Inner dialogue and thoughts

[Trish]

You don't need to use direct thoughts to achieve that.

IMO, direct thoughts are a crutch a lot of writers use to convey emotion, and the result is usually less effective than the alternative, which is to convey those emotions indirectly.



Oh, he was so fucking cute.

Dana bit her lip hard, then shook her head as though that simple denial could somehow abrogate her instant attraction.

She wouldn't think about him. Couldn't think about him. She turned back to the action, refusing to be distracted, even as her heart thumped faster and the heat of a blush filled her face.

Everything remains in 3rd person past tense, but the same thoughts still come through in her voice.

IMO, doing it this way it far superior to using direct thoughts.

I agree, with two caveats - 1. "abrogate"? really? That was way out of left field and doesn't fit the voice (or the meaning) at all. 2. She turned back to the action, refusing to be distracted, even as her heart thumped faster and the heat of a blush filled her face. - Italicized part is just as implied and unnecessary as italics and tags.

 

[Banespawn]

I agree, with two caveats - 1. "abrogate"? really? That was way out of left field and doesn't fit the voice (or the meaning) at all. 2. She turned back to the action, refusing to be distracted, even as her heart thumped faster and the heat of a blush filled her face. - Italicized part is just as implied and unnecessary as italics and tags.

Yeah, abrogate probably wasn't the best word I could have used. And you're right that I don't really need the bit you put in italics. That's what edits are for.

 

[Trish]

Yeah, abrogate probably wasn't the best word I could have used. And you're right that I don't really need the bit you put in italics. That's what edits are for.

I pointed it out only because of the context - rewriting example of someone else's work as a proposed improvement. Otherwise I wouldn't have said anything, because yes, editing.

 

[transplant]

I think it might be nice to use that thought tag along with the italics for the first time or two that you are indicating thought, just to let the reader know what your conventions are. After all, readers usually need all the help they can get. But after that, once the convention is established, you can probably dispense with the thought tags.

I see value in what @JLT is saying. @Trish mentioned it too. Most? Many? Some? readers aren't aware of conventions. They sneak a little time here and there to pick up a novel because they love to read and love a great story. For those, the convention is defined by the book. Having a tag or two early on might be useful to tell the reader what to expect - define the convention. In this case, if the cat never speaks, then the fact these are thoughts would be clear quickly and either tags or italics would be unnecessary and probably distracting. @Banespawn's technique read well too.

 

[Homer Potvin]

In this case, if the cat never speaks, then the fact these are thoughts would be clear quickly and either tags or italics would be unnecessary and probably distracting.

Good point about the cat. That does put things on different footing.

 

[Naomasa298]

IMO, direct thoughts are a crutch a lot of writers use to convey emotion, and the result is usually less effective than the alternative, which is to convey those emotions indirectly.

There is a style of 3rd person called Free Indirect Discourse. This combines the closeness of 1st person with a 3rd person narrator. The narrator is still the one telling the story, but we are so close to the character, and the words on the page are so colored by the character's voice, that we forget about the narrator entirely.

Whether it's more effective or not, is down to taste, and how well it is done by the author. Direct thoughts/speech can be just as effective, sometimes more.

 

[JLT]

What else would italics be mistaken for? Aside from proper names of titles or ships or something?

Emphasis.

"I won't say he was scared. I'd say he was really, really scared."

 

[Louanne Learning]

I can only reference my experience as a reader, and I think @Banespawn comes the closest to what I try to achieve as a writer.

My goal is to have the reader becomes so immersed in the meaning of the words, that the words themselves become invisible.

This is achieved with as few distractions as possible. Italics, to me, are a distraction. Avoided if possible. Same with - he thought -