This is perfectly understandable without quotes. You can add the 'she thought', but it's not absolutely necessary.
Apart from making use of 'she thought', which is fine if you don't overdo it, paragraphs help--just like starting a new paragraph when someone speaks. Italics are really not necessary for thoughts if you organise your sentences and paragraphs well. Also, if you use italics for thoughts, it makes it less obvious when you need to use them to emphasise words--which is when italics should be used. There, I just did it. Example: She headed for the dressing room, overwhelmed at having to try on all the dresses. The store assistant had told her that they would all be altered for her size, but looking at herself in the mirror, she looked ridiculous in the first two she tried. She also felt lonely. If Mom were here, she would find the way to encourage me. I understand she is doing something very important, but I’d like so much to have her here with me, she thought. Soon she picked herself up, and continued trying on dresses.
I'm glad to hear that. I just feel slightly uncomfortable switching both tense and POV without warning. I think in a memoir if there is just a tense issue, maybe it's not so bad to have a tense shift, but both...?
I'm glad to hear that. I just feel slightly uncomfortable switching both tense and POV without warning. I think in a memoir if there is just a tense issue, maybe it's not so bad to have a tense shift, but both...?
For me when I want to make it clear the character is thinking something, I give it it's own paragraph and use italic. Like this Then continue with the narrative.
Was that aimed at me or someone else? If it was to me, then I have seen it written like I have shown in books I've head, so I think each publisher is different when it comes to things like this.
But that's strictly a publisher-by-publisher case. If it doesn't work, and you aren't self-publishing, then an editor will remove the italics, add in a few words, and then run it through the printer regardless of what you would want. It's a moot point, anyways, because it is, after all, the choice of the writer to use the language as he/she sees fit. I use italics for emphasis exclusively, but that's how I choose to use the language. Publishers may frown, some readers may frown, but so long as the writer's smiling, there's not much else that matters, just be aware that if you ARE writing for a publisher, then it could make or break the book.
I hate italics for thoughts, but I see them more and more often these days. It seems that publishers are actually quite fond of them. IMO they are only popular because they hide weak writing (and editing), a kind of shortcut. Likewise tiny little one sentence paragraphs. Read a book published 30 years ago--they were hardly ever used because writers knew how to structure sentences properly. Also, it has a knock-on effect--as we get used to seeing them, and reading internet-speak, we accept them as the norm.
It depends from what POV you're writing your story in. For example, if it's a first person view, you can actually implement direct speach into your story without any special marks. If it's a third person view, indirect speach is the most common way: Third person allows direct speach, however this doesn't really work if you're using a first person perspective. TheComet
I'll have to slightly disagree with you there, since having a character's thoughts in it's own paragraph help certain people know a character is thinking and not talking, because sometime a writer doesn't add 'They/she/he/I/name of character here thought' I can't speak for everyone who has aspergers but having this makes it more easy for me to read a book I want to enjoy, and it's why I write like that as well. So it's only weak writing/editing for people who it doesn't help.
Using italics for character thoughts is an improper use of italics. There are specific, permissable uses of italics, and that is not one of them. If your reader cannot distinguish the literal thoughts without such gimmicks as italics, it's sloppy writing.
Interesting timing on the conversation, because I'm reading a book by William Dietrich, published by Harper Collins, and he uses italics for thoughts. The book was well-received among critics, and Dietrich has a Pulitzer for non-fiction, so it seems like he'd be at least aware of the fundamentals of writing. Thinking back over what I've read through the years, it seems to me that I've come across the use of italics as thoughts a lot more in the past decade or so than I ever did before there. I was taught not to use them, and it also stood out to me when a writer did. Maybe whether this is acceptable or not in fiction writing is changing over time. Authors sure seem to use them more now than they used to.
Publishing choices are not always in accordance with what you should do in your manuscript. Sometimes a publisher will print an entire chapter in italics, which is most assuredly not recommended in a manuscript. Italicized text is harder to read than normal font. Moreover, there are specific situations for which italics are the correct choice (all of them for short passages only!) These include: Foreign words or phrases. Titles of creative works, or of vessels. Words that receive emphasis they would not ordinarily receive within the structure of a sentence. The standard method for indicating italics in manuscript is underlining. If that turns the manuscript ugly, it's a pretty good indication you are misusing italics.
I looked over the discussion, why argue what someone in grade school said? Unless someone is a world reknown writing scholar shouldn't we request references to the answer that is in question? I am not advising for or against italics, but I did look for a respectable source to quote. One: http://www.helium.com/items/614947-fiction-writing-how-to-write-your-characters-thoughts This quote supports the 2nd grade teacher teaching something different then it is today, so both sides could be right. list of times to use italics: http://english.learnhub.com/lesson/4790-using-italics-in-writing On the reverse, I found several lists of when to use italics, and thought was not one of them. I have heard both ways on the various creative writing forums. "Because I said so" wasn't a good reason for Mom, it definately isn't when answering someone's question. "We've always done it this way..." seems not to be the case for writing style, many popular authors don't do it right, (I heard Tolken uses quotation marks for thought) We are here to learn or share knowledge or to inspire, do we really need to have unsupported claims continuously repeated or reworded for several pages? Wouldn't this thread have been alot better with one post saying how "it's done" with the second post linking to an official source on the subject? Or if you don't have a link, tell the one questioning to look it up(with the source you know that has it right.) Some novels have thoughts in italics, it is done, with my sources they say this is not as common as before, so I would agree with the people that normal thought should not be in italics, emphasis on the thought would.
I limited my research on the matter to authoritative sources, such as the Chicago Manual of Style. I searched many such referrences online and offline before taking the position against the use of italics for literal thought. It was not an easy research. The authorities don't come out and say, "Thou shalt not use italics for literal thoughts." What hey do say, however, is what the proper ways are to render various types of dialogue, spoken and unspoken. They also enumerate the correct ways to use italics. In no case does one of these authoritative sources endorse the use of italics for literal thoughts. You can find sites anywhere on the Internet that support any position on any subject. It's important to take the source into account. In the end, you will make the decision whether to render literal thoughts in italics, or whether to stick with the standard of unquoted, plain text silent dialogue (which is referred to in the Chicago Manual of Style). The former, although it may be accepted by some publishers, may annoy others and increase your odds of rejection. The latter will not annoy any publisher. Furthermore, because it forces you to write with more clarity, it will make you a better writer. Seen in that light, the wiser path is obvious.
to avoid confusion, 'letter' was a typo for 'latter'... referring to not using italics... and i wholeheartedly concur with cog's opinion and reasoning on the matter...
