# Were or Are?



## Androxine Vortex (Jul 10, 2012)

I'm in the middle of editing some stuff I wrote today and I came across this passage:

(Keep in mind this is about a hunter stalking a deer, not some little girl. I realized how wrong this sounded out of context!)

He had been watching his prey for sometime now. She was young, too young in fact to be wandering around at night alone. Where are it's parents or siblings? But it does not matter. All that mattered now was the kill to come.

Should it be, "Where are it's parents..." or "Where were it's parents..."
I had initially used "were" but didn't think that would work because it wasn't past-tense but "are" doesn't sound right either. I can't make heads or tails on this. So which version should I use?


----------



## Ireth (Jul 10, 2012)

If you're aiming for present tense, I think it's the "she was young" that's the problem. Should it not be "she is young" instead? Unless the deer has aged significantly since the hunter has started stalking her, using "was" doesn't make a lot of sense. Also, I'd switch the final sentence to present tense as well. "All that matters now is..." etc.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Jul 10, 2012)

I'd prefer...

"The deer looked young."

It's a more active sentence and from the perspective of the hunter.

Be careful with "were & are" they can be passive which you want to avoid most of the time.


----------



## Androxine Vortex (Jul 10, 2012)

Ireth said:


> If you're aiming for present tense, I think it's the "she was young" that's the problem. Should it not be "she is young" instead? Unless the deer has aged significantly since the hunter has started stalking her, using "was" doesn't make a lot of sense. Also, I'd switch the final sentence to present tense as well. "All that matters now is..." etc.



I am horrible when it comes to grammar rules sometimes and past/present tense has always stumped me. I guess I can see what you mean but even when I say, "she is young" it still sounds different. Maybe because I'm so used to writing in the incorrect way. I guess I should think of it like if I was the actual hunter I wouldn't look at the deer and say, "she was young" because I'm looking at her right now so she IS young.

I don't know, for some reason it still sounds weird when I don't use "was" but I'm pretty sure you are more informed about these things than me. I guess it's just an easy thing for me to mix up and something I'll have to work on.


----------



## Jess A (Jul 10, 2012)

> He had been watching his prey for sometime now. She was young, too young in fact to be wandering around at night alone. Where are it's parents or siblings? But it does not matter. All that mattered now was the kill to come.



Not a bad little paragraph. It has some atmosphere and I can almost imagine the tension. 

-------

This would be the passage in present tense:

_
He has been watching his prey for some time now. She is young, too young in fact to be wandering around at night alone. Where are its parents or siblings? But it does not matter. All that matters now is the kill to come._

Past tense:

_He had been watching his prey for some time now. She was young, too young in fact to be wandering around at night alone. Where were its parents or siblings? But it did not matter. All that mattered now was the kill to come._

You would use 'are' in the past-tense one if you make the 'where were/are its parents or siblings?' into the hunter's dialogue or thought. You would probably italicise it if it is the hunter's thoughts, but I put "" to make it clearer.

_He had been watching his prey for some time now.The doe seemed too young to be wandering around at night alone. "I wonder where its parents or siblings are," he thought/said. But it did not matter. All that mattered now was the kill to come._

--------

You could use 'fawn' as well, since 'doe' is probably more accurate for an adult female deer.

You could ditch the dialogue or the thoughts about its parents and siblings. It is almost a repeat of 'the doe seemed too young to be wandering around at night alone' (which I shortened a little):

_He had been watching his prey for some time now. The doe seemed too young to be wandering around at night alone. But it did not matter. All that mattered now was the kill to come._

Etc. Lots of ways you could work with it. 

--------

Also, '*it's*' should be '*its*'. Only use 'it's' when it stands in for 'it is'. That is how you remember which to use if you are not sure of the grammar rule. 'It' doesn't have that possessive apostrophe. You can say 'The doe's parents'. 'The deer's parents'. 'Her parents'. Or 'its parents'. If you say 'it's parents', that is like saying 'it is parents'.

This is a hasty edit so people should correct me if I missed something.


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (Jul 11, 2012)

To answer the original question: You're writing in the past tense, so it should be "were".

Also, "But it *did* not matter."


----------



## Androxine Vortex (Jul 11, 2012)

Little Storm Cloud said:


> You would probably italicise it if it is the hunter's thoughts, but I put "" to make it clearer.



I actually read on multiple sites last night that you shouldn't use quotations or italicize a character's thoughts. Anyone want to clarify if this is true or false?



Benjamin Clayborne said:


> To answer the original question: You're writing in the past tense, so it should be "were".
> 
> Also, "But it *did* not matter."



But I thought that Ireth said it should be in present tense. I'm confused now


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 11, 2012)

Androxine Vortex said:


> I'm in the middle of editing some stuff I wrote today and I came across this passage:
> 
> (Keep in mind this is about a hunter stalking a deer, not some little girl. I realized how wrong this sounded out of context!)
> 
> ...



I have a different take on this than the others who have responded.  Before I comment however: I want to make clear that I in no way, form, or fashion endorse the use of such horrible, dreadful words as "was," "were," or "are."  

This is the way I read your passage:

He had been watching his prey for sometime now. She was young, too young in fact to be wandering around at night alone. _Where are it's parents or siblings?_ But it does not matter. All that mattered now was the kill to come.

The italics are all important as they indicate that it is internal dialogue.  It is quite the norm to have the narrative be in past tense and dialogue and thoughts in present.  This is the way I read it, so that sentence works fine.

The next sentence, however, is a problem.  "But it does not matter" does not read as internal dialogue.  You need to make one of two changes:  Either 1) make it simply "It doesn't matter." and put it in italics or 2) "But it did not matter."

Hope that helped.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 11, 2012)

> I actually read on multiple sites last night that you shouldn't use quotations or italicize a character's thoughts. Anyone want to clarify if this is true or false?



It's a style choice, but you have to call it out in some way.  Here are your options:

1. Quotes: I can't recall a lot of instances where I've seen quotes to indicate thoughts, so I'd definitely ditch that idea.

2. Italics: The reader knows that italics indicate thought.  It's the style I use, and I prefer it.  I haven't really researched the arguments against it.  My guess would be that some may think it distracting?

3. Speech tag: Simply write: This isn't my favorite way to indicate what the POV character is thinking, BWFoster78 thought.  To me, this method is more distracting than the italics.

You're the author.  It's your call.

Hope that helped.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 11, 2012)

Androxine Vortex said:


> I am horrible when it comes to grammar rules sometimes and past/present tense has always stumped me. I guess I can see what you mean but even when I say, "she is young" it still sounds different. Maybe because I'm so used to writing in the incorrect way. I guess I should think of it like if I was the actual hunter I wouldn't look at the deer and say, "she was young" because I'm looking at her right now so she IS young.
> 
> I don't know, for some reason it still sounds weird when I don't use "was" but I'm pretty sure you are more informed about these things than me. I guess it's just an easy thing for me to mix up and something I'll have to work on.



Some people like using present tense for their stories.  Personally, I hate it with a purple passion.  Writing in past tense as you've done is perfectly acceptable.


----------



## Steerpike (Jul 11, 2012)

I don't think you have to explicitly call out thoughts in this example. The following works just fine:

*He had been watching his prey for sometime now. She was young, too young in fact to be wandering around at night alone. Where were her parents or siblings? But it did not matter. All that mattered now was the kill to come.*

You relate what the character is thinking, but not via direct internal monologue. If you do use direct internal monologue, you'll generally read that italics are disfavored. This despite the fact that you can find any number of published books that use them for this purpose.

Also, the above example is in past tense. It works equally well in present tense, so go with what you prefer.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Jul 11, 2012)

BWFoster78 said:
			
		

> I have a different take on this than the others who have responded.  Before I comment however: I want to make clear that I in no way, form, or fashion endorse the use of such horrible, dreadful words as "was," "were," or "are."



Just a quick point on this. More often than not I agree with BWF on this. However, I want to be clear on my stance. These "to be" verbs - "was, were, are" often find themselves in passive voice sentences BUT they are not ALWAYS passive. Trying to write an entire novel without using the word "was" may be a tad extreme.

They're really words you want to watch out for that might clue you in that you're being passive when you don't realize. There may be times though that you want to be passive. For example, if I'm using dialogue to show character in an introverted or submissive person, passive voice may help that.

It's all about making conscious choices to find what works. Most of the time, in my opinion, you'll want to avoid passive voice.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 11, 2012)

T.Allen.Smith said:


> Just a quick point on this. More often than not I agree with BWF on this. However, I want to be clear on my stance. These "to be" verbs - "was, were, are" often find themselves in passive voice sentences BUT they are not ALWAYS passive. Trying to write an entire novel without using the word "was" may be a tad extreme.
> 
> They're really words you want to watch out for that might clue you in that you're being passive when you don't realize. There may be times though that you want to be passive. For example, if I'm using dialogue to show character in an introverted or submissive person, passive voice may help that.
> 
> It's all about making conscious choices to find what works. Most of the time, in my opinion, you'll want to avoid passive voice.



Good point.  I agree completely.  Just a little attempt at humor/hyperbole.

My official position is: avoid using those words unless you have to do serious gymnastics to do so.  

I also am much more lenient on the topic when we're talking about dialogue (pun intended).


----------



## Butterfly (Jul 11, 2012)

> Originally Posted by T.Allen.Smith
> 
> Just a quick point on this. More often than not I agree with BWF on this. However, I want to be clear on my stance. These "to be" verbs - "was, were, are" often find themselves in passive voice sentences BUT they are not ALWAYS passive. Trying to write an entire novel without using the word "was" may be a tad extreme.
> 
> ...



That's true, the passive voice needs other elements besides simply one appearance of a 'to be' word. Passive sentences place the object in a more important position than the subject, and they usually (but not always) follow this equation:-

Object + To be word + a past participle (+ by subject) - In brackets as it can easily be left out.

e.g A lamp was placed on the table by Jeff. = passive

Jeff placed the lamp on the table = active.

I hope this explains passive structure.

The passive voice is used quite a bit in the crime/thriller/mystery genres, where the person who has done the action is an unknown and the emphasis is on the objects of say a murder scene. It can be used effectively to add suspense in that a character is being acted upon. A good example of this is in the film industry an opening to a particular James Bond Film - Die another day. Die Another Day Opening Titles - YouTube - we know he's being tortured by not by whom. That's passivity in motion. How would you write that scene without this tool? If you did, I doubt it would have the same impact.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 11, 2012)

Butterfly said:


> That's true, the passive voice needs other elements besides simply one appearance of a 'to be' word. Passive sentences place the object in a more important position than the subject, and they usually (but not always) follow this equation:-
> 
> Object + To be word + a past participle (+ by subject) - In brackets as it can easily be left out.
> 
> ...



This clarifies, but also simplifies, the concept.  There are other ways to create passivity than by using the past participle.  

I think, however, that we have to be careful about getting into the weeds.  The writer who's advanced enough to be getting this far into whether something is passive or not is probably advanced enough to make the determination whether the form of "to be" works in their piece.  For the purposes of the OP, I think saying: try to avoid using "was" is the best bet.


----------



## Androxine Vortex (Jul 11, 2012)

When I write I typically write in past tense.

He walk*ed* over to the door.
The water flow*ed* down the side of the cliff.
His head *was* pounding.

So I guess when I write internal monologue it feels more natural to me to make it in past-tense. Sometimes I can see it wouldn't be the best choice, like I could write:

His head was pounding. _Where *am* I?_

Steerpike is saying that it wouldn't matter which tense I write in for the original example though. So would,

"He had been watching his prey for sometime now. She was young, too young in fact to be wandering around at night alone. Where were her parents or siblings? But it did not matter. All that mattered now was the kill to come."

be just as appropriate as,

"He had been watching his prey for sometime now. She is young, too young in fact to be wandering around at night alone. Where are her parents or siblings? But it does not matter. All that matters now is the kill to come."

To me, the first seems better.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 11, 2012)

> His head was pounding. _Where am I?_



This is correct.  Narrative is past and dialogue, internal or not, is present.



> "He had been watching his prey for sometime now. She was young, too young in fact to be wandering around at night alone. Where were her parents or siblings? But it did not matter. All that mattered now was the kill to come."



You can write this like this, and it is technically correct.  Instead of converting "Where were her parents or siblings?" to internal dialogue, you're having the narrator talk directly to the reader.  If that's what you're going for, you're fine.

It's kinda like you're watching a show on TV, and the actor turns to the audience and says something.  It can be used to good effect, but it can also be distracting.  

Ultimately, this is a style choice.  

I think that using italics or some other way to denote this as internal dialogue is the best way to do it.



> "He had been watching his prey for sometime now. She is young, too young in fact to be wandering around at night alone. Where are her parents or siblings? But it does not matter. All that matters now is the kill to come."



This example is the same technique as above; the actor is addressing the audience directly.  The only difference is you're writing in present tense instead of past.


----------



## Androxine Vortex (Jul 11, 2012)

BWFoster78 said:


> This is correct.  Narrative is past and dialogue, internal or not, is present.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thank you very much and to everyone else as well. I just prefer keeping most of my stuff in past-tense. And I think I'm not going to use italics because most books I read do not have them.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 11, 2012)

Androxine Vortex said:


> Thank you very much and to everyone else as well. I just prefer keeping most of my stuff in past-tense. And I think I'm not going to use italics because most books I read do not have them.



That's a valid choice.  Please remember this, however:

Whatever method you choose to indicate internal dialogue is up to you.  You do, however, have to choose some method.  You can't put internal dialogue in your text without letting the reader, via italics or speech tag, know that it's supposed to be internal dialogue.


----------



## Androxine Vortex (Jul 11, 2012)

BWFoster78 said:


> That's a valid choice.  Please remember this, however:
> 
> Whatever method you choose to indicate internal dialogue is up to you.  You do, however, have to choose some method.  You can't put internal dialogue in your text without letting the reader, via italics or speech tag, know that it's supposed to be internal dialogue.



Ok help me on this for a second. I was actually reading a book and I'll use a quote here:

*He glared at the nobleman. Who does this fool think he is? He turned on his heel and left the chamber with a sour taste in his mouth.*

There were no italics or quotations to let the reader know that he was thinking, "Who does this fool think he is?" to himself. I thought that not using anything was a suitable method? I guess this is only fine when it's obvious that that's what he was thinking or something?


----------



## Steerpike (Jul 11, 2012)

Androxine Vortex said:


> I guess this is only fine when it's obvious that that's what he was thinking or something?



Yes, I think that is right. I've seen that done plenty of times myself, and so long as it is clear that the character is thinking (as it is here), I think you're fine with it. If you find that you write something that is unclear or confusing without a tag or other identifier, you can add in a tag or italics or something, or rewrite so that it is clear enough not to require them.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 11, 2012)

Androxine Vortex said:


> Ok help me on this for a second. I was actually reading a book and I'll use a quote here:
> 
> *He glared at the nobleman. Who does this fool think he is? He turned on his heel and left the chamber with a sour taste in his mouth.*
> 
> There were no italics or quotations to let the reader know that he was thinking, "Who does this fool think he is?" to himself. I thought that not using anything was a suitable method? I guess this is only fine when it's obvious that that's what he was thinking or something?



Personally, I would never do it this way.  I think it's horrible.  Leaving aside the pronoun confusion making it sound like the nobleman rather than the POV character is leaving the chamber, I find the sudden switch with no indication jarring.  You're reading narrative, and, all of a sudden with no warning, the tense shifts.  IMHO, it's really bad.


----------



## Androxine Vortex (Jul 11, 2012)

BWFoster78 said:


> Personally, I would never do it this way.  I think it's horrible.  Leaving aside the pronoun confusion making it sound like the nobleman rather than the POV character is leaving the chamber, I find the sudden switch with no indication jarring.  You're reading narrative, and, all of a sudden with no warning, the tense shifts.  IMHO, it's really bad.



How would you have written it then? Using a speech tag or italic?


----------



## Steerpike (Jul 11, 2012)

BWFoster78 said:


> Personally, I would never do it this way.  I think it's horrible.  Leaving aside the pronoun confusion making it sound like the nobleman rather than the POV character is leaving the chamber, I find the sudden switch with no indication jarring.  You're reading narrative, and, all of a sudden with no warning, the tense shifts.  IMHO, it's really bad.



Yeah, I hear you. In fact, a couple of years ago this was a huge argument on another writing forum, and I was making the same point you are about the tense shift having to be indicated. It led to a drawn out argument with a lady who had made a living writing fiction and published a good number of novels. Her viewpoint was that any such use of italics would mark me as an amateur who couldn't communicate the fact that it was internal monologue effectively without the "crutch" of italics. Then she suggested that I go pull books off the shelves at the bookstore to see how it is done.

I did so, and found that in many cases she was absolutely right, and that the authors proceeded in the manner she indicated. I also found a lot of use of italics for internal monologue, particularly in fantasy novels. So she wasn't correct in every case. She did have en editor on her side who made the same argument she did, so I guess if you're submitting to an editor who thinks italicized thoughts are a hallmark of an amateur, you'd want to remove them.

My position now is that you can do it either of these ways. I don't really care as a reader, so long as the author has done an effective job of it. Ever since that prior debate this issue sort of comes to me unbidden when I'm reading a new book, and I do see the no-italics, no-tag presentation a lot. But I also love authors like Steven Erikson, who use italics to indicate direct thoughts.


----------



## Butterfly (Jul 11, 2012)

There are several ways to set off internal monologue. You have to decide on which one suits your narrative  in the best way possible. 

1. Quote marks

2. Italics

3. wondered, believed, thought, etc, and use them without quote marks and italics. 

Look at examples written by other writers, try writing your scene in the different styles, and choose which feels best to you.


----------



## Steerpike (Jul 11, 2012)

Butterfly said:


> There are several ways to set off internal monologue. You have to decide on which one suits your narrative  in the best way possible.
> 
> 1. Quote marks
> 
> ...



Yes, I think all of these work. I think Androxine is making the point that you can actually go with nothing. Just put the thoughts in, and don't worry about quotes or italics or tags like "thought" or "wondered." You do see that a lot. 

At least, that's what I think Androxine is getting at. He can correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## Androxine Vortex (Jul 11, 2012)

I thought these were helpful

Dealing With A Character’s Internal Thoughts

Fiction writing: How to write your characters thoughts - by Mike Klaassen - Helium

How to write Thoughts of a Character - Writing.Com

Especially the last one when it talks about past/present tense


----------



## Steerpike (Jul 11, 2012)

Those are good links, Androxine.

I like the suggestion about "undoing the tense shift" in the last one. In fact, this is exactly what I do in my own writing. My character's thoughts now become part of the story.

For example, instead of:

*Zoe peered around the corner and watched Josh and Amy. What are the two of them talking about? They hate each other. She gathered her courage and marched over to them.*

I'll now write it like this:

*Zoe peered around the corner and watched Josh and Amy. What were the two of them talking about? They hated each other. She gathered her courage and marched over to them.
*
The quality of my examples aside, you get the picture


----------



## Butterfly (Jul 11, 2012)

I agree, the blending is my fave, and the one I use. Though most of the time it's more trying to use.


----------



## Androxine Vortex (Jul 11, 2012)

Steerpike said:


> Those are good links, Androxine.
> 
> I like the suggestion about "undoing the tense shift" in the last one. In fact, this is exactly what I do in my own writing. My character's thoughts now become part of the story.
> 
> ...



Now I can see what they mean by distracting the reader. I mean it's not so distracting that I have to stop and realize what's going on but it does interrupt the flow.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Jul 11, 2012)

This might be a good thread topic on its own. There's some nice stuff here hidden under the "Was or Were" title.

Anyway,  I use both italics & blending into narrative to convey thought.

Typically, I write thoughts into the narrative when it's perfectly clear that it has to be inner monologue. For example, when a character is alone.

When clarity is an issue or if I want to draw attention to the thought I will use italics. If I really want the reader to notice a thought then I will separate the thought in italics into its own paragraph. These are normally very short sentences like "It shouldn't be this cold" - that would be in italics with no quotes by the way.

About the only thing I never do is use quotations for a character's thoughts. As a writer I strive for clarity. Writing thoughts like dialogue just seems like your opening the door to confusion. I'd be interested in examples where it's done effectively though.


----------



## Androxine Vortex (Jul 11, 2012)

T.Allen.Smith said:


> This might be a good thread topic on its own. There's some nice stuff here hidden under the "Was or Were" title.
> 
> Anyway,  I use both italics & blending into narrative to convey thought.
> 
> ...



I understand with that last part and agree. When I see quotation I instantly think, "actually speaking out loud"

And i don't know why I named it, "Were or Are?" It should be "Were or Is?" *FACEPALM


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 11, 2012)

Androxine Vortex said:


> How would you have written it then? Using a speech tag or italic?



For my novel, I'm using italics.  I'm kinda anti speech tag in general and try to limit them.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 11, 2012)

Steerpike said:


> Yeah, I hear you. In fact, a couple of years ago this was a huge argument on another writing forum, and I was making the same point you are about the tense shift having to be indicated. It led to a drawn out argument with a lady who had made a living writing fiction and published a good number of novels. Her viewpoint was that any such use of italics would mark me as an amateur who couldn't communicate the fact that it was internal monologue effectively without the "crutch" of italics. Then she suggested that I go pull books off the shelves at the bookstore to see how it is done.
> 
> I did so, and found that in many cases she was absolutely right, and that the authors proceeded in the manner she indicated. I also found a lot of use of italics for internal monologue, particularly in fantasy novels. So she wasn't correct in every case. She did have en editor on her side who made the same argument she did, so I guess if you're submitting to an editor who thinks italicized thoughts are a hallmark of an amateur, you'd want to remove them.
> 
> My position now is that you can do it either of these ways. I don't really care as a reader, so long as the author has done an effective job of it. Ever since that prior debate this issue sort of comes to me unbidden when I'm reading a new book, and I do see the no-italics, no-tag presentation a lot. But I also love authors like Steven Erikson, who use italics to indicate direct thoughts.



I can relate to the argument about needing to make the thoughts clear enough without the italics b/c I use the same reasoning about emphasizing words.

On the other hand, I'm just not sure how you make internal dialogue clear without it jarring the reader.  

I'd rather be upfront about it.


----------



## Jess A (Jul 12, 2012)

> About the only thing I never do is use quotations for a character's thoughts. As a writer I strive for clarity. Writing thoughts like dialogue just seems like your opening the door to confusion. I'd be interested in examples where it's done effectively though.



Okay, it seems my post was misread, and that is probably my fault.

I meant quotes for direct, verbal speech, not for thoughts.  Don't use quotation marks for thoughts - I merely put them in my example so that I could make my point clearer. My point was that he _could _ say that part out loud. Alternatively he could 'think' it - considering he is hunting, I doubt he would say it out loud. Perhaps I did not make myself clear in the first place, apologies.

Some novels use italics for thought. Some do not. That is also a matter of choice, but it needs to be consistent. I am not going to engage in a debate over which is best. Whatever feels comfortable for you is what you should go for.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Jul 12, 2012)

Little Storm Cloud said:
			
		

> Okay, it seems my post was misread, and that is probably my fault.
> 
> I meant quotes for direct, verbal speech, not for thoughts.  Don't use quotation marks for thoughts - I merely put them in my example so that I could make my point clearer. My point was that he could  say that part out loud. Alternatively he could 'think' it - considering he is hunting, I doubt he would say it out loud. Perhaps I did not make myself clear in the first place, apologies.
> 
> Some novels use italics for thought. Some do not. That is also a matter of choice, but it needs to be consistent. I am not going to engage in a debate over which is best. Whatever feels comfortable for you is what you should go for.



The response was only part of a conversation between myself, Steerpike, Butterfly, & BWF. It wasn't directed at anyone, merely a comment on what I do and don't do in response to their writing preferences.


----------



## Jess A (Jul 12, 2012)

T.Allen.Smith said:


> The response was only part of a conversation between myself, Steerpike, Butterfly, & BWF. It wasn't directed at anyone, merely a comment on what I do and don't do in response to their writing preferences.



Yes I know, but I think I probably started the conversation, and I hate realising that I was unclear about a point. Anyway, this is clearly unimportant, so we may move on with the topic.

I just used your comment because it helped me with my point. Apologies.


----------

