He thought

Italics means you don't need the tag. Sometimes I put it in anyway because it helps the sentence cadence. And as an avid audio-book listener, the tag helps because one cannot 'hear' italics.

Mostly I use italics for inner monologue without tags no matter how many people think it is wrong.

[MaeZe, been in way to many italics for inner monologue debates]

I look for this when I read.

It seems to me that often the first example of italics is called out as 'he thought.' Then afterward, it may or may not be.

I've taken to saying it in the first instance, and very occasionally later if it it helps with pacing or anything like this.

Look up filtering on google. I'm uneducated, stupid, and new to writing novels - but I think phrases like 'he thought' fit that concept.

For me, it's hard to eliminate entirely, but I do the best I can.

Coffeehunter browsed through the shelves filled with unfamiliar packages. Where's my coffee?
Finally he spotted a familiar yellow can, seemingly glowing in golden light. Oh thank goodness. His life would come apart without his morning coffee.

Personal preference - I'd lose the italics. In small doses it's ok, but if you're using it for internal thoughts (which can be abundant) it could be distracting.

Using tags like 'he thought' can create distance rather than drawing a reader into the character's head. It's perfectly possible to write thoughts/internal dialogue without resorting either to direct thought (in italics) or tags. For example:

Cofffeehunter browsed through the shelves.Where was his coffee? Ah, there--on the third shelf, glowing in the light streaming through the eastern window. Thank goodness for that. No one should be expected to function without a morning cup of coffee.

Like MaeZe, I use italics for thoughts. I tend to use 'he thought' or 'she wondered' and similar for the first few times to establish what's going on, but readers quickly pick up on stuff like this.

I'm with Marissa on this. No need for italics or tags. Trust your readers. They -- we, because we're all readers -- are smart enough to understand the way stories work.

indianroads said:

...
Personal preference - I'd lose the italics. In small doses it's ok, but if you're using it for internal thoughts (which can be abundant) it could be distracting.

Click to expand...

Aaaaaaaaahhhhhh.

The argument of paragraphs of italics really is a different discussion. If you have paragraphs of italics you should probably be in first person narration or some related POV. ESP dialogue I have no opinion. Good luck with that, it's a pioneer's field.

coffeehunter said:

This is an interesting case:

John shook his head. “School is tomorrow,” he said. “You need to,” and I’d rather be done with it. "Let’s go.”

Given what I've learned here, would the above be correct? The idea here is there's some internal dialog in between talking.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure I'm able to follow what you want that to say. There's a tag that's not a tag, in the ital, which I think you want to be John thinking, but ... a. it's a tag, which it shouldn't be, and b. I'm lost on the POV and the antecedent with the it actually.

coffeehunter said:

John shook his head. “School is tomorrow,” he said. “You need to,” and I’d rather be done with it. "Let’s go.” {this reads unnecessarily complex and is confusing}

Given what I've learned here, would the above be correct? I avoided "he thought" here, embedding his thought in between dialog.

Click to expand...

Try:

I’d rather be done with it. John shook his head. “School is tomorrow. You need to. Let’s go."
^italics--internal thought ^action that also shows this is John's paragraph ^dialogue, separated from internal thoughts for the sake of clarity.

Yes, you don't need the tag 'he said' if it is clear who is speaking. But it is not wrong either. It may depend on cadence and style.

Using a "he thought" tag or not is largely a matter of narrative distance.

Which is to say, using such a tag, or other filtering tags, automatically imposes distance between the reader and the POV. If you are writing a deep-penetration 3rd person limited, this is (1) a bad thing and (2) not necessary. Italics are a sufficient cue in that case. Sometimes you don't even need that.

If you are writing from a shallower POV, or a variable-depth where the narrative "camera" does not sit squarely inside the character's head all the time but dips in and out, "he thought" may be useful. Distance isn't always a bad thing, & filtering isn't automatically an unforgivable sin. It's a matter of style, not rules.

coffeehunter said:

Is it necessary to write "he thought" in third-person limited?

Click to expand...

It is necessary in books for very young children, especially the ones which parents will normally read to them. Not so much in adult books

It's also an opportunity to imply thought... and convey emotion. I see it done sort of like this sometimes:

Cofffeehunter prowled through the kitchen.

Where, he howled in the silence of his mind, is my coffee?

After six and half hours, he found the can in the trunk of his car, under his wife's fleece jacket.

Please let it be full, Coffeehunter prayed.

coffeehunter said:

Sometimes I want to explicitly say something in a thought process. Is it necessary to write "he thought" in third-person limited? Can it be ignored? Please share some examples of what's standard.

I've always explicitely wrote "he thought" because it might helpful if the book turns into an audiobook. Sometimes the clarity helps.

A lame example I use generally:
Cofffeehunter browsed through the shelves. Where is my coffee? he thought.
Soon, the can was found on the third shelf, glowing in yellow light.
Yay, Coffeehunter thought.

Click to expand...

As has been mentioned, if you use italics to indicate thoughts, you rarely need to use "thought" as a tag. It's redundant. But there are times when the tag might be useful or necessary. For instance, if you want to add an adverb to the tag, to convey a certain tone to the thoughts. Or when you want to combine both a thought and an action. An example of each type below:

Or maybe, he thought sourly, he's afraid I'll bolt for the wall again.

Click to expand...

A great beast swept over her, his body made of night and shadow, his eyes lambent caverns of fire. They
hid mysteries, those eyes, secrets so ancient that no one alive remembered them. Except her.

I know your name, she thought, but the creature had disappeared, lost in the space between the stars.​

Click to expand...

I don't listen to audiobooks, but I have sometimes wondered how the readers make direct thoughts obvious when there are no tags. Still, I don't think we want to pepper our manuscripts with thought tags to compensate.

BethS said:

... I don't listen to audiobooks, but I have sometimes wondered how the readers make direct thoughts obvious when there are no tags. Still, I don't think we want to pepper our manuscripts with thought tags to compensate.

Click to expand...

Pretty much you read past it and ignore the matter.

I think a slew of thought tags would be very distracting.

BethS said:

As has been mentioned, if you use italics to indicate thoughts, you rarely need to use "thought" as a tag. It's redundant. But there are times when the tag might be useful or necessary. For instance, if you want to add an adverb to the tag, to convey a certain tone to the thoughts. Or when you want to combine both a thought and an action.

Or maybe, he thought sourly, he's afraid I'll bolt for the wall again.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Or - use a physical mannerism to convey an emotional state:
He smirked. The dude is afraid I'll bolt for the wall again.

A great beast swept over her, his body made of night and shadow, his eyes lambent caverns of fire. They
hid mysteries, those eyes, secrets so ancient that no one alive remembered them. Except her.

I know your name, she thought, but the creature had disappeared, lost in the space between the stars.

Click to expand...

BethS's second example is fricking gorgeous. Wow... lovely.

I don't listen to audiobooks, but I have sometimes wondered how the readers make direct thoughts obvious when there are no tags. Still, I don't think we want to pepper our manuscripts with thought tags to compensate.

Click to expand...

In my writing, if there's a way to leave out a dialogue or thought tag (that isn't disruptive to the flow) I'll do it. My knowledge and abilities are a work in progress though.

indianroads said:

BethS's second example is fricking gorgeous. Wow... lovely.

Click to expand...

In my writing, if there's a way to leave out a dialogue or thought tag (that isn't disruptive to the flow) I'll do it.

Click to expand...

That's pretty much my approach, though I don't tie myself in knots trying to avoid them.

BethS said:

As has been mentioned, if you use italics to indicate thoughts, you rarely need to use "thought" as a tag. It's redundant. But there are times when the tag might be useful or necessary. For instance, if you want to add an adverb to the tag, to convey a certain tone to the thoughts. Or when you want to combine both a thought and an action. An example of each type below:





I don't listen to audiobooks, but I have sometimes wondered how the readers make direct thoughts obvious when there are no tags. Still, I don't think we want to pepper our manuscripts with thought tags to compensate.

Click to expand...

I haven't consumed many audiobooks either, but it's my understanding that a good reader varies the tone of their voice and rhythm slightly for different characters. That helps get untagged dialogue and thoughts across without confusing the listener.

I don't know how it works with the type of e-reading that is done with a "computer" voice reading from text, though. I'm guessing the listener may have to back up and repeat some passages to understand them. Or maybe the listener gets used to a given author's style after a while.

I've noticed that tagging and filtering seems to be coming back in vogue though, at least in SFF books written in recent years. So maybe editors are telling writers do do more of the things we've been telling each other not to do for the past couple decades (at least). Perhaps the audio market is the reason?

indianroads said:

Or - use a physical mannerism to convey an emotional state:
He smirked. The dude is afraid I'll bolt for the wall again.

Click to expand...

I dunno, that would actually knock me out. Since we're in the head of this person, I'd wonder how he was aware of smirking specifically (unless he is doing it deliberately to be rude). I think there are times when the tag works fine, though, as with Beth's example.

I'm not sure "he thought" would be a filter in a case where you are directly representing what the person thought versus summarizing it.

I never knew you, she thought. (a tag)

vs

She thought then that she'd never knew him

In the latter case, it often works better (imo) just to write something like "She'd never known him."

BethS said:

I don't listen to audiobooks, but I have sometimes wondered how the readers make direct thoughts obvious when there are no tags. Still, I don't think we want to pepper our manuscripts with thought tags to compensate.

Click to expand...

Not audiobook, but I've read a few literary novels and short stories that don't use quotation marks to signify dialogues and no thoughts are in italics and I never got confused between what was dialogue or thoughts. I think like everything it's all in the execution.

coffeehunter said:

I guess at the end of the day, outside of submission guidelines, the publisher edits the book the way they see fit.

Click to expand...

No, not at all. That's neither what editing nor publishing entails.

cornflake said:

No, not at all. That's neither what editing nor publishing entails.

Click to expand...

This.

Editors make suggestions. Writers implement them, or not.