Voice in head?

Discussion in 'Word Mechanics' started by GuardianWynn, Jan 27, 2015.

  1. ChickenFreak

    ChickenFreak Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    15,262
    Likes Received:
    13,084
    Wow. The entire industry? All those book that don't have a single italicized thought are a figment of my imagination? Huh. Surely there should be more space on my bookshelves, if those books aren't actually there.

    You seem to be struggling, pretty hard, with the idea that others have opinions, and that their opinions may not match yours in every detail. The fact that you are out there merrily reading books with italicized thoughts, and perhaps writing books that include them, is not something that makes me feel personally offended. The fact that I am not reading or writing those books, seems to make you feel personally offended.

    Your offense is hurting you a great deal more than me, so I'm not going to get bothered by it. But it is puzzling.
     
  2. Chinspinner

    Chinspinner Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,901
    Likes Received:
    1,023
    Location:
    London, now Auckland
    Yeah, dismissing someone's "attitude" during a debate strikes me as a load of sanctimonious crap. You have a difference of opinion, Chicken finds italics an unnecessary tool to identify thoughts, whereas you two consider it an acceptable convention.

    Seriously I watch so many arguments on this site (particularly in the debating sub-forum) end up with some clique of two congratulating each other on their superior intellect and debating prowess. Always without substance. It is just this strange pantomime that occurs time and time again. Sod the debate; lets just try to lawyer our way to an argument we can, at a stretch, call a win and then bask in our lonely applause.

    Regarding the subject at hand; that it is rarely, if ever, cited in guides can be used to support either argument, or more accurately, neither argument. But, some people use it, some people don't. Some people like it, some people don't.
     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2015
    GuardianWynn likes this.
  3. ChickenFreak

    ChickenFreak Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    15,262
    Likes Received:
    13,084
    I'm going to clarify this one more time, addressing the quote that you preseented, but misunderstood, in the recent pages of the other italics thread:

    "But getting that flexibility requires that you write so that you don't _need_ the italics in order to be understood. That's a skill, one that requires some work and practice"

    Writing thoughts without italics is a skill. Writing thoughts WITH italics is a skill. Cooking a steak to medium rare is a skill. Cooking a steak to well done is a skill. They are all skills that require work and practice.

    I value the first skill in each pair. I don't value the second skill in each pair. However, all four of them are skills. Individual skills. All of them required work and practice and intelligence and talent to master.

    If you lack one of those skills....you lack that skill. That doesn't mean that you lack skill, overall, in the larger pursuit of which that skill is a part.

    If the skill that you lack is something like basic punctuation, something that you simply can't work without, then odds are that the lack of that skill does mean both things. If the skill is something that you can work without, then the lack of that skill doesn't necessarily mean that you lack skill in the overall pursuit.

    You can write fiction without the skill of writing un-italicized thoughts. I won't like that fiction, because the italics will drive me mad, but you can nevertheless develop a high degree of skill in the other skills involved in fiction writing. You may make many readers happy. I just won't be one of them. If I do come upon your books, and admire your overall mastery of many fiction-writing skills, I will lament, "God, this would be so much better if they could just stop with the italics."

    A cook that doesn't have the skill of cooking a steak any way other than well done, doesn't have the skill of cooking a steak any way other than well done. That doesn't mean that he is otherwise an unskilled cook. He may be a far more skilled cook than many cooks that do have the skill of cooking a steak to all sorts of donenesses. But he doesn't have that skill. And if he wants to cook for people who don't like their steaks grey, the lack of that skill is an issue for him. He may be a brilliant chef, but if I want a steak, I'll go to someone else's restaurant.

    Neil Gaiman is a more skilled writer than me. He has the skill of presenting thoughts without italics. He has the skill of presenting thoughts with italics. Even if he didn't have the skill of presenting thoughts without italics, he would be very skilled in other ways, he just wouldn't have me reading his books. (I can bear his books because he very seldom uses the italics.)

    I do not say that the insistence on using italics for thought means that the writer is overall lacking in skill. The writer may be better than me. But (Edited to clarify: But if they cannot also write without thoughts in italics) they still lack a skill that a writer must have in order to write a book that I will read. And it may well be a skill that a writer must have in order to have a good chance of getting published.

    I understand
    that you don't think that that last assertion is true. We disagree there. We also disagree on whether we like to read books with italicized thoughts. We will not agree on the first point until one of us comes up with conclusive evidence, and we will likely never, ever agree on the second point.

    But I'm really hoping that this whole looooooooong spiel has explained to you my position on the "skill" issue. Because I just don't know how I can explain it any more thoroughly.
     
    GuardianWynn likes this.
  4. Jack Asher

    Jack Asher Banned Contributor

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2013
    Messages:
    3,545
    Likes Received:
    2,083
    Location:
    Denver
    Actually this brings to mind your earlier experiment on another thread. You leafed through a bunch of books at random trying to find use of italics. You failed with at least one author that I found did use the technique. But there are truck sized holes in this methodology. Among them that the authors you cite just might not have had any internal monologue.

    So now it's time to put up. I want to see a book that has internal monologue in quote tags. Your book case is full of examples? Let's see one of them that diverges from all of the cases we've given.
     
  5. Chinspinner

    Chinspinner Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,901
    Likes Received:
    1,023
    Location:
    London, now Auckland
    A very quick search and verification later: -

    The Chicago Manual of Style
    (13.41), “Thought, imagined dialogue, and other interior discourse may be enclosed in quotation marks or not, according to the context or the writer’s preference.”

    AP Stylebook
    “So, is an unspoken thought always worthy of quotation marks? Writer’s choice on that.”
     
  6. Lea`Brooks

    Lea`Brooks Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    May 11, 2013
    Messages:
    2,968
    Likes Received:
    2,007
    Location:
    Virginia, United States
    Can't we all just agree that everyone writes differently? :) This conversation is just going in circles.

    Though, @GuardianWynn I did stumble upon something kind of interesting regarding your predicament. I'm really not trying to get my way, I promise. lol I'm just trying to help your conversations between Vivian and Valorie seem less confusing. What if.... you used quotes AND italics? So it would immediately be set apart, but still be like conversation. So it would look as follows:

    The man was surprised for all his effort he simply could not bring it down on her. “Your pretty strong, it don't matter though. You can't keep this up forever. Just let it in, I promise I'll settle it quick.”
    Or let me out,” Valorie heard a whisper in her mind say.
    “No!” she shouted at the top of her lungs.

    Any time Vivian speaks, it would be surrounded by quotes, but also italicized. And when Valorie responds to her in her head, it would read the same way.

    If you're trying to steer away from italics, I completely understand. It's just a style I found regarding telepathic communication, which yours kind of is. Just a suggestion. :)
     
    GuardianWynn likes this.
  7. Jack Asher

    Jack Asher Banned Contributor

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2013
    Messages:
    3,545
    Likes Received:
    2,083
    Location:
    Denver
    The style book arguments have been made before. I know you're late to the party and missed it. Earlier versions of CMOS stated that the use of italics was correct. Starting in 2013 (I think) the manual switched to "author's choice" as well.

    But I'll be honest, I can recall dozens of times I've seen italics for thought in published work, and can't remember seeing it in tags ever. I'm interested to see if @ChickenFreak can scare up a book that both uses that technique and uses dialogue tags. So far all she's found is books in which the author didn't use italics at all, not that they used inner monologue and quotes.
     
  8. ChickenFreak

    ChickenFreak Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    15,262
    Likes Received:
    13,084
    When did I say quote tags? I'm not in favor of quote tags for internal monologue, and I have no idea whether I have any books that use them. I'm against italics for internal monologue. My bookshelf is full of books that use neither one, that just present internal monologue as smooth flowing part of a close third-person or first-person narrative.

    If you want someone to defend quote tags, find someone who likes them.
     
    GuardianWynn likes this.
  9. Jack Asher

    Jack Asher Banned Contributor

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2013
    Messages:
    3,545
    Likes Received:
    2,083
    Location:
    Denver
    Are we pretending that "quote tags" are different from "speech tags"? Because if not, that would be right here
    If that is the case then we're at a disagreement in terms.
     
  10. GingerCoffee

    GingerCoffee Web Surfer Girl Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2013
    Messages:
    18,385
    Likes Received:
    7,080
    Location:
    Ralph's side of the island.
    I don't want to carry on too vehemently here. I suspect this thread is about to be closed. But just to be clear, it's not a matter of explaining, it's a matter of your underlying premise.
    "But getting that flexibility requires that you write so that you don't _need_ the italics in order to be understood. That's a skill, one that requires some work and practice"​
    The presumption is two-fold: assuming anyone who uses italicized thought may not know how not to, and assuming not using italicized thoughts is the least bit difficult.

    I find your underlying premise insulting. It doesn't matter how you try to rationalize it.
     
  11. GingerCoffee

    GingerCoffee Web Surfer Girl Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2013
    Messages:
    18,385
    Likes Received:
    7,080
    Location:
    Ralph's side of the island.
    As far as the style guides go, in the stickied thread I cited several style guides as well as one recognized professor's style guide that said using italicized thoughts was an accepted convention. The CMoS simply doesn't mention inner monologue as a use for italics.

    There are dozens of other sources, such as the Editor's Blog I cited in this thread which say italicized thoughts are an accepted convention.

    The CMoS notes quotes are OK with thoughts while a dozen other style references say never do it, it's confusing.
     
  12. ChickenFreak

    ChickenFreak Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    15,262
    Likes Received:
    13,084
    Corrected to add the quote I'm responding to:

    The disagreement or confusion is with regard to the term "inner monologue".

    You seem to see all forms of what in might call "in-brain language"--inner monologue, telepathy, etcetera--as the same. I do not. (Edited to add: That is, "as the same" with regard to how they should be presented.)

    This thread is about an 'etcetera'--it's about inner dialogue, not monologue. Two characters are residing in one head, communicating with one another.

    To you, that's probably a semantic nitpick. To me, it goes to the core of one (just one) of the big reasons I don't like italics for inner monologue.

    To me, italics for inner monologue are a solution searching for a problem.

    In close third person or first person, everything that is not specified as NOT being in the character's head, is in the character's head. We don't need italics to tell us that. The italics are unnecessary.

    In a third person book with a changing point of view, the italics don't tell us which character the thought came from--we still have to somehow communicate that. So the italics are insufficient.

    In a more distant third person POV, with a clearly defined POV character AND a somewhat intrusive narrator that may have opinions different from the character, italics may be both useful and sufficient.

    And that's why I say that this goes to the core of just ONE of my reasons for not liking italics, because even though thay may be both useful and sufficient in this situation, I still don't like them. Plenty of books deal with this situation without italics, and that's how I like it.

    Edited to add: I missed much of my point: For inner dialogue, you would again need to attribute each character's words to the character, so italics are, again, insufficient.

    For inner monologue--not telepathy, not inner dialogue--I do not use italics, quotes, or thought tags. I am firmly opposed to italics for inner monologue. I don't have similarly strong opinions on the use of quotes or thought tags for inner monologue, but I don't use them.

    The use of italics for telepathy and inner dialogue are a solution to an actual problem--they don't have to go out and search for their problem. I can see the value. (Edited to add: There is no value in terms of attribution, but value in communicating that the language was not spoken aloud.) And I still don't like them.

    So for this case, one of inner dialogue, I would be choosing between conventions:

    - The convention of quotes and dialogue tags for dialogue, which doesn't fit perfectly because the dialogue is silent.
    - The convention for telepathy, which is most often italics, though I've seen other conventions. (angle brackets, pairs of colons, etc.)
    - The convention for inner monologue, which would be no typographical or punctuation change at all.

    I see the inner dialogue primarily as dialogue, despite the lack of sound. So I choose the convention used for dialogue. You can disagree with that choice, and obviously you do. But it's not the same choice that I make for inner monologue.
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2015
    GuardianWynn likes this.
  13. ChickenFreak

    ChickenFreak Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    15,262
    Likes Received:
    13,084
    If you find the premise that skills must be learned and practiced to be inherently insulting...well, I don't know what to say. That would make the very existence of all schools to be insulting.

    Edited to add: If it makes my position any clearer, I'm sure that the use of italics for thought is also a skill that would require learning and work and practice. To make the best use of them, I'd think that you'd learn to trim away a certain amount of attribution and setup clutter that their use makes unnecessary, thus making many passages cleaner and clearer. It would be a skill. It would take effort. The fact that it's not a skill that I intend to ever use doesn't change the fact that it would be a skill.

    And NOT using italics for thought is also a skill. You'd need to know how to introduce that attribution and setup, and you'd need to ease it in without creating a feeling of clutter.

    They're both skills. Acknowledging that a skill is a skill does not strike me as insulting.
     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2015
    GuardianWynn likes this.
  14. ChickenFreak

    ChickenFreak Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    15,262
    Likes Received:
    13,084
    I'm not "rationalizing" anything. You're making this debate about your feelings of being insulted, because you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. I'm addressing your feelings. But I need to remind myself that this is not about your feelings, and your feelings, and your failure to understand what I'm saying, are not my problem. If you choose to misunderstand and have bad feelings about your incorrect understanding of what I'm saying, there's really nothing more I can do about that.
     
    GuardianWynn likes this.
  15. GuardianWynn

    GuardianWynn Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2014
    Messages:
    2,392
    Likes Received:
    843
    I actually won't agree everyone writes differently Yes I am nit picking. I called myself on it so don't call me on it. We all use symbols like "? . !" for exactly the same thing. We (I hope) all agree that they have a purpose and we use them for that purpose. If we see someone not using them for that purpose we likely correct someone. Right?

    Italics and quotation marks. lol I like the spirit of compromise but in a sentence like;
    "Or let me out," a voice echoed into Valorie's mind.
    A sentence that needs a speech tag and quotation marks. What exactly does italics add? That it wasn't spoken? I state in the tag that it wasn't spoken.

    Thank you. You inspired me to look this up. I know I am gonna get a lot of hate for this but;
    "Its sixteen editions have prescribed writing and citation styles widely used in publishing" - Source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chicago_Manual_of_Style

    Oh course a book published in styles that have been published is going to advocate something that has been published. To be fair that is like saying this.
    "This is a error. A rule of grammar broken but someone let it slide, accidently or they didn't care. Now it is officially a thing. It is correct because we did not call it incorrect." Whether that is a recent or not is not the point either.

    @ChickenFreak Your awesome.
    It is a thing I think everyone missed. Or no one is talking in a way that shows understanding.
    Let me try and help and be sure to correct me if on any account I am mistaken.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_speech
    Chicken I believe is saying that inner monologue or private thoughts should be expressed in indirect or free speech. Not in direct speech. Chicken is also saying that direct speech is a valid style to inner thoughts but not one she prefers. Also if your using direct speech you should conform to the correct way of expressing that which is quotation marks. Also a dialogue is usually direct speech.
    Did I miss a point chicken?

    I still ask. If I am writing a characters direct speech(in thought) and as such am required to show quotation marks and speech tags to clearly show that it is direct speech and who said it. What are italics adding?
     
  16. Lea`Brooks

    Lea`Brooks Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    May 11, 2013
    Messages:
    2,968
    Likes Received:
    2,007
    Location:
    Virginia, United States
    @GuardianWynn First of all, "You're* awesome," and "Also if you're* using direct speech...." This is the third time I've had to correct your use of your. You'd better work on that.

    Second of all... You are completely contradicting yourself. I don't know if you don't understand or if you just plain don't care.

    We (I hope) can all agree that quotations are used to mark spoken dialogue, while italics are used for internal dialogue. It's what they are commonly used for, even if there is no rule. And even though Vivian is separate from Valorie, the dialogue is still, unfortunately, internal. So:

    1) The common practice is to use quotation marks when people are speaking out loud.
    2) The common practice is to use italics when people are having an interior monologue or thought.

    You are choosing to ignore these common practices, but then saying everyone writes the same? You're completely contradicting yourself. If everyone writes the same, then you need to accept the fact that one is common practice and the other is not. You find ONE example of someone using what you're suggesting (conversations happening in the brain that no one else hears in quotation marks) and maybe I'll concede your point. It's never been done before. Which, in turn, means that by YOU doing it, you ARENT writing the same as everyone else. No, it's not a rule. But there's also no rule that says I shouldn't use exclamation points after every sentence. But I don't do it, do I? Because it would be distracting and weird.

    You do realize that putting Vivian and Valorie's conversations in quotations is going to be wordy and redundant, right? Because after every time Vivian says something, you're going to have to say "in my (or her) head" every single time. Because if you don't, the reader will think it's being said out loud (which it's not). And that will make it confusing. And from I've seen, the most universal Rule Of Writing is to delete all excess words. To not get too wordy. To simplify as much as possible. But instead of trying to simplify, you are choosing to add MORE words.

    Again, your story, your choice. But don't you dare say "Everyone writes the same way" and then go against the common practice. Because despite what you want to think, using italics for things occurring inside the brain (whether it be thought or telepathic communication) IS the norm. It IS common practice. And you are going against it.

    I am SO done. This thread needs to be closed already.
     
  17. Jack Asher

    Jack Asher Banned Contributor

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2013
    Messages:
    3,545
    Likes Received:
    2,083
    Location:
    Denver
    You misunderstand how italics would be used, I think. It would look like this
    Or let me out.

    No tags, no echos, just the fact that the voice speaks is all anyone needs to know to fill in the rest.
     
  18. GingerCoffee

    GingerCoffee Web Surfer Girl Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2013
    Messages:
    18,385
    Likes Received:
    7,080
    Location:
    Ralph's side of the island.
    Who is the 'you' referring to here?

    That's quite the false analogy.

    You're just digging the hole deeper.

    The only skill it takes to italicize thoughts in fiction is control+i. Or you can highlight the passage and use the menu bar. Writing, "she thought" does take a bit of spelling skill I suppose. :rolleyes:

    Writing takes skill. Writing dialogue/monologue, internal or external, takes skill. There is no special skill above and beyond the skill of writing dialogue needed to use italicized thought or not, tags or no tags.

    You continue to imply that some people who use the italicized thought convention must not know how else to write. @Cogito, @mammamaia and others have made the same assertion. It's an unsupportable assertion no matter how much you call it a "skill" to rationalize judging people as less skilled who use italicized thought in their writing.
     
  19. GuardianWynn

    GuardianWynn Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2014
    Messages:
    2,392
    Likes Received:
    843
    Granted I am not a master lol referring to the your/you're mistake.
    Well, depends on how your taking my words. Obviously we write different to a point. We don't all write the exact same book over and over. Didn't think I needed to specify that.
    Didn't you just a post ago suggest both? Also do you like only read half my post? Your words don't seem to reflect a full understanding of what I said. What we are referring to here isn't just interior monologue but dialogue. I mean they sound the same but these are different words.
    Though that isn't really the point. A quote is needed because I am well quoting her exact message. Spoken, or written or otherwise. I am giving you the un-filtered version of what she is saying.
    Wait realizing something. Your just like ignoring my questions aren't you? I asked you what does italics add if even with them I still need quotes and speech tags? I see no answer? Did I miss it?
    Actually you can have people speaking aloud without quotation marks. You just imply the theme of what they said. It is then indirect speech and doesn't need a quote. Where are you finding this "spoken out loud needs a quote" rule?
    No I can't quote a book using what you ask. Then again I can't quote a book using italics for thoughts either. I kind of suck. lol. Which is why I open thread asking opinions.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclamation_mark
    See maybe this is off to you but the rules of grammar as I see them seem to be like telling you when to use stuff. Using them at a time other than that is not correct. Replacing a period with a exclamation mark because you felt like it and not to express the exclaim it means would be incorrect and not just distracting.
    Well from what I see this style of scene needs tags and quotes already. Internal or external mean nothing. So I ask again what is italics saving me?
    I got an idea. We can just type a character dialogue tag color in the table of context. Every main character gets a unique color. Think of the words we would save by not needing tags anymore. Cuz the colors would BE tags. Why are we not doing this?! lol joking if you couldn't tell.
    For being done you wrote a nice wall of text. I would like it if you answered my questions towards you.
     
  20. GuardianWynn

    GuardianWynn Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2014
    Messages:
    2,392
    Likes Received:
    843
    First I don't like the lack of clearly showing where this came from. Like I said before this site I would have been honestly confused by this.

    Second it doesn't deal with the aspect of that fact I am quoting her without using quotation marks.

    Third how does that translate to a dialogue when it and Valorie are going back and forth?
     
  21. ChickenFreak

    ChickenFreak Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    15,262
    Likes Received:
    13,084
    Jack. Corrected.

    You are so determined to be insulted that you're denigrating your own skills. Sorry, I'm done with playing the perpetrator role in this drama; you'll need to re-cast it. We're done talking.
     
  22. ChickenFreak

    ChickenFreak Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    15,262
    Likes Received:
    13,084
    Actually, that's not altogether what I'm saying. :) Speaking of feelings, I feel bad saying that when you've been so nice, but it's not quite it.

    When a thought is just a thought--Fred is thinking inside Fred's head and the only person getting that thought is Fred--I don't normally use italics, quotes, thought tags, or speech tags. I just present the thought with no trimmings at all.

    That's true whether the thought is an indirect thought:

    Fred was annoyed about the mess.

    Or a kinda-direct thought, one that uses the character's voice but not an "I" or a tense change:

    Fred looked around at the mess. Great. Just great. Just peachy. He knew he should have changed the locks.

    Or a flat-out literal direct thought:

    Fred looked around at the mess. Great. Just great. Just peachy. Just...oh, for God's sake, will you look at that? My favorite teacup smashed to powder. I knew I should have changed the locks.

    Now, that last one feels weird, doesn't it? Easing one's way into a direct, literal thought like that without italics or thought tags or quotes can be difficult. It requires more context and prep and wrapping. A little sample like this isn't enough to make it feel right.

    And I'm sure that the pro-italics folks would say, "Yeah? See? SEE? We get that for free!" Indeed they do. I don't care. Not a single one of my favorite authors needed italics to solve that problem.

    Some of my favorite authors do use thought tags:

    Bella was in travelling gear, but managed to show no signs of travel: how could anyone contrive to look like an ice lettuce on a hot summer's day, her mother wondered? Her make-up was bright and unsmudged, her blouse looked as if it were straight from the shop hanger, there was not a bulge in her slacks. It was almost inhuman.

    That's from Death of a Mystery Writer, by Robert Barnard. This book is either third person with a frequently shifting point of view, or third person omniscient, depending on how you define those two. Whichever it is, the POV shifts often enough that some care is definitely required to ensure that the thought is tied to the right person.

    Now, in your case, I'm suggesting speech tags and quotes because I'd choose to format communication between Valorie and her Voice not as thought, but as a conversation. It's communication, not rumination. If it were rumination, just Valorie thinking to herself, I wouldn't suggest speech tags or thought tags or quotes.

    If you have now decided that I'm insane and you're going with the italics camp, I won't be offended. :)
     
  23. GuardianWynn

    GuardianWynn Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2014
    Messages:
    2,392
    Likes Received:
    843
    Nope almost ever thing you have said seems to make perfect sense to me.
    The only thing that I am a bit confused on is why you would use direct speech without a quote. I suppose the context making it clear is a valid way at going about it. As quotes are meant to give said context. Still the concept of quoting without quotes does strike me as a bit odd.
     
  24. Lea`Brooks

    Lea`Brooks Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    May 11, 2013
    Messages:
    2,968
    Likes Received:
    2,007
    Location:
    Virginia, United States
    No, you're definitely not a master. But you're a member of a writing forum, and proper spelling is suggested in the rules. And people are going to continue to call you out on it if you continue to use the incorrect version. Which you did. Again. Twice. In one post.
    I didn't think I needed to specify a lot of things that I've said, but apparently, I have. And if you're going to get nit-picky, then so will I.
    Yes, I did suggest you use both, to set the internal conversation apart from the external conversation, thus saving you from having to use "in her head" after every said, thus making it easier for the reader to understand.
    The point to me isn't whether it's direct speech or indirect speech. It's internal versus external.
    Yes, I did ignore your question. One, because I explained why I suggested it in the post where I suggested it. And two, I knew you would only argue the idea, which would only add to the headache of having to explain such a simple concept to you. I said, in my original suggestion: "I'm just trying to help your conversations between Vivian and Valorie seem less confusing. What if.... you used quotes AND italics? So it would immediately be set apart, but still be like conversation." Also, it would take away having to say "in her head" every single time. Because "having a sentence look like this" immediately lets the reader know that this is not a normal conversation. There is something different about it, because typically, dialogue is not written it italics. So it alerts them to a change.
    Indirect speech is not someone speaking. It is reported speech. It is someone saying what someone else said.

    June said, "I like potatoes." -direct speech... her exact words
    June said she likes potatoes. -indirect speech... someone else saying what June said

    You don't put indirect speech in quotes. Because indirect speech is a summary, not the exact words. You don't put a summary of someone's words in quotes. So even though the words were said out loud, they are still being summarized. Thus, no quotes.
    Well, I can. Maze Runner by James Dashner. Uses italics (not quotes) and a tag for telepathic communication. The Dark Visions Trilogy by L. J. Smith. Uses italics (not quotes) and a tag for telepathic communication. Beautiful Creatures by Kami Garcia and Margaret Stohl. Uses italics (not quotes) and a tag for telepathic communication.
    And then latch on to one person's idea of "what's right" and refuse to accept the common consensus among the other members.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italic_type#Usage See, this says that italics are commonly used to indicate thought process, but you seem to be completely against that, so what's the point of rules, right?
    Internal and external mean everything. If you ignore that, you're going to fail as a writer. Because things are common for a reason. They are common because they work. And if you start putting people's thoughts (purely thoughts) in quotations, you are going to be laughed out of writing.
    Yeah, let's do that! And in all honesty, the final decision on this will come down to your publisher, if you ever get one. They may decide they hate your quotations idea and suggest something entirely different. Like gray text instead of black. Or a different font. Or a different justification. So you could be entirely wasting your time arguing this.
    Is that enough answering for you?
     
  25. ChickenFreak

    ChickenFreak Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    15,262
    Likes Received:
    13,084
    Because in that case, it's not direct speech, but literal thought. Fred didn't say all that stuff about his teacup being smashed, he thought it, but he thought it word for word.

    Really, this isn't used that often. I generally use the character's voice and turns of phrase, but I use the "he" rather than the "I". So instead of:

    Fred looked around at the mess. Great. Just great. Just peachy. Just...oh, for God's sake, will you look at that? My favorite teacup smashed to powder. I knew I should have changed the locks.

    I'd use:

    Fred looked around at the mess. Great. Just great. Just peachy. Just...oh, for God's sake, would you look at that? His favorite teacup smashed to powder. He knew he should have changed the locks.

    This change doesn't bother me. If it did, then I'd have more motivation to try to like the italics thing. But I doubt I'd succeed. In liking it, that is. If I had a character whose exact, exact words were that important, and to get the effect I wanted I had to choose between using italics for thought or using first person, or even (shudder) first person present, I'd go with the first person or the intensely-loathed-by-me first person present, before I'd go to italics. I hate italics for thought that much.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice