Two style questions

My book is set in the late 19th Century. I sometimes tend to write too formally because of the formality of that time period. What are your feelings about using contractions in narratives? e.g. "Andrew wished he had not looked." AS OPPOSED TO "Andrew wished he hadn't looked."

Also, what is the accepted convention now for showing a character's thoughts. Full quotes?

Thx

TG

creeping into the prose too. All the period source material was getting to me.

Seems to me that if you've set up the narrative voice as a formal one, then
you might dip into less formal contractions in places where the narrative
is very close to the character's consciousness.

I'm ashamed to say I don't know if objective third-person narrators use contractions
or what current conventions in showing thoughts are.

Italics work for me to show thoughts.


I wish Clara was here. She'd know what to do. Tom thumped the refrigerator
closed, then dowsed the guacamole with tabasaco. And I wish Roger wasn't.

Italics are acceptable for showing a character's thoughts, but not necessary. The convention that I was taught, in fact, made use of no special punctuation or type:



So I was instructed by a professor who'd published a dozen novels or so and had won awards for several screenplays in the US and UK, so I'm inclined to trust that he knows whereof he speaks.

At the same time, though, I can see how non-italicized "thoughts" can be confusing and might seem to be part of the general narration.


I haven't read Wells or Doyle recently, but I don't recall any deliberate avoidance of contractions by either, and much of their stuff is set around the same time as yours.

Or are you basing yours in the US? Or elsewhere?

if no tag is used to indicate it is a thought then italics are in order. Also, in manuscripts, underline sections that are intended to be italicized unless otherwise indicated in the guidelines.

After posting, I paged through a few books to see how it's done, but I didn't spot any without the "Bill thought" indicator. Bill is apparently in a lot of books.

http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/cmosfaq.html

Many questions are answered here and most editors use this style guide.

I've heard that it's still not really great form, but oh well. If some higher-up bitches, I suppose I could go back.

I would never, never, never use full quotes, or even a pair of apostrophes i.e. 'What stupidity!' to show a character's thoughts. They are too easily confused with dialogue, and the reader has to get all the way to the attribution to see whether it is a thought or dialogue. I do thoughts in italics, and I don't mind if there is nothing at all:

NOT--"What stupidity!" she thought.

NOT--'What stupidity!' she thought.

MAYBE--What stupidity! she thought.

YES--What stupidity! she thought.

IMHO.

:D

"What stupidity!" she thought.

or

What stupidity!


I have also seen the italics used with a tag by some established authors but, as the saying goes, "one must know the rules before one breaks them."lol

Publishers have editors who will edit in a consistant way. As long as the acquisition editor is not a major stickler--which most aren't, unless you innundate them with tons of adverbs or inappropriate punctuation.(overusing !!! for example)

As a kid I read a lot of not-very-good books in which solitary
characters were constantly engaging in expository monologue.

"Now be careful," Joe reminded himself as he neared the log bridge.
"Don't fall in the creek like you did last week!"

I grew up thinking that talking to themselves was something that
people did. It's a difficult habit to break, one that makes people
form judgements about you.

My whole life blighted--by a cheap narrative device! :cry:

Don't they? :blush: