Dealing with Internal Dialogue

[Lorna]

Hi, I'm quite new to the forum and after showcasing a couple of pieces of my work I've noticed a couple of recurring criticisms of my use of internal dialogue. The novel I'm writing focuses on one point of view all the way through. The majority of it is written in the third person but sometimes I use first person to register the immediacy of his thoughts. For example:

'Damn, Jarad thought, seething in frustration as he saw the soma had finally taken hold. There isn’t a chance I’m going to be able to question her about how to free the dragons. Yet at least, in an attempt to reconcile himself, I’ve got some insight into Xhamoura’s aims.'

I've had a look on a couple of other web sites and seen using speech marks is a no no. Is the use of italics the norm? If this is the case, what if (as is occasionally the case) a good portion of the page ends up as italics. Personally I think it distracts from the look of the text. I read somewhere if you're just using one POV it becomes obvious to the reader it is this character thinking the thoughts.

Just wondering how others deal with internal dialogue?

 

[Ankari]

Why wouldn't you just use first person point of view for the entire novel? Unless you have more than a few characters, this would be the best route as everything is internalized. I have seen large parts of a page italicized before, so I don't find it too odd.

 

[Queshire]

I use italics along with ' ' for thoughts, so it'd be like 'blah blah blah' now if that ends up with a page or so italicized, then you have other problems there!

 

[Caged Maiden]

I do not use italics, though I have seen other people use them. I write mine like this:

She punched him in the face. Idiot, she thought, if only I'd seen you coming I might have gotten away without this coming to violence. She dusted herself off and prepared to strike again. He wasn't going to give up so easily.

I don't know how correct that is, but that's the way I write internal thoughts. My suggestion would be to carefully think about how you are writing if something looks off. It's very easy to write in third person and use very little actual internal thought. That's how I write, and the reason I don't use italics.

 

[ascanius]

Ankari does have a good point, why not just make it all first person if there is only one main character? You don't have too though whichever works best. Though I would find it confusing to switch between two different POV's I would really just use italics for internal dialogue and avoid the switching, again up to you. You could very well have written his thoughts Italicized with the same effect and remain in third person.

As to when...From that example there are many ways to write it without using italics or have specific internal dialogue. If your coming up with a page of Italicized text you need to look at how your wording things and if it could be done without internal dialogue, I would think. Though sometimes internal dialogue does help give a greater insight into the characters thoughts. I use internal dialogue to demonstrate a vital piece of information where the exact words are important to explain the deep emotional thoughts a character is having or how they are rationalizing something. It should be just like normal dialogue in that it needs to be important. You don't want to read about the idle chit chat between two characters talking about the weather when it has no purpose to the story as a whole. The same is true for internal dialogue, it should be important, for me it tends to be very important. Another thing I noticed that helps with internal dialogue for me is to have some type of dilemma, something that is making the character question themselves. The internal dialogue is there to show the progression of thoughts to a conclusion in a way that expresses their intrinsic emotional value.

Remember if your using third person omnipotent POV then you as the story teller are aware off all the characters though process' and as such know what they are thinking. So you don't necessary have to tell exactly what that person is thinking verbatim. You can explain their thoughts, like. So and so cringed with exasperation realizing he had no chance of asking her about freeing the dragons. It was unexpected and disheartening, a thorn in his side. However one thing did reconcile him, namely insight into Xhamoura's machinations. The same thing as your example but without internal dialogue, the key points are covered. However if Xhamoura's machinations are obscure and he has to puzzle them out you could use internal dialogue to show how he puzzled them out. something like.
but that still leaves Xhamoura? Unhappy he leaned against a pillar trying to solve the riddle he now found himself in. It would mean that Xhamoura knew all along.....but how.. The implications of that single question sent a small shiver down his spine.
Do you see what I mean? But you could have done that with anything, just an example.

Hope that helps. I don't think there is any rule as to how much or what exactly qualifies aside from importance, but what I told you is what works for me.

Edit. I also don't like using italics that much, like Anihow, but I have found their use. so I tend to keep them to a minimum.

 

[Benjamin Clayborne]

In third-person, it's pretty standard to italicize inner monologue, with no quotes. It's a little tricky making a distinction between the exact words someone is thinking, and the general ideas someone is thinking about. E.g.:

Bob looked at the door. Where the hell is she? He couldn't understand what was taking so long.

The sentence "Where the hell is she?" is a phrase that Bob is literally thinking, word-for-word, but the "He couldn't understand" sentence is more a description of the concept he's thinking about.

That said, if you've got an entire page of inner monologue, then your problem isn't how to format it; your problem is that the character is doing a huge amount of thinking and very little doing. Unless your story is intended to have a lot of internal conflict by the protagonist, you probably need to reassess what the actual motion of the plot is.

That said, most people don't think in long sentences of concrete words; they think in concepts and ideas with some words thrown in. A page of a character thinking is probably better rendered in non-italicized thoughts, rather than italicized monologue. E.g.:

Bob had long wondered what he'd find beyond the door. Another hallway? Another world? It had been ages since he'd arrived here; he'd lost track of time. Sometimes I feel like blah blah blah blah...

versus

I wonder what I'll find beyond the door. Another hallway? Another world, maybe? It's been ages since I got here. What time is it? Sometimes I feel like blah blah blah...

 

[Penpilot]

I use italics along with ' ' for thoughts, so it'd be like 'blah blah blah' now if that ends up with a page or so italicized, then you have other problems there!

Ditto.

I'd suggest studying some books written in what ever third person style you're going for to see how thoughts are dealt with in them. Learn from the best... er... or the reasonably acceptable in some cases.

 

[Steerpike]

It is a tricky issue, and you have to go with what work for you. You will find a fair number of authors and editors who say it is not appropriate to use italics for this sort of thing. By the same token, you'll find a lot of published books that use it (in response to which I've been told published examples of bad writing doesn't excuse bad writing).

I don't have a problem with the italics, personally, but just be aware that there is a prejudice among some who consider it bad writing. If your manuscript lands on the desk of someone who has that view, I guess it would be a strike against you.

 

[Benjamin Clayborne]

I don't have a problem with the italics, personally, but just be aware that there is a prejudice among some who consider it bad writing.

I wonder what it is they think is bad about it? I've never found italicized internal monologue difficult to read or follow. I suspect it's one of those things that people elevate from a personal preference to a Law of Nature.

 

[Steerpike]

I wonder what it is they think is bad about it? I've never found italicized internal monologue difficult to read or follow. I suspect it's one of those things that people elevate from a personal preference to a Law of Nature.

Well, one writer in particular, who is now retired but has published a lot of fiction, told me it was simply an improper use of italics and that it would mark a writer as an amateur. They didn't think it was hard to follow or anything like that. That view was seconded by at least two other published authors. They didn't elaborate on it apart from saying it was improper, and two of them seemed quite strident about it. I pointed out that a lot of published books include it, and the responses I got were 1) established authors can get away with things that make beginning authors stand out as amateurs; and 2) examples of published bad writing doesn't make it right.

Like I said, I don't have a problem with it at all.

Also, on at least one other writing forum (writingforums.org) there are some established writers and at least one moderator who are adamantly of the view it is incorrect to use italics for internal monologue. If you post the question there, you'll see what I mean.

So I'm not saying do it or don't do it, but just letting people know the attitude exists out there. I don't know anything that passionately says you have to use italics for internal monologue, but I've come across people opposed to it more than once.

It's odd.

EDIT: Another argument that was made, which I just remembered, is that it was lazy writing and if the work in question were written better the need for italics would not exist.

 

[Lorna]

Hi thanks your answers everybody. I have a solid answer on how often to use internal dialogue- Benjamin's comment that if my character is talking to himself for a page and not doing, that isn't good! Ascanius- the inner dialogue should be limited to the most important of his inner conflicts / thoughts processes. I'll bear that in mind.
I guess there's no clear cut answer as to whether to italicize. I guess it might be worth contacting whatever editor I'm going to use on completion in advance to ask for personal preference? My own preference is still not to use italics.
I've had a look of a couple of books I thought being character driven might use alot of internal dialogue- L.E.Modesitt and Robin Hobb but found the former doesn't use first person internal dialogue and in the Far Seer books Fitz is written from a first person perspective. Does any one know of any writers who combine a narrative written about one character mainly in the third person with first person internal dialogue?
Thanks for your help,
Lorna

 

[Benjamin Clayborne]

They didn't elaborate on it apart from saying it was improper, and two of them seemed quite strident about it. I pointed out that a lot of published books include it, and the responses I got were 1) established authors can get away with things that make beginning authors stand out as amateurs; and 2) examples of published bad writing doesn't make it right.

Remember the old Looney Tunes cartoons where someone would get so angry that they'd slowly turn red, like a thermometer filling up, and then steam would come out of their ears? That's how I feel every time I hear those two arguments. (I know you're not defending them, I just have to write that somewhere.)

EDIT: Another argument that was made, which I just remembered, is that it was lazy writing and if the work in question were written better the need for italics would not exist.

If that's the case, then that Shakespeare dude was the laziest writer of all time.

Seriously, I'll pay hard cash (not really) if someone can ever provide a mechanical reason why italicized internal monologue is "lazy" and could always be done "better."

 

[Devor]

I can kind of see how a bad writer can use italics to avoid writing emotion or to overplay their "strength" in dialogue. But I don't get why it would be a rule. I'd say use it, but if you find yourself using it too much, maybe see if it's necessary.

This topic came up once before. All I remember from that is that you need to use the 1st person present tense when you do it.

 

[Steerpike]

Seriously, I'll pay hard cash (not really) if someone can ever provide a mechanical reason why italicized internal monologue is "lazy" and could always be done "better."

Yeah. People who say it is a rule of come sort don't usually cite to any clear mechanics. It generally comes out along the lines of "good writers don't have to resort to a font change to tell the reader someone is thinking."

I think it fine, personally. The only reason I mention it is that if you're playing the odds in submitting to editors, an argument could be made not to use them for no other reason than some editors seem to be quite opposed to them, but I've never heard of an editor being upset at the lack of them.

 

[Telcontar]

Seriously, I'll pay hard cash (not really) if someone can ever provide a mechanical reason why italicized internal monologue is "lazy" and could always be done "better."

Agreed. It is as good a mechanism for the phenomenon as any other. And like any other literary mechanism, it can be used badly, or used lazily - but it, itself, is neither bad nor lazy.

 

[Legendary Sidekick]

I do not use italics, though I have seen other people use them. I write mine like this:

She punched him in the face. Idiot, she thought, if only I'd seen you coming I might have gotten away without this coming to violence. She dusted herself off and prepared to strike again. He wasn't going to give up so easily.

I don't know how correct that is, but that's the way I write internal thoughts. My suggestion would be to carefully think about how you are writing if something looks off. It's very easy to write in third person and use very little actual internal thought. That's how I write, and the reason I don't use italics.

Not wrong.

My students read a story today that had thoughts unitalicized. My freshmen also read a narrative my Laili Ali (Muhammed's daughter) which, being a narrative, was naturally in first-person.

Personally, I like using first-person to seamlessly internalize and externalize the MC's words. But I understand it's not every writer's cup of tea.

(First-person present is my comfort zone. I've been playing with third, past and present tense, and even second-person lately. The challenges here help you find your comfort zone--or if you've found it, they give opportunities to play outside of your zone.)

 

[The Din]

+1 italics

 

[Steerpike]

Speaking of this, it came up yet again on another forum:

Character thoughts: how do you like to render them?

If anyone want to follow the discussion there. It is relatively short now, but I've seen the issue turn into a 10 or 20 page thread on that site. Just FYI.

 

[Devor]

So, the dispute is really a plain question of italics or quotation marks for thoughts? I assumed, I guess wrongly, that it was more about how often thoughts should be quoted directly or expressed within the narration, "he wondered" instead of "I wonder."

This now tops to-prologue-or-not* as the most ridiculous thing people fight about on writing forums.

*Should I prologue in this instance is still a fair question.

 

[Steerpike]

As I've seen it, editors and authors who are established simply tend to say that one should not put internal dialogue in quotations. This, despite the face that it occurs regularly in published work.

I do agree with the point that if you NEED the italics to make it clear that it is internal dialogue, then your writing simply isn't good enough and you need to revisit it. But that shouldn't preclude the use of italics. Still, I think the safer approach if you are approaching publishers is not to use them.

Whether or how often such things should be expressed is one issue, but the one that I see popping up all the time boils down to formatting - use italics or not.

I agree about the prologues argument being ridiculous, but it is unavoidable because writers still insist on using them