Survey of forum members' REACTION to using italics for first person thoughts

Anyone who needs italics to make it clear that they are writing thoughts, needs to improve on their writing. Therefore, whenever italics are used as a crutch, or to mask a writing deficiency, it'll be annoying. Not because of the italics but because of the overall poor writing skill, where the reader has to re-read multiple segments because the writer isn't communicating well enough.
That's why thought italics are bad, because they are a clue to the overall poor standard of writing.

There are multiple legitimate uses for italics, and "clarity" or "making thoughts more clear that they are thoughts" isn't one of them. In my opinion.

 

Never argue with an agenda.

 

So ...this means that 50% of the books people buy will not use italics for thoughts, and 25% of them will? Horses for courses, people.

We need to be less rigid about 'rules' pertaining to style. By all means, everyone is entitled to like what they like, but the idea that one style is RIGHT and the other is WRONG just doesn't apply to anything creative. Writing, painting, theatre, whatever.

Remember how Impressionist paintings were originally received by the art establishment? They were considered 'careless, untutored, messy, untalented, blah-de-blah'— to the extent that artists like Matisse had to stage their own exhibitions, because established galleries wouldn't let them in. Strike a chord here, maybe?

 

Yes, this is irrelevant, and no.

 

Almost every book I read has italics for thoughts, and I personally like it. Inner dialogue is one of my favorite aspects of a character, so seeing italics coming up on a page excites me--because I know what's coming.

And I know my reasoning for liking them is a little outside the box, but oh well, it is what it is.

P.S. I strongly hate when a writer does something like this:

Bob is so mad at me, Jane thought.

So annoying. We already know Jane is thinking because of the italics. I am firmly in the camp of either writing italics out completely or only using italics. One or the other, never both.

 

It's interesting that after I explain I was looking for readers' reaction to seeing italics in a piece they are reading, not publishers', people want to re-write my poll to ask something else. For the record, I have said all along one should use a publisher's style requirements when submitting anything to that publisher.

I've answered this in the discussion thread to avoid creating a duplicate thread.

More irony, Cogito, since the same thing can be said for your posts. Your agenda is to convince people you are right. Mine was to find the evidence and draw my conclusion from that evidence.

And I did find the evidence, quite a bit of it actually, including the two university professors who teach writing, are published novel writers, are published style guide writers, and are recognized in their field for their expertise in writing style, who advise writers to use the italics for inner dialogue.

 

I have just popped in and out over the last week, and haven't kept up with this discussion. So forgive me if I misunderstand, but at this point, I don't get at all what you're arguing about. Is it:

1. Published writers use italics, and therefore it is okay for us to use them too. You've made this point before, and if this is your argument, then this poll really is meaningless, hence my suggestion.
2. It is okay to write your original manuscripts in italics, and then remove them before you submit it to a publisher, since it seems most of them are not going to want any submissions in italics (this is where CoS comes into play, since the publishers and editors collaborate on it). If that's the case, then there is no reason for the discussion at all, since italics is just a building block for writing, and will be edited out, much like using repetitive motion tags, for better writing technique in the editing process before you send it off.
3. Readers like seeing italics, and therefore it's a good idea to use them. If that's the case, then this discussion really doesn't amount to anything since it is the publisher that will make the final decision on italics.
4. Or last, is it that you really don't believe that publishers care about thoughts in italics? If that's the case, then the only way to know, is to send inquiry letters to publishers and agents asking for either their in-house style guides, or for them to answer you directly. If this really is the argument, which is what I assumed it was, then my suggestion stands.
5. EDIT: Or the thrill is in the arguing and not the outcome. (thanks Nee)

In truth, at this point, it looks more like you're just arguing to argue, rather than to learn from those who have more experience than we do.

 

Or the thrill is in the arguing and not the outcome.

 

I don't mean to steal Maia's thing, but...ditto...

 

None of those statements are true about my position, either in this thread, or in the other. Contrary to the number of false assumptions about this poll and thread, I was just addressing here, the claims in the other thread that seeing the italics bothers readers. I wanted an idea how many readers were actually annoyed when they saw inner dialogue in italics in something they were reading. The rest of the discussion is on the other thread and my points there are not consistent with your misunderstandings.

Again to avoid continuing a duplicate thread, I'll address your list more specifically in the other thread.

And you would all be wrong.

 

I don't understand why y'all are getting out your pitchforks just because someone wants to discuss something on a discussion board.

 

Well...it is up to the writer to make themselves understand, so...