italics for thoughts

[Clearrr]

What do people think of using italics to show a person's thoughts?

Thanks,

Clear

[Greenwolf103]

I don't really get bugged by it but I don't think it's too common, these days. I'm sure people use them but I just haven't seen them too often.

But I *do* get bugged by it if it takes up the whole page!

I guess it depends on the POV you are writing in.

[TerriLynn]

I use them all the time in my writing and I don't mind reading them in others. It's a great way to get into the character's head without author intrusion or exposition.

however...that's just my opinion. not that anyone ever listens to me
;)

[SRHowen]

Just so you know, when submitting a ms, what you want in italics, is not put in italics, you underline it.

Shawn

[TerriLynn]

Yep, that's the rule.
However...I never follow them :evil mwah ha ha
and haven't had a complaint yet.

[cluelessspicycinnamon]

I don't always like seeing thoughts in italics. Sometimes it's boring reading italics for so long,a nd it hurts your eyes. But it really just depends on you, I think. Probably italics, quote marks, or neither, are all correct.

[Tish Davidson]

I've always thought that quotation marks were reserved for spoken words. I think you can use italics or nothing for thoughts depending on how obvious it is that the character is thinking. Generally, it is a good idea to stay away from long passages of internal thoughts anyway.

[Tish Davidson]

Yep, that's the rule.
However...I never follow them mwah ha ha
and haven't had a complaint yet.

That's really stupid. Why would you knowingly violate a rule that might annoy an editor and make you look like an amateur?

[maestrowork]

If you have a lot of internal thoughts, don't use italics. It's irritating to read. If it's just a random thought within the narrative, then it's okay.

[veingloree]

I think it is generally unecessary. The fact that the line is a thought is generally apparent. I think italics only really help when there is some kind of telepathic thought dialogue going on and the thoughts are be treated like speech.

[James D Macdonald]

As long as you pick a style and stay consistent (and the readers can tell what you're doing), it doesn't matter much how you indicate thoughts.

[TerriLynn]

That's really stupid. Why would you knowingly violate a rule that might annoy an editor and make you look like an amateur?

Ouch...and that was really rude. Like I said, I haven't had complaints from either agent or editor. When done correctly it isn't going to annoy anyone except for someone who doesn't know how to enjoy a good story.

The rules of writing are not carved in stone and are very bendable and occasionally some break. When you've learned to break them without looking like an amateur, then you're on your way.

[James D Macdonald]

Underlines for italics are for the benefit of the typesetter.

[Jamesaritchie]

Some rules are there for sound reasons, and while your editor might not complain, underlining isn't there for the editor, and you can screw someone's day up royally by using italics just because you don't want to follow the rules. It's pretty childish.

If you don't underline, someone is just going to have to do it for you, and their thoughts concerning you will not be kind ones.

As an editor, I never complained about writers who didn't follow format either. I just didn't buy their work.

[maestrowork]

I agree. Terri, follow the rules now if you want to get published. You can bend them all you want once you're successful.

You may not have any complaints yet... then again, you're not published yet either.

(And like others said, these ms formatting is for the typesetter. Be considerate.)

Cheers!

[TerriLynn]

I don't worry about the italics when I submit a manuscriipt because I'm not stupid enough to think it will be published as is. When the final draft is written with the requested revisions then it will be formatted as per the rules

[ChunkyC]

When the final draft is written with the requested revisions then it will be formatted as per the rules
If you ever get that far, which is less likely if you don't follow the rules NOW. Terri -- it's just as easy to hit the 'U' for underline as it is to hit the 'I' for italics. If you know that the person receiving your submission prefers underlining, why in heaven's name would you use italics? That makes no sense. The fact that publishers want manuscripts submitted with underlining to indicate italics is widely known. Anyone who does not do so will be seen as an amateur, period.

Why take the chance you'll annoy them when to give them what they want is so simple? I'd much rather play russian roulette with as few bullets in the gun as possible.

[Clearrr]

Thanks to everyone who helped me clarify!

Great site!

Clear

[TerriLynn]

If you ever get that far, which is less likely if you don't follow the rules
That's presumptuous....I am that far.

[James D Macdonald]

If your book is sufficiently brilliant you could write it with your finger on brown paper bags using warm spit.

If your book is less brilliant, sticking with standard manuscript format is a better bet.

I've had the privilege of seeing raw submission manuscripts by some of the very top best selling authors.

With one or two Notably Irascible Exceptions they all used absolutely standard format: Courier type, one-inch margins, double space, black ink on white 8x10 paper, running header, underline for italics, double underline for boldface.

[SRHowen]

I switched genres to romance and currently have my first book with an editor at a major house and an agent at another major house.

An agent that works at a publisher? Major agency, maybe?

Trouble is, they may be considering your novel, (was it sent to them by request?) but when it comes down to -- we have these two great novels, which one? Toss a coin? Rock, paper, scissors? More like--this one is formatted correctly, and this one isn't. Take the one that is. And no that's not silly--that's the way it is.

Shawn

[TerriLynn]

quoting my bio now? :rolleyes

Yes...Requested fulls! An agent at an agency, an editor at a publishing house. And you care, because?

For the record, and before anymore comments are made....my post...the one with the D evil face was tongue in cheek...I really don't laugh like that. It's more of a Scooby-Doo type of giggle.

I know how to format a manuscript and I know what rules can be overlooked (to a point)


:rolleyes
and I thought WN was bad.

[Tish Davidson]

You're trying to hook an agent for a book your simultaneously sending to a publisher? Or are these two different books?

[Gala]

edited.

[maestrowork]

Hey, if it works for you.

But don't go around telling people that it's "okay." There are rules and formats for a reason.

[Euan Harvey]

>And you care, because?

We care because we love you. :heart

:ack

Cheers,

Euan

[gp101]

Uncle Jim, you wrote:

"With one or two Notably Irascible Exceptions they all used absolutely standard format: Courier type, one-inch margins, double space, black ink on white 8x10 paper, running header, underline for italics, double underline for boldface."

I'm familiar with all that except for the double underline/bold bit, but I've read elsewhere (no, I'm not monogomous with this site) arguments over courier 10 point vs courier 12 point. I've always used courier 12. Is there a preference or "rule" that should be followed?

Would love to use 10 point and chop 80 pages off my manuscript, but I don't want the manuscript tossed before it's read due to tiny script.

Thx in advance.

[TerriLynn]

Tish...no, I'm not trying to hook anyone, I already have. My full was requested by the editor...she sent suggestions to "up the suspense" and asked for it back. I did as she asked and sent it back....then went hunting for an agent because I wanted someone in my corner who knew what the heck they were doing in terms of a contract. I've had three agents interesest and one who literally loves the story. (they started with the first 30 pgs, asked for the first 100, then recently asked for all of it.) All of this as happened in the past month. And also, the editor is interested in seeing my second book, which I'm currently revising.

To the others, thank you for your kind words. And Maestro, I don't believe I told anyone not to follow the rules...I said they were bendable. (even the Great Donald Maass will attest to that)


cheers

[evanaharris]

I think dismemberment is the standard punishment for using Courier 10. Using Courier 12 is a hanging offense. [For what it's worth, Courier 10's too small for me to read comfortably, and I have good eyesight. Courier 12 is okay for sure.]

They put you in the docks if you don't underline italicized portions.

Save a slanted letter. Don't italicize.

[ChunkyC]

Terri -- yes, I made an assumption because I got the impression you were saying that proper manuscript formatting wasn't all that important, and that's not something I would expect from a published author. Your subsequent posts show that you are published or about to be, and that you weren't saying to ignore proper format, therefore I apologize on both counts.

The reason some of us (myself for one) get a bit uptight when these kinds of things come along is that many, probably most, of the people who come to this and other boards like it are unpublished and desperately wish to be. Anything that might cause the inexperienced among us to do something that could diminish their chances of getting published is doing them a disservice, IMHO. This is why I or others who feel the same as I do speak up on the matter, not because we are bitter, as some would have you believe.

[maestrowork]

IMHO, courier 10 is too small to read. An editor/agent won't care if it's 80 pages longer or shorter (as long as you cover the postage :b ) but they do care if it's readable and won't strain their eyes.

Some agents/editors request material formatted in Times Roman font. So read the submission guidelines if there are any.

[SRHowen]

about what? I have a major NYC agent. I am published, I do professional editing, and mentoring, I run a crit group---.

Well, the whole, but I got away with it--does make me bitter. It gives new writers to the game the idea that they can do anything and get away with it. It was shouted--I am that far. Okay, so then it's hmm, wonder what they have had published, so go look at the bio--and find that you have an agent considering your work who works at a publisher. Agents don't work at a publisher.

Under consideration also does not make you "that far". When that far was to the stage where a proof reader is going to go through the work, and then a typesetter--who WILL NOT like the italics and may miss many places you wanted them because that person will be looking for underlines. Yeah, the italics look nicer--heck, they make it look more like it is already published, but it's not the standard.

Like putting those little copyright symbols on your work, it makes it look amateurish. And don't fool yourself, having first work under consideration still makes you a beginner, the publishers know it, the agent knows it--but why shout it?

Last--having done the "used italics" in one ms many years ago, and having it sent back to me with a note telling me that italics are underlined, and then having to go through and replace all the italics with underlines--it took forever. Granted todays word processor programs can do a global search and replace (in WP you use a code search and replace to do it), but why give yourself that extra step?

And I do know if I have two ms on my screen and one is the way I requested it and the other isn't--and they are both great--I'll take the author who took the time to read the submission guidelines--and thus will be easier to work with.

Why take the chance on doing something that will PO an editor, when it's hard enough to get past the consideration stage in the first place?

:shrug

And no I wasn't being a bitter whatever, it makes me angry when incorrect info is pushed on those here who are new to the game, the lurkers--and so on. Many new writers latch onto one idea (the one that fits what they are doing now and then point to a thread or a web page where it says it's okay to do that) And the info about not underlininng was being pushed pretty hard--but I do it and I am "that far."

Shawn

[wisdomquest]

As a reader, I LIKE and PREFER italics for thoughts ... I always thought that they were a 'given'.

Good to know though, that what you want in italics should be underlined in your manuscript - I did not know that.

So - underlining is ONLY for what you want italicized - and wouldn't mean anything other than 'to be italicized' to the typesetter?

Are there other tips & tricks to keep the typesetter happy?

Thanks!
-wisdomquest :snoopy

[ChunkyC]

So - underlining is ONLY for what you want italicized - and wouldn't mean anything other than 'to be italicized' to the typesetter?
Exactly. The manuscript will only be seen by those whose job it is to turn it into a finished book. They are professionals with a system they are trained to use, and underlining to indicate italics is a part of that system. Because the typesetter uses this system, the industry as a whole tends to use it as well (if there were exceptions from individual publishers, that would in all likelihood be noted in their guidelines).

Helpful folks like HConn and Shawn can tell you about others -- I believe a double-underline tells the typesetter you want bold-face, but I wouldn't want to guarantee that as I've never personally needed to use bold in a manuscript yet and would want to check to be sure.

[TerriLynn]

At the risk of sounding like a bitch....if you're going to accuse me of something at least read what was written and by whom. I didn't come in here to fight with anyone....so I'll just keep my comments to myself when I visit.
Now, someone start a new thread so I'll stop being accused of being an amateur who doesn't know the frickin' difference between a publishing house and a literary agency.
Oops....there's that bitch in me.

[HollyB]

Back to the original question...

I once read a book review by Marilyn Stasio (she does the NYTBR crime reviews) where she described thoughts in italics as icky. I remembered that, because in the novel I was working on at the time, my character thought in italics. (Properly formatted underlined characters to imply italics, I mean.)

[Tish Davidson]

"Tish...no, I'm not trying to hook anyone, I already have. My full was requested by the editor...she sent suggestions to "up the suspense" and asked for it back. I did as she asked and sent it back....then went hunting for an agent because I wanted someone in my corner who knew what the heck they were doing in terms of a contract. I've had three agents interesest and one who literally loves the story. (they started with the first 30 pgs, asked for the first 100, then recently asked for all of it.) All of this as happened in the past month. And also, the editor is interested in seeing my second book, which I'm currently revising."

Sounds like a plan. Good luck. Always helpful to have a good agent in you corner when contract time comes.

I know you are offended at my comments, but as a multi-published author, I despise seeing people sail in here and start advising people to break the rules, especially when there is no particular reason. It took me a long time to learn to sort out what advice I got was legitimate and what was bull. It took me a while to learn to trust the judgment of my agent and make changes she suggested without feeling angry. In short, it took me quite a while to get past the idea that since I got an agent for my first book on my first try every word I wrote was golden. I don't think I'm especially egotistical. I think a lot of writers feel that way about their books. If I can shorten the time it takes a new writer to learn the rules and be reasonable about their creative products, then maybe I will have helped someone. I have no patience for those starting out who think that they are such "artistes" that the rules don't apply to them.

[sellthepharm]

Tish,

Well said and many thanks from an aforementioned 'new writer'.

As an official lurker on this fantastic site, I have made one interesting observation: the vast majority of posters are here to help and are full of information. Others, sadly, are full of themselves.

Scott

[SRHowen]

Oh forget it--some people who get to the requested submission stage are just too full of themselves to bother with.

All I ask is don't push your exceptions to the rules on those who are not there yet and perhaps smash their chances.

Shawn

[Tish Davidson]

There's many a slip between requested submission and printed page - another thing I learned the hard way.

[reph]

Chunky: "I believe a double-underline tells the typesetter you want bold-face, but I wouldn't want to guarantee that..."

Double underline for small caps, wavy underline for bold.

[Jules Hall]

For what it's worth, Courier 10's too small for me to read comfortably, and I have good eyesight. Courier 12 is okay for sure

I think a lot of confusion is caused by the fact that Courier 10CPI is a 12pt font and Courier 12CPI is a 10pt font. "Courier 10" could be a reference to either of these.

[veingloree]

I had the impression that Time New Roman was more commonly used these days?

[TerriLynn]

It really depends on who's asking. Some agents/editors prefer TNR 12pt, some prefer Courier 12 pt, and at one time I'd heard one or two wanted 14pt. (Guess it depends on their eyesight) :)

But, :shrug as it's been pointed out...what do I know....

[maestrowork]

OK, from my experience, these are mostly required:

- double spaced
- 12pt font
- 1" margin
- numbered pages
- left justified text

The following varies from agent to agent:

- Time Romans (12 pt)
- Courier (12 pt... some may accept 10pt to cut down paper use)
- text only (some may accept graphics, drawings, etc.)

These formatting standards are not mentioned in submission guidelines, but are standards for years in publishing:
- underline for italics
- double underline (Reph said "wavy") for Bold
[What's for actual "underline"?]
- # for blank line


Electronic submissions are usually in Word or RTF formats.

Again, read the guidelines. If there're none, stick with the standard format. Anything else is going to decrease your chances.

[maestrowork]

There's many a slip between requested submission and printed page - another thing I learned the hard way.

How true! Don't count your chicken until your book is actually in print and in the store! (even after you sign a contract, anything can go wrong)

I've had two full ms. requests in the past 6 months. Neither came through. So I've learned not to be TOO excited about it until I see the check.

[Pthom]

The list of proofreaders' marks I've used for years, agrees with Maestro -- with two exceptions, where it agrees with reph.

Set in italic type: single underline........ word becomes word
Set in small capitals: double underline.. word becomes WORD
Set in boldface type: wavy underline... word becomes word

Microsoft Word can do all these.

As for how to indicate text should be shown with an underline (like this), my list is silent.

[mammamaia]

(This message was left blank)

[TerriLynn]

For Christ's sake bad advice was n[/b] given....it was misunderstood and slammed down someone's throat! Kudos my ass!


(my apologies to the head moderators....but I've had enough!)

:head

[Nameless65]

i'm out sick for a few days and look what blows up!Hey, way to turn the burner back up on a cooling pot. Gracias! :party

:huh

[ChunkyC]

Couldn't have said it better, Nameless.

[wisdomquest]

At the risk of letting my ignorance show ...

Are the wavy lines (for bold) added by hand afterwards?

I write in Word (Office XP Pro) ...

I've managed to find the double underline option (and unless I'm doing it wrong it seems kind of clunky to use?) ...

But I can't find a WAVY underline option in Word.

Also - do most of you format AS YOU WRITE? Or do you add any emphasis (by hand or through your software), when editing?

Thanks!:snoopy

EDIT: Colour me stupid - I found the 'wavy underline' option ... (duh) ... but its as clunky as the double underline to use though.

Once its turned on EVERYTHING gets (double or wavy) underlined til you turn it off, (right?) - and you can only turn it on and off by using the drop menu under format, font right? there are no keyboard shortcut/codes (ie control-u for single underline)?

Believe it or not I'm REALLY familiar with Word (transcriptionist for many years) - but the XP version is new to me. And, I've never had a need for double OR wavy underlines before now.

Ah well, live and learn ... thanks guys! :snoopy

[ChunkyC]

Yeah, Wisdom, you need to turn it on and off as you go, or hilight a passage and apply the underline after the fact. I guess you could add it by hand if you had to, but the software will make it clean and consistent in appearance.

[Lori Basiewicz]

I tend to add the formatting in stages, Wisdom. Whenever I pause for a mental breather, I go back through what I've just written and add the formatting. Sometimes I do it as a write, too, but generally only when I pause. And I never leave it until the end. I figure if I leave it until too much later, I'll miss a bunch, but that is just me.

[maestrowork]

Here's a easy one:

Format it as you wish: italics or bold

When you're ready to format your actual ms. for submission, do a global search and replace. You can search EVERYthing that has been italicized and turn them into underline (with no italics), and all words boldfaced to double/wavy-underline (I'm still kind of skeptical about wavy because not a lot of people know how to do it, and bold-face is very common... or common than small-caps).

If you want to know how to do it in Word, let me know. I won't bore you with how-to's here.

[Jules Hall]

I don't have a copy here to try it with, but I suspect if you go to Tools/Customize and switch to the 'toolbars' tab, you can find double/wavy underline buttons that you can drag up onto your toolbar next to the standard underline one.

[ChunkyC]

Plus, most word processors use the CTRL-U keystroke combination to turn underline on and off. There probably would be combo's for the others as well you could put on a cheat sheet until you have 'em memorized. This works well if you know ahead of time you are coming up to a spot you know you'll want formatted a certain way, it lets you keep your hands on the keyboard and not break your rhythm reaching for the mouse.

[wisdomquest]

You guys are great - thanks for all the suggestions.

I WAS able to get the double underline button up onto the formatting toolbar, (also strike-through and small caps), but I couldn't find the option to do the same with the wavy underline - as it was not listed with the rest.

I've never played with all the bells and whistles in Word ...(transcribing used only very basic formatting), so maybe its time I learned.

Now that I finally got started writing, I just hate the idea of getting side tracked with something else.

So much to do, so little time ...

Anyway ... Thanks again, peeps ... very much appreciated!

-wisdomquest :snoopy

[maestrowork]

I wouldn't worry about it so much as you write. However, before you submit, do a once over and fix all the formatting. That's why I think the global find/replace works wonder. I am always able to switch from normal to ms. format in minutes.

[wisdomquest]

Thanks maestrowork,

I tried some global find and replace tests on a short document that I had saved, and it worked like a charm.

Very cool ...

Thanks again!

-wisdomquest :snoopy

[SRHowen]

but the punctuation after a word in italics or bold, should also be in italics or bold, so if you do not key them that way, the global search and replace will make your little lines one letter (the period or whatever) short.

Shawn

[maestrowork]

Is that right? I never format the punctuation after the word.

[ChunkyC]

I wondered about that as far as proper typesetter 'ettiquette', but always did format the punctuation, 'coz when you don't and you use the actual formatting instead of the underline, it looks weird with question marks & exclamation points.

Really?

Really?

You don't say!

You don't say!

[maestrowork]

With italics, yes. But with bold-face or underline, it looks odd...

It was the Ring!

[SRHowen]

it does look weird. I never use bold--except for chapter headings.

Shawn shoves chair backward to reach bookcase for formatting book---

End punctuation is not mentioned for bold, though it is mentioned for things like The Smoking Gun--Chapter One The em dash needs to be bold as well. Also if you use a colon it would be in bold, but none of my writing manuals on formatting say if an end mark such as a period, or question mark should be in bold. I can't even find a fiction book on my shelf that has bold used in the text.

It is true of italics. I am thinking it is for bold as well--perhaps one of those weird looking things like the first time you use courier vs times.

So, my bad, maybe.

On a side note: as I said I never use bold to indicate shouting or some such--how many of you use bold in your text?

Shawn (e-mailing her agent to see what he says)(e-mailing her boss at the magazine to see what she says as well--called head editor)

She says, not end punctuation, but joining punctuation and in full quotes. Colons yes, semi no--so it varies. I hate those things that have exceptions and are case dependent.

[HConn]

I never use bold in my fiction. Mainly because I never see it in fiction I read.

[reph]

The Chicago Manual, 12th ed., p. 142, in discussing use of italics for key terms, says:


"What is meant by random selection?

In the last example note the italic question mark. This illustrates the printer's rule that punctuation is set in the style of the immediately preceding word."

[maestrowork]

I think that's it. In most books (fiction at least) it's usually italic, and not bold. And that's why the punctuation formatting looks fine. If it's bold instead of italic, it'd look kind of weird.

[Vanessa99]

I use italics for thoughts. I usually write in the third person. I don't think they are quite as necessary for the first person POV. What i don't like is when I've seen people introduce thoughts in quotation marks. It's easy to get them confused with conversation.

[macalicious731]

deleted, sorry!

[Flawed Creation]

in "what is meant by [i] random selection [i/], i would think that the question mark should not be in italics.

italics on individual phrases either add emphasis or marks a title. neither is need for the punctuation.

OTOH (and this is just a guess) it seems logical that when the entire text of something is in italics or bold, the punctuation should be. if you're using italics for thoughts, the question mark is also part of the thought, and should be italic also.


the first point i'm fairly sure of, the second less so.

i'd appreciate a definitive answer, although i don't know if there is one.

[reph]

Flawed Creation, putting the question mark in italics isn't very logical; it's only what the Chicago Manual says to do. The question mark isn't part of the term to be explained, random selection. Maybe the reason to italicize is just visual. Sometimes, if you don't, part of the last letter will bump into the punctuation mark.

There are other editions of Chicgo since the one I quoted. I don't know what they advise.

[SRHowen]

My agent requested I put all punctuation after italics in italics (underlined) based on his knowledge of publisher's wants and needs. I'd already done so, but his wish was that other writers would get it and also do so.

My ms went to 32 publishers/editors (big houses) by request.

If that's not a definitive answer, I don't know what is.

As a side note--if you don't agree, fine, but don't send childish rantings to my ez-inbox, I'm getting sick of them.

Shawn

[TerriLynn]

32! :eek Wow...that's a lot! I didn't know there were that many. (my agent's only going for the top ten right now...although they aren't requested...yet. ;) )

I'm not jumping into this italics debate because frankly...that poor horse is dead...send him to Elmers. No two people are going to agree what's right and what's wrong...so it's just not worth the stress of trying to prove your point.

Anyway.....just wanted to post and let you know you haven't completely gotten rid of me. :grin (what can I say....i'm a masochist) :)

Terri

[ChunkyC]

it's just not worth the stress of trying to prove your point
I can only speak for myself, but I'm more concerned with trying to find out if there is an accepted way of doing things. If there isn't, then I agree there's no reason to flog it to death. But one never finds out anything without asking first.

[TerriLynn]

I can only speak for myself, but I'm more concerned with trying to find out if there is an accepted way of doing things. .......... But one never finds out anything without asking first.
Exactly Mr Chunky,
And I'm not saying don't ask...I'm saying don't debate it. The answer was given yet a debate started on who was right and who was giving false information.
If there's one thing I've learned about this buisness is it's all subjective!! What one agent or editor wants is going to be a completely different thing to another agent or editor. Okay...maybe not completely I'm going for a point. All you have to worry about...and I'm using the word *you* as a euphemism for *anyone*...is to follow the rules and guidelines set forth by the agent or editor you are working with or wish to work with. Because, let's face it...if you want to get far you're going to have to learn to play in their sandbox.

Hey!....how'd I get in here??

:gone

[maestrowork]

Who cares, TerriLynn. Let it go. You can always ignore these posts. If it bothers you, don't respond. Don't read.

[ChunkyC]

You make valid points about dealing with specific editors, Terri. Follow their guidelines.

As far as debating a point, some of us just plain like to do so. We're having fun and is it really doing anyone any harm? That's the beauty of this place. Any two or more people can go off and discuss / debate / argue whatever they want. You can either join in, or not.

If you tell us you think it's a big waste of time, that's your opinion. No rational person will deny you the right to have that opinion. But tell us, and I quote: 'don't debate it', well, that comes across like you're telling us what to do, and it's not surprising it will ruffle a few feathers. I don't believe you're actually demanding that we stop, but when you use wording like that, it gives that impression. Do you see what I mean?

I hope you see that I'm only trying to make clear why some of the responses to your posts are the way they are.

[SRHowen]

exceptions to every rule, those who make it despite they didn't follow industry standard. But I could bet good money that when your ms goes to the copy-editor that those italics and the punctuation following them will be underlined and not in italics. So what if you didn't do it in your submission, when it gets to the copy-editor, the person who went to school to learn his job, it will be in industry standard. Which is underline for italics and the punctuation afterward also underlined so it is not missed. (based on the industry wide use of the Chicago Manual of Style)

One reason is that italics are hard to read on a galley proof.

Things like, to underline or not in a submission may be agent or editor specific (though rarely do I see agent or editor web sites or guidelines that specify on this one)(they figure if you write and want to sell you have read at least the CMS), but keep in mind the further you get from industry standards, the greater reduction you take in your chances of getting in the door. And despite what many hope or want to believe, there are industry standards. You can't go wrong using them. (You can go wrong not using the,m unless requested to deviate from them)

Here are a couple of web sites that speak of italics and the standard:

community-2.webtv.net/sol...age11.html (http://community-2.webtv.net/solis-boo/Grammar2/page11.html)

www.dailygrammar.com/396to400.shtml (http://www.dailygrammar.com/396to400.shtml)

And of course the industry standard, The Chicago Manual of Style

It really is not a matter of follow the agent's or editor's guidelines--this is a copy-editor thing.

I'd seriously question an agent or editor that wanted my ms done in italics vs underlined, and wanted the punctuation afterward not included in the underline. Electronic submissions for an e-book maybe, they would want it in italics--but standard print ms that is going to go to a copy-editor and become a galley proof at some time--

I'd want to know why the standard was not being followed, it would call into question if my publisher or agent knew what they were doing.

Disclaimer for those who think it's all about them--this is not a jab at anyone. It's about industry standards--period. Ez-box letters and e-mails attacking my agent or me, or childish rants will from here on out be posted to the BB so all can see.

Grow up, please.

Shawn

[SRHowen]

just a note--on the top ten, there are many imprints under each house, and sometimes the book (mines cross genre) may be right for more than one imprint. And my agent has connections in the UK and Europe as well. So thus the seemingly larger list.

Each agent has their own way of doing things. I take it that the agent considering your ms has offered you representation then? Congrats! :party That is an accomplishment. Have you told him/her about the publisher who is considering your ms? If not, might be a good idea before he queries the same person.

Shawn

[TerriLynn]

Thank you Shawn. I got the call Monday. Yes, she's aware and has already spoken with the editor (who wants to see the mms again after a few more changes) :rolleyes (I'm just waiting on them now) They actually both had suggestions (for added scenes) but aren't quite on the same page (meaning the only thing they agreed on was they want more sex) :D . Do you ever have that happen? Who do you listen to? :\

Mr. Chunky...and I'm only assuming you're a mister....debate away if that's what gets you off...but when it turns into insults and as stated above-- fills an in-box with childish rants..then yes, it becomes a problem.

Maestro, get over yourself and learn to read. There is never any intended animosity in my posts except what you want to put in them....(although...let's not count this one)
And beleive me, I've learned to pass over the ones that do.

TL

[ChunkyC]

Mr. Chunky...and I'm only assuming you're a mister....debate away if that's what gets you off...but when it turns into insults and as stated above-- fills an in-box with childish rants..then yes, it becomes a problem.
I'm with you all the way there, Terri. And yes, I am a Mr., though there's no need to use it here, Chunky or CC will be just fine. After all, we're all brothers and sisters in the writing family.

PS -- let me echo Shawn's congrats on getting an offer of representation (unless you've signed?). All successes in this business should be celebrated.

[SRHowen]

I can only say I listened to my agent, then did it my way. Does this mean I said no I won't change that or do that? No. I read my editorial letter--only a 2 page long one, and then looked at what he wanted me to change, put some thought into it, then made changes--we bounced the ms back and forth, three times and off it went. And we did exchange many e-mails with just pages listed where there were typos, and missed punctuation etc. I hated those, page number, and that was it--I had to hunt for the typo which was a couple of times that dang period or question mark not underlined, or an extra space.

You have to feel you can talk to your agent. If you don't understand--ask! One line in my editorial letter said tone down the scene in chapter so and so--I read the scene and thought tone down what? The interior monologue? The torture part of the scene? What? So I called my agent, and we hashed it out--we had a great give and take session and I came away knowing just what I would do.

I am lucky, my agent and I have become friends and we work well together.

As to the editor--how does your agent feel about that editor? Make sure she sees the suggested changes the editor made. Reach a middle ground, but keep your voice and style.

Shawn

[TerriLynn]

As to the editor--how does your agent feel about that editor? Make sure she sees the suggested changes the editor made.

They have a very good business and personal relationship from what she (the agent) said. They know each other well. We had a good conversation on the phone and I don't think it'll be a problem to work together. Believe it or not, people actually like me and I get along well with everybody. :grin
I plan to call her after I've read the revisions from the editor, but I'm sure they've been sent UPS ground (like last time) which means it'll be a while before I get them and the agent wanted her revisions within the next three weeks. :shrug
So..should I do her revisions, send them then do the editors when they come in?
This is getting too stressful :ack (and I'm really going to look like that before it's over!) lol And now I have to write up my bio....which is really sounding lame...write up a full synopsis for book one and book two and send her the full for book two as soon as it's done...which it would have been if I weren't going nuts over everything else! :rolleyes

I thought this writing thing was supposed to be fun. :wha

[zerohour21]

If I paraphrase the thoughts of my characters, then I do not use italics. If it is a direct verbatum thought from the character, then I put it in italics.

I was unaware that publishers wanted the text that is supposed to be italicized in the book to be underlined in the manuscript. I'm not trying to start this whole debate over again about whether you should comply with the publishers demands, because if that's what they want, then that's what they want, but honestly, I'm curious as to why they would wnat it that way. I mean, I can understand underlining the text before word processors became popular, because back then getting text in italics on a standard typewriter probably wasn't going to happen very easily, but in this day in age with the use of Microsoft Word and other highly advanced word processors, wouldn't it make a lot more sense to have all the text you want in italics be put in italics on the manuscript? Again, not trying to stir anything, but I am curious as to why it should still be underlined even now, especially since now I have to go through my entire six hundred page novel and convert it tothe right format.

[Tish Davidson]

was unaware that publishers wanted the text that is supposed to be italicized in the book to be underlined in the manuscript. I'm not trying to start this whole debate over again about whether you should comply with the publishers demands, because if that's what they want, then that's what they want, but honestly, I'm curious as to why they would wnat it that way.


As was explained early in the thread, the underlining is for the people who physically produce the book (formerly the typesetter, but I don't know what they call themselves in the computer age). Underlining stands out much better than italics when someone scans the mss for anything that needs special treatment. I know TerriLynn brags about she doesn't have to follow the rules, but for the rest of us mere mortals, it's better go go along with convention.

[TerriLynn]

Tish Wrote:
I know TerriLynn brags about she doesn't have to follow the rules, but for the rest of us mere mortals, it's better go go along with convention.

You know...I had planned to let this go...since you're obviously a pendejo! However, I couldn't.
Why don't you go back and re-read this thread and get your facts straight before you light this fire again.
Personally, I don't give a rat's ass if you like me or not... and I think I'll be able to sleep at night. But don't post bullshit like this and say I said it! If your going to quote me...quote me right. And here's one for you...bite me!

[Tish Davidson]

I stand by what I said and I am quoting from this thread:

Shawn 8/23
Just so you know, when submitting a ms, what you want in italics, is not put in italics, you underline it.

TerriLynn 8/23
Yep, that's the rule.
However...I never follow them mwah ha ha
and haven't had a complaint yet.

TerriLynn 8/24
I don't worry about the italics when I submit a manuscriipt because I'm not stupid enough to think it will be published as is. When the final draft is written with the requested
revisions then it will be formatted as per the rules.

ChunkyC 8/24
If you ever get that far, which is less likely if you don't follow the rules NOW. Terri -- it's just as easy to hit the 'U' for underline as it is to hit the 'I' for italics. If you know that the person receiving your submission prefers underlining, why in heaven's name would you use italics? That makes no sense. The fact that publishers want manuscripts submitted with underlining to indicate italics is widely known.

TerriLynn 8/24
That's presumptuous....I am that far.

It was then revealed by Shawn that "that far" was fulls requested by an unnamed agent whom a few days later you said was representing you.

No, I don't like your attitude. You swept in here, gave advice contrary to standard practice, and were unpleasant when published writers called you on it. Since then you have continued to be rude, including this most recent post.

I'm pleased for you that you now have representation, but that doesn't mean you know all there is to know about publishing. Many of us who have written professionally for years are still learning things from each other. There are quite a few working, professional, multi-published authors and some editors giving advice on this board, not to mention a large number of serious part time writers who are published. Virtually all of them genuinely want to help less experienced individuals work their way through the confusions and scams of getting published, and they do it in ways that are not rude or confrontational. That apparently is not your style. Okay, I'm not going to change you, but I'm not going to take your opinions seriously, given the attitude you started off here. Yes, I know you don't give a $#*%.

[HConn]

TerriLynn, Writers.Net (http://www.writers.net/forum/) seems pretty friendly to snotty, obnoxious people. Maybe you'd fit in better over there.

[JimMorcombe]

If you use MS Word, then you will find some things easier to do with "Styles" than with global find and replaces.

For example, being as blind as a bat, I have changed both the "Normal" style to be Times-Roman 14 point, 1.5 line spacing with Spacing After = 18 pts. (I actually use another style, but I'll pretend its "Normal").

Before I give it to anyone else to read, I just change the Normal style to be Times-Roman 12 pt.

Before submitting it, I change Normal to be Courier New 12 pt Double space with Spacing After = 0 pt.

There's actually lots of good stuff you can do with styles.

[TerriLynn]

they do it in ways that are not rude or confrontational. That apparently is not your style. Okay, I'm not going to change you, but I'm not going to take your opinions seriously, given the attitude you started off here.

I never claimed to know everything about publishing, it's your assumption. And I never started out with an attitude until you attacked...and yeah, my style is to attack back when I'm attacked.
HC--great comback...take long to think of that? FWIW, I've been to WN and I've met some great writers and editors there. Yeah, the place has problems, which I stay away from, but at least they aren't as pompous and condescending as the people here.
I won't post anymore...since I'm not going to learn ANYTHING from any of you (with the only exception going to Mr MacDonald). I already belong to a few other rooms where I've learned a hell of a lot more about writing, publishing, marketing and anything else there is to know about the writing world. And the people are a lot friendlier and supportive and encouraging than most of the people I've met here!

I'd say it's been a pleasure to be here...but it hasn't.

Best of luck to the rest of you.

[JimMorcombe]

When we read, we don't actually look at the letters. Our brain is more efficient than that. We recognise the shape of the word.

With Times Roman, thin letters such as "i" and "l" use much less space than fat letters such as "a".

This means that "fill" and "fall" have different shapes and are easier for the trained eye to tell apart under Times-Roman. (The trained eye being someone who usually reads Times Roman). If you are reading a sentence, it is easier in Times Roman.

However, under Courier New, every letter has equal standing. If you want to read through and pull out mistakes (not just spelling mistakes) then they are much easier to see in Courier.

Maybe it doesn't make much difference to the young with 20/20 eye sight. But it makes a big difference to me and other poor sighted individuals.

[Lori Basiewicz]

Oh, it makes a difference to young eyes, too, Jim. They are just as likely to let part of their brains wander off and daydream as anyone else.

For the italics question about why it is so, may I suggest printing two copies of a single page of your manuscript. In one, take a single line and format it as italics. In the other, take the same line and format it as underlined. Compare the hardcopies of the two.

I think you will find it much easier to identify the underlined version than the italics when it is surrounded by other text.

[HConn]

Let's see if I can make this happen:

Illlicit

Illlicit

This is why I like Courier. Easier to catch errors. I think it's easier to read, too, but that might be because I'm used to it.

[aka eraser]

Jenna's #1 rule on the Cooler is: Respect your fellow writers.

We can argue, even passionately, without being rude, snide or condescending. This thread has merit and I'd prefer to leave it here where it could benefit the largest number of writers, but if the sniping doesn't stop I'll move it to Take It Outside.

[emeraldcite]

I second that motion. be civil. it's that simple. if you want to argue, take it outside. there's a special board just for that reason...

[SRHowen]

I learn new stuff everyday--why bother with beta readers if you knew everything?

Now if I could just figure out why on my own ez-board community I can't get the custom names to stay put I'd be happy.

Sigh

Shawn

[zerohour21]

Sorry, hope I wasn't being rude or anything. I'm generally not one to be a rebel for the sake of being a rebel, though I do have a tendancy to question rules and such if they don't make sense. I'll follow them anyway, but will still wonder about the logic behind it. And then sometimes someone will explain it to me, and then after that it will make a little more sense. Or sometimes it won't. It all depends on the situation.

Changing font to courier isn't a problem; I'll just highlight all of the text and change it. And I'm pretty good with computers and know Microsoft Word pretty well, so I'm sure I can find a shortcut to changing all the italicized stuff to underline.

[Lori Basiewicz]

Zero, you can you use the Find/Replace option to change italics to underline. If you click the "more" button when you are in the find/replace screen, there is a "format" option that lets you look for and replace different formatting styles.

[Tish Davidson]

If you click the "more" button when you are in the find/replace screen, there is a "format" option that lets you look for and replace different formatting styles.

Ooh - didn't know about the format option. Thanks Lori - I'm learning something new every day

[SRHowen]

But--if you didn't make the punctuation after the italics, in italics when you wrote the work, it will not get the underline.

Shawn

[zerohour21]

Thanks. That makes changing the format a lot easier and a lot less tedious, which is always agood thing.

Except now my novel is 875 pages instead of 650.:eek

[Pthom]

If you've inadvertantly missed formatting the punctuation following an italicized word, here's a solution, albiet somewhat kludgy.

use Find / More / Format / Font and set it to look for italics (or if you've already changed italics to underline, set it to look for underline).

Click on Find Next. (you can now exit the find dialog; the key combination [CTRL]+[Page Down] will go to the next instance of what you have in the dialog.)

Word will locate the next instance of italics. Look for punctuation following it. Hit the right arrow, highlight the offending punctuation and either italicize it or underline it according to your preference.

[ChunkyC]

Zero - I do believe you're right about the 'genesis' of using the underline, double-underline etc. In the era of typewriters it would have been near impossible to do italics or bold or whatever, so a 'shorthand' was needed, which became the industry standard. With all the professionals in the industry trained to use this shorthand, it just plain stuck around even after the arrival of the personal computer. And as was pointed out a few posts back, it is easier to spot an underlined block of text than an italicized block of text.

We have to remember that the folks who turn a manuscript into a finished book are staring at page after page of text every day of their working lives. They are trained for and so used to looking for the underline, that I would not be surprised if they would sometimes skip right over italicized text without even noticing it.

[Duesylady]

I've used the Chicago Manual of Style for years. I upgraded to the newest issue on the bookstore shelf (14th edition--last year) which gives the go-ahead for italic use to designate thought. Then, after returning home with my purchase, discovered that the 15th edition will make its appearance.

According to the Chicago Manual of Style website, the 15th edition will not advocate italic use for thoughts. <Frustrated sigh> I suppose editors and typesetters everywhere tired of novels written with pages full of thoughts, but I'm attempting to compose my scenes with the fewest possible "dialogue tags". Putting thoughts in quotation marks confuses ME, and leaving them as 'body text' seems odd as well. The last thing my tale needs is the elevated word count provided by "he thought, or "she thought.:head

[Ken Hoss]

So the subject is to use italics or underline for a characters thoughts. What about just using he/she thought after the line? And using parenthesis to encapsulate the thought?

"Damn! She must think I'm nuts.", Ken thought.

Damn! She must think I'm nuts.

Which is right? IMO, both.

And then there is:

Damn! She must think I'm nuts.

But then, the last novel I wrote was BC, (before computers), and I never got to see it published. (It was "lost" by the SP house I mailed it to, bulk of course, and was never seen again.)

So, which is right?


signed,

Confused

[ChaosTitan]

You don't have to underline anymore to show italics (unless submission guidelines specifically ask that you do, but this is rare).

And you don't need to use quotes around thoughts.

[IdiotsRUs]

So the subject is to use italics or underline for a characters thoughts. What about just using he/she thought after the line?

These are called filter words ( also include he felt, he saw, he heard etc). They are, not exactly bad - they are used sometimes pretty extensively in omni for example -- but should be used for a purpose. And that purpose is to distance the reader from the narrative.

If you don't want distance, don't use them. As long as the reader knows whose POV they are in, they aren't necessary. You don't need to use italics unless it's a direct thought ( ie uses I instead of he in third)

X walked down the road. The lion lurked half behind the skip. Little buggers get everywhere these days. I think I should run.

Y twirled in front of the mirror. The shoes pinched, and purple might be out of fashion. The feathers are just the right touch though. I need these shoes.



Line three is a thought of the character, but does not need the 'he thought' tag as we know whose POV we are in. Line four is a direct thought, so is italicised.

[James D. Macdonald]

Underline is correct for manuscripts. Underlined words will be set in italic.

Use underlines unless the guidelines specifically say otherwise, and any time you're submitting your work on paper.

[blacbird]

Underline is correct for manuscripts. Underlined words will be set in italic.

Use underlines unless the guidelines specifically say otherwise, and any time you're submitting your work on paper.

The reason for doing this hasn't changed. Underlines are easier to see than italics, and for editors working with paper manuscripts, this is a significant consideration. It is easy to miss italicized fonts on paper copies. I do a lot of technical editing of scientific papers, many with taxonomic names for which italics are required, and I assure you I much rather see underlining in the manuscript than an italic font.

caw

[kidcharlemagne]

These are called filter words ( also include he felt, he saw, he heard etc). They are, not exactly bad - they are used sometimes pretty extensively in omni for example -- but should be used for a purpose. And that purpose is to distance the reader from the narrative.

If you don't want distance, don't use them. As long as the reader knows whose POV they are in, they aren't necessary. You don't need to use italics unless it's a direct thought ( ie uses I instead of he in third)

X walked down the road. The lion lurked half behind the skip. Little buggers get everywhere these days. I think I should run.

Y twirled in front of the mirror. The shoes pinched, and purple might be out of fashion. The feathers are just the right touch though. I need these shoes.



Line three is a thought of the character, but does not need the 'he thought' tag as we know whose POV we are in. Line four is a direct thought, so is italicised.

Thanks IRUS--still learning about this myself. I'm currently reading a Tom Wolfe book written in 3rd person close and the thought of the character is written without italics and he hardly ever uses 'he/she thought'.

I may be off point here but when, as a reader, I see large chunks of italic text I start skipping. The same applies to SMS extracts, emails, letters etc. I just think to myself, yes, yes, alright let's get back to the main text.

[Ken Hoss]

These are called filter words ( also include he felt, he saw, he heard etc). They are, not exactly bad - they are used sometimes pretty extensively in omni for example -- but should be used for a purpose. And that purpose is to distance the reader from the narrative.

If you don't want distance, don't use them. As long as the reader knows whose POV they are in, they aren't necessary. You don't need to use italics unless it's a direct thought ( ie uses I instead of he in third)

X walked down the road. The lion lurked half behind the skip. Little buggers get everywhere these days. I think I should run.

Y twirled in front of the mirror. The shoes pinched, and purple might be out of fashion. The feathers are just the right touch though. I need these shoes.



Line three is a thought of the character, but does not need the 'he thought' tag as we know whose POV we are in. Line four is a direct thought, so is italicised.

Thanks for the input. That cleared it up for me, and it's been a long time since I did any serious writing. (About 20 years.) And that was BC (before computers), and we didn't have all of these great resources to check out. Hell, I was still using an old Underwood to pound out my MS's.

[-SAN.]

I'm new here, and just want to say how much I'm learning already. I'm not looking forward to going over my manuscript to replace italic script with underlined, lol - but I found this discussion [except for the snarkiness] fascinating.

[jaksen]

I've used italics for anything which is sort of 'outside the story.' For example, when a character finds some old letters of his mother's and is reading them off and on throughout the story. I did that in italics.

The publisher has always left the italics the way I use them. But once I use them in a certain way, I don't change it. That way the reader knows oh, italics, so that must mean ...

[brianjanuary]

I don't personally have any objection to this if it's used in moderation. But I just read a novel that had entire chapters in italics, which drove me nuts.

Brian January
http://amzn.com/B005WM0HN6 (http://amzn.com/B005WM0HN6)

[blacbird]

I'd say, yeah, use italics for thoughts. Then, if you find your manuscript overflowing with italics, you'll know you're spending way too much space and energy narrating thoughts, and not enough space and energy narrating character activity.

caw

[The Lonely One]

Don't have to italicize thoughts. You just don't. There's no rule and there are so many published examples (including my own) there's just no argument that it is some kind of standardized thing. Italics are the quote marks of thoughts, so to speak, but speaking for minimalism, if it's clear it's a thought in context, italics, to me, are superfluous. That's why I don't use them in most cases. A he/she thought tag is fine. I know authors who sometimes don't even use quote marks for dialogue (of course in this case it isn't standard). Again, clarity is really the only important part.

But also it's not as if they're not okay. Lots of examples of italicized thoughts in fiction. Just be consistent.

I think some people in this thread are overthinking something where you just make a call and move on to telling your story.