Here's a few examples of how I imagine it could be done:
Benskia looked at his wage slip. 'That sucks,' he thought.
Benskia looked at his wage slip--That sucks (in italics)
Benskia looked at his wage slip and thought to himself how much it sucked.
Any more versions, or any preferences?
Don't use italics; no one does anymore.
Um, I do. *does a quick survey of her most recently bought books* And three out of four of the books I'm flipping through seem to as well.
So you may wish to reconsider that statement.
That's how I'd do it.
Also, as a general rule, say what the character feels, not what he thinks. It's a subtle difference, but it makes an impact on the flow and impact of the writing.
I've reconsidered and I'm going to stick by my intial assessment. No one really uses italics anymore for internal thought.
If it's the term "no one" that you take issue with, then you're right. I'm generalizing. Perhaps I should say "the vast majority of publishing writers."
I also agree that tags should be omitted wherever possible. I see where I didn't specifically state that in my original post.
quote:
You can even slip into first person at times without a tag, quotes, or italics (if you want to go for deep penetration).
I just finished the first draft of a work, and my first reader commented on just this issue, tagging it as a POV change. Is it acceptable to change from 3rd to 1st in deep penetration, and does it need quotes, etc?
Thanks!
Susan
I suspect that if it's sort of like omniscient POV - it can work if it's done perfectly, but otherwise just looks like a POV lapse.
[This message has been edited by Beth (edited June 24, 2005).]
quote:
Is it acceptable to change from 3rd to 1st in deep penetration, and does it need quotes, etc?
[This message has been edited by TheoPhileo (edited June 24, 2005).]
At least, as Beth mentioned, that works for me. Others may choose different methods.
Something like wbriggs' example would be my usual preference for "deep penetration", expressing the thought of the character as a statement rather than by any form of attribution. Attribution tags generally weaken the impact of a statement. Since the exception is in quoting authorities/celebrities on some subject, it doesn't have very much to do with wordcraft (unless the authority/whatever being quoted is your own creation, in which case you are still the one that must think up the actual words).
If it's the term "no one" that you take issue with, then you're right. I'm generalizing. Perhaps I should say "the vast majority of publishing writers."
I am still confused. Going through the bookshelves of myself and my boyfriend, and looking only at books published in the past five years, I see these people never using italics for thoughts:
Terry Pratchett
Peter Hamilton
Neal Stephenson
Alastair Reynolds
Orson Scott Card
Susanna Clark
And these people using them:
Catherine Asaro
David Brin
Robin McKinley
Julie Czernada
Karl Schroeder
Lois McMaster Bujold
Tanya Huff
Holly Lisle
Charlie Stross
Cory Doctorow
Timothy Zahn
The italics appear to have a simple majority, which suggests you may be wrong about "the vast majority". And I am very skeptical of any definition of "no one" which includes several Hugo and Nebula nominees, last year's winner of the Hugo and the Nebula, and the current president of SFWA.
You can say that people shouldn't use italics for thoughts: it's a valid position, though not one I agree with. You can say that people should be careful how they use italicized thoughts, and I'll agree with you (I like Survivor's subvocalization rule, though I don't stick to it absolutely myself). You can say they shouldn't be used often. You can say that OSC says not to use italics, and that he is not only our sponsor for this forum but a published author with far more credibility than me, and I will agree with you.
But you cannot say that no one uses italicised thoughts, because it is not true.
I apologize for being so testy over such a minor point, but I despise absolutes. And I've learned through unpleasant experience that there are newbie writers on boards like this who take such pronouncements far more seriously than is intended or healthy.
--Signature seen elsewhere--
Obi: Only a Sith Lord deals is absolutes.
Anakin: Obi, that IS an absolute.
Obi: S**t!
As a writer, I do whatever I think is best for my story, and I really don't care.
99% of the time, I don't use italics for thoughts, I use plain narrative and reserve italics for emphasis. I've given up using the "he/she thought" tag, as I've discovered it is almost always superfluous. And I've nearly eradicated "he/she knew" in my narrative. Because, if I've set up my POV properly, then it should be obvious that my character is internalizing something.
But again, I don't care if an author uses italics for thoughts -- it makes ZERO difference, because I'm capable of adapting to an author's style and narrative (as is most everyone, I presume). The only time it becomes an issue is when it's 40 straight sentences of italicized text -- that's hard to read.
I guess I could be wrong. I was just trolling through memory and can't remember anyone that I've read recently using them. Whenever I see them (and I have, but not often) it's always in older books and strikes me as incredibly old-fashioned.
Maybe I was taking the pronouncement of OSC to not use italics ("because no one does") to core.
At any rate, I'll keep my eyes open (although, glancing through the five random books I've read over the past month reveals no italics anywhere....)
edited to add: P.s. that simple majority is really only of YOUR (not to slight your boyfriend's) bookshelf. I mean, I could make a similar list in which there were no italics-users represented. Let's be socially conscious of our use of statistics.
edited again to add: Hmmm, maybe that's where our disagreement comes from. You've generally read more authors that use italics, whereas I don't. I think this may be because I gravitate towards stories that are highly character-driven. In such a story, character thoughts account for a very large portion of the prose. In such a case, the prevalence of italics would be a distraction. Then again, I'm now reading some McKillip in which plot is clearly the focus and she doesn't use italics, either.... It's a puzzle.
[This message has been edited by Rahl22 (edited June 26, 2005).]