -- my Oxford grammar book has ten such uses, if I recall correctly -- have little or nothing to do with being in the present. For example, "I walk to the shops every Saturday," can be said on any day of the week.
 
In your example, my question might be; what does a forced smile look like and should you filter the reader into that assumption or should you leave it up to them.
Jan gave a quick wave and a forced smile and quickly looked away.
"Why is she acting like that?" he thought. "Did I do something to upset her?"
Maybe something more like.
Jan gave a quick wave, a half smile and turned away.
What did I do to upset her, he wondered.

Jan gave a quick wave, a grimace and gazed elsewhere.
He wondered what he'd done to upset her.
 
In your example, my question might be; what does a forced smile look like and should you filter the reader into that assumption or should you leave it up to them.

Maybe something more like.
Jan gave a quick wave, a half smile and turned away.
What did I do to upset her, he wondered.

Jan gave a quick wave, a grimace and gazed elsewhere.
He wondered what he'd done to upset her.
But you wouldn’t say:

What did he do to upset her?

You would either do a quote without quotation marks, or pull back to a third person thought narration. You don’t like that kind of in between state?
 

Similar threads


Back
Top