A question for agents/editors about italicized inner dialogue

Not an agent or editor, but as someone who has read a ton of books, it doesn't sound like this person knows what they're talking about. Italicized internal thoughts are very common. You already know this. And if you're POV is in 3rd person, of course the internal monologue would be in 1st person. Sane people don't talk to themselves in third person.

Do what you want. Do what fits the story. Italicize internal dialogue is not standing in the way of your book getting published.

Don't get confused. There's nothing to get confused about. The confusion is coming from you already knowing the answer to your question yet trying to respect the "professional" and their opinion.

There are no rules in writing. (Outside of basic grammar rules of course.) ^_^

Looks like you're between a rock and a hard place. Did you hire this editor? You're paying her? She probably has a lot of really good advice from years of experience. Follow that.

And yes, it's a manuscript. Until it's published. Then it's called a book -- and so it goes. But times have changed. Take her good advice and use it to your benefit. I'll bet she has a lot more good advice than bad; things she's unwilling to bend on (internal dialogue in italics, 1st person). Anything you doubt, secretly Google--so as not to rile her.

How would she know if you didn't follow all of her advice before querying your manuscript? I'd thank her very politely, take the good, leave the bad, and send it off.

If she really were an editor of many years' standing she'd know that an editor's suggestions are only suggestions, and that the author gets the final say on whether or not any of those editorial suggestions are implimented.

Also, she's talking nonsense.

Listen to her good advice and ignore the rest, and be wary of her. Good editors don't attempt to control authors in the way she's trying to control you.

And for what it's worth, I charge more than $150 an hour.

I'm just floored that she's being so heavy handed about it. 'Either take all my advice or I'll stop'?

J. Marks said:

I have a few questions for any agents and/or editors who might happen by:

How do you feel about italicized inner dialogue (IID) in a submitted manuscript? I recently had a retired professional editor and writing consultant look at my manuscript, and she said not to italicize this. I mentioned that I did this because I not only find it easier to read, but that it gives a clearer understanding of what's what. Well, the retired consultant went off on me, saying (I'm paraphrasing here) that it's NOT a book, it's a manuscript, that I'm not the one printing it, that lazy, poor writers do this, also adding that if I wasn't going to take her advice, I could go elsewhere.

Click to expand...

I'm going to address her tone later, but is it possible that you're overusing the italics?

I write in a tight third. Almost all of my exposition is the MC's thoughts, but I very, very rarely italicize; only when she's directly talking to herself. I'd say you might find itals like that once every ten chapters or so; it's just not something I do a lot, and most if not all of the books I read also use it very rarely. It can be jarring and/or annoying to find itals all over the place.

So it's worth considering if the problem isn't the italics so much as that you're using them as a crutch instead of deepening your POV.

katci13 said:

And if you're POV is in 3rd person, of course the internal monologue would be in 1st person. Sane people don't talk to themselves in third person.

Click to expand...

I do, all the time. "Geez, dumbass, what were you thinking?" or "Make sure you do this or that tomorrow."

J. Marks said:

She wants me to respond to all of her critiques and suggestions within the manuscript, so she would see how (and if) I was following her advice. Since I'm keeping the italicized thought, this is could be a short relationship!

Click to expand...

As OH says:

Old Hack said:

If she really were an editor of many years' standing she'd know that an editor's suggestions are only suggestions, and that the author gets the final say on whether or not any of those editorial suggestions are implimented.

Also, she's talking nonsense.

Listen to her good advice and ignore the rest, and be wary of her. Good editors don't attempt to control authors in the way she's trying to control you.

Click to expand...

Thank her for her time and thoughts, and end the relationship. She has absolutely no business being rude to you or insisting you let her double-check your work to make sure you're following her Perfect Advice. It's rude and it's controlling, and your book is not HERS. (Never mind that nonsense about how it's not a book it's just a mss or whatever the hell she thinks she's saying there, which sounds to me like a deliberate attempt to make you feel inferior.)

Whatever good advice this woman may have is lost in attitude, and I'd get out of there fast.

Again, it's definitely worth checking the mss to see just how much of it is italicized inner thought, but if you want to write a whole book that way it's your business and not her place to tell you you're not allowed to. She can tell you no one will want to buy it--which is likely true--but that still doesn't make her your Mommy who has to check behind your ears before you're allowed to go outside and play.

I'd love to know this woman's name, if you care to PM or reppie me with it. She sounds like someone I'm vaguely familiar with.

Stacia Kane said:

I'd love to know this woman's name, if you care to PM or reppie me with it. She sounds like someone I'm vaguely familiar with.

Click to expand...

It wasn't me, honest.

Old Hack said:

It wasn't me, honest.

Click to expand...

LIAR.

J. Marks said:

She wants me to respond to all of her critiques and suggestions within the manuscript, so she would see how (and if) I was following her advice. Since I'm keeping the italicized thought, this is could be a short relationship!

Click to expand...

I knew someone who sounds quite similar to the woman you're talking about. If/when you do decide to part ways, beware of potential lashing out. I was involved with someone similar a few years ago and I think one of her last lines to me was "You'll never be published."

"Self-Editing for Fiction Writers", which I'm reading just now, advises against using italicized inner monologue or thoughts, and offers a few alternatives (e.g. using plain old non-italicized font, or tagging it sparingly with 'she/he thought'). Maybe this editor is a fan of that guide.

Their reasoning is that long stretches of italics are irritating to read and take the reader out of the story.

Agreed that the editor's attitude sounds awful, though, and she shouldn't be forcing you to change it.

I prefer not to italicize inner monologues, but it's just a style choice. I have no problem with italicized thoughts in third person stories, though I do slightly prefer close third person where italics aren't used (Stephen King comes to mind).

Self Editing For Fiction Writers is an excellent guide to editing your own work. Overuse of italics is darned annoying. Used sparingly and properly, the italicized passages are practically invisible.

Also, what Stacia and Old Hack said.

Man, that editor does have a horrible attitude, and she sounds very controlling and like she thinks she's Ms. Golden Freelance Editor. It's situations like this where take what you like and leave the rest, bye, bye works best.

Stacia Kane said:

I do, all the time. "Geez, dumbass, what were you thinking?" or "Make sure you do this or that tomorrow."

Click to expand...

Well, I may be a tad guilty of doing this. Lol! Actually now that you bring it up, if my character is beating themselves up, they'll think, "What were you thinking?" or something like that. That's so funny.

It's weird the things that never cross our minds until someone else brings it up.

katci13 said:

Sane people don't talk to themselves in third person.

Click to expand...

Stacia Kane said:

I do, all the time. "Geez, dumbass, what were you thinking?" or "Make sure you do this or that tomorrow."

Click to expand...

I think you missed the qualifier.

Old Hack said:

It wasn't me, honest.

Click to expand...

...says the kitten firing the rifle.

Roger J Carlson said:

I think you missed the qualifier.

Click to expand...

Ha, I was wondering when someone would mention that.

Sat Nam! (literally "Truth Name"--a Sikh greeting)

I've got a top NY editor who I pay well. And she asked me to ADD italics. So, I think your editor is both heavy-handed and wrong.

Blessings,

Siri Kirpal

Forgive me for butting in, but I'm so confused now. I'm not sure how to handle a situation in which the MMC reacts to what he is told and the reader gets into his head, so to speak.

EX:
"No one has ever shown any interest in that old diary. Lucy seemed curious, so I gave it to her. "

Lucy. Of course she'd have found a way to get her hands on it -- but not for long. "Glad you found a home for it," he said. "Now to get rid of the rest of this." He picked up an old, tarnished mirror. "Why do you keep this junk?"

Personally, I don't care for books where sentences like the ones beginning 'Lucy' and 'Of course' are intalicized, but I will go back and put them all into italics if that is the preferred method.

Is it?

One factor could be the nature of italics themselves.

It's easy, using a word processor, to italicize, but italics, in and of themselves, are hard to read/differentiate from non-italicized text.

In manuscripts, I don't italicize - I underscore, which indicates italics (for the finished product). This might be where the distinction between manuscript and book is important.

Or not. What do I know.

Wow - she sounds harsh. Not sure how correct she is, though, as IID is something we see regularly. I agree with Old Hack and Stacia. You're paying her for professional advice, not to belittle you.

Doesn't the "no italics in manuscripts" rule go back to the days of typewriters?

Anything beyond basic typography is better reserved for the actual book, although as Susan pointed out above, in *small* doses italics are pretty inoffensive. Big blocks of anything other than the standard text in the standard font you're using are probably not a good idea. This was gently pointed out by the person who eventually became my agent.

The only person in the whole fiction supply chain indispensable to your story is you. Find someone who doesn't think they're the second coming of Maxwell Perkins.

I don't know...I've seen plenty of writers abuse the thought-italics. I personally think that's the sort of thing that shouldn't be used more than a couple of times in a manuscript. Most of the time it's not necessary, and I can see what she means about it being a lazy writer technique. In my opinion, you should generally be able to tell that it's the character's thought without the italics (sometimes they're necessary), and adding the italics is, in a way, like a person adding "she said angrily" to a bit of dialogue.

I can't say if that's what she's referring to, just that I've seen a lot of writers overuse italics and/or "he thought" phrases.