I do think genre plays somewhat of a role here. I read mostly general fiction, and I rarely see italics used for thoughts. In fact, I don't even remember the last book I read that used italics for thoughts. Perhaps other genres do things a bit differently. Maybe someone who reads sci-fi, fantasy, etc. can clarify.
Or you could read through the thread, there's a lot to learn here besides what's on this page, from forum dynamics to style conventions.
why do i keep getting a server error and can't get my reply posted? sorry, bb, but you're not making any more sense than those em dashes do... first of all, third person narrative can't include the dialog of a character in the scene being described, the way it was done there... nor can that ending bit of reply dialog follow a comma in the narrative that is not even close being a dialog intro... it's also not at all clear who's doing the speaking... i had to delete bb's post that goes in automatically when you hit the 'reply' button in a persons's post, before i could get my reply to 'take'... the edit window didn't work, either!... i had to go to 'options' to add this...
@mammamaia sorry, but I have a feeling you are not reading the whole of Michael O's paragraph... Em dashes wereused correctly
Michael O's em dashes in question: "... These were the hands of The Shadow and this room was his hidden sanctum where”—“Milo...Is it you?”—he looked up. It took a moment to put a name to these eyes from the past and a big smile followed, “Tipper McCloud!” There are two ways to use those em dashes and it is possible Michael O used it correctly though I wouldn't have done it that way. The first em dash would unquestionably be correct if it were inside the quotes. It connotes an interruption in the sentence being read. If used that way, the second em dash isn't needed because the sentence being read does not resume. But Michael O was treating it as the reader's actions altogether being interrupted. It doesn't look quite right because the thing interrupted is more logically the sentence from the story, but technically Michael O used the em dashes around the interrupting thing and that could be correct if Milo continued reading before looking up. I think looking up is still part of the interruption. So while I see what Michael O did there, I would have only used one em dash and I'd have put it inside the quote. http://www.punctuationmadesimple.com/PMSEmdash.html As for the italics, it's tricky. I'm tempted to think in italics Milo is reading to himself and without them he's reading aloud, but then you have the problem of the quotation marks. I would not choose to use italics to connote reading silently and I'm still a tad torn about seeing it used when characters are communicating via thoughts. But I would not go so far as to say it was wrong in either case.
I listed a few in my post. I forgot to add sci-fi titles, but e.g. Tanya Huff's Valor-series employs them a lot. Both Joe Abercrombie and Richard K. Morgan have "designated" characters in their novels with a lot of italics-for-thoughts. I'm not entirely sure what's up with that, though... to separate the characters? In Morgan's case that does kind of make sense 'cause the characters were quite similar. I could read one chapter by replacing the character's name with another char's name and voilà, it was about the same, apart from the italics-usage.
Again, folks, do not confuse what ends up in print with what is acceptable in manuscript. Typesetting isn't writing. Many things happen in typesetting that are not part of the manuscript, and if you are writing to publish, you should never, ever forget that distinction. Forum dynamics, indeed. That is why I have, for the most part, dropped out of this discussion. One voice, in particular, is obsessed with the argument rather than the substance.
Friend of mine (from another forum) just had her book accepted by a publisher, due out in 4 months. The editor working for the publisher told her to italicize inner dialogue. I don't know the name of the publisher but I believe they are financing printed copies as well as electronic.
Yeah, there are a lot of traditionally published books that use that format. Whether it was once frowned on or not, it seems fairly common, particularly in some genres.
"You thought you had killed it. You buried it with a stake through its shriveled evil heart. You thought you were free of it forever. But ... it has risen again. It has clawed its way from the tomb and now stalks us all again. It is ... the Thread that Wouldn't Die." - Abraham Van Helsing (or maybe Groucho Marx - it's hard to tell them apart sometimes)
It's stickied, of course it won't die. Here's the quote because she had other interesting things to say in it: She added: Hmmm, Mister and Mrs.... sounds like a debatable edit.
I thought it was worthwhile to post since so many people in the thread said publishers' editors would not accept the italics for thoughts.
My guess is that some genres are more open to using italics for thoughts. For example, I don't even remember the last time I saw italics used for thoughts in literary fiction.
As long as you stay consistent. I looove italics for thoughts. Even edgier, just a comma. It worked for me. ex: It makes no sense, I thought. But maybe Daniel does have a stick up his butt.
it's not done as often. and it's new compared to the "italics for thoughts" thing. Plus it's hard to pull off. You need to clarify which lines are thoughts and it has to look good. Aesthetically pleasing
A quibble: I would say that it's a good deal older. To me, at the ancient age of almost fifty, thoughts without either italics or explicit thought attributions are old, and the italics thing is new-fangled and annoys me.
I personally like italics for thoughts. You can either start a new line for it or put it inside a paragraph and even right after dialogue. For me, any book that uses it, works well. I much prefer it over just added a thought tag like you do with dialogue.
