I agree - writers should follow the general standards rather than stylizing or personalizing. So if we want italics in the final MS (which is still up for debate, obviously) then we should use italics in the MS, because that's the general standard these days.
Very true, and that's the reason a lot of standard manuscript formatting has come about - fonts that are easy on the eye, double spacing which is easier to read (and make notes on, although most submissions are read on screen now). I'm not sure there's ever a good time to deviate from your publisher's formatting - they're only going to correct it to their house style during editing. And I'm not sure it's ever a good idea to give your publisher unnecessary work. I mean, the likes of Stephen King or JK Rowling could probably get away with demanding their manuscripts are printed in comic sans, but most of us? Nope. Anyway it's all a moot point because as Bay says, it isn't standard manuscript format to underline italicised words.
You mean it's a moo point. It's like a cow's opinion. It doesn't matter. Edit: That's a bad joke. I'm a horrible person.
I appealed a disciplinary action at my old job, but the director of the agency said that since I'd already submitted my resignation, the point was "mute."
That would be difficult to resist. I've not only heard people make that same mistake but also vehemently defend themselves when corrected. I don't like to be that person who corrects people on things like that but I will usually take them to the side and say something simply because I don't want them to potentially embarrass themselves in the future. Depending on my relationship with said director, since I already resigned I would have totally called them on it. As for my post, it is actually a joke from the show Friends. I've used it in front of people and nobody has corrected me on it. I'm sure there are people out there who really just don't know but I like to think that most of the time, they either think I'm an idiot and don't know the word moot or they just didn't catch it.
Since I write in first person, I actually use commas more than I use italics. Because its' no longer an indication of thoughts with a "she thought to herself", but a narrator and their inner monologue.
Just to clarify, which one is the right way to potray a character's thought ? For example: Everything is ruined. Everything is ruined. 'Everything is ruined.' John thought, "Everything is ruined." Im writing in 3rd person limited if that has a connection to this. And if its true that you dont need italics for thoughts, then what is it used for?
Sorry, but this thread is 49 pages long and still going. If you have an agent/editor/publisher, ask them what they want, otherwise I think either a) emulate a well-known writer whose style you like, b) swing for the fences and do your own thing, but be prepared to be corrected, or c) join the thread, there are probably still 51 blank pages that need filling
Hmm well i think i can just write it as a normal sentence, as long as the readers can know that it's a thought. Thanks
That's what I would do. John stared at the message and read it three, four, five times. The content didn't change, as much as he wanted it to. Everything was ruined. It's pretty clear to me that it's his opinion (thought) that everything is ruined.
Bella rode through the forest, the leaves and branches scratched past her eyes and over her tunic Heck, the branches sure are gnarly. ... Is the approved CW House style, I'll think you'll find, worldwide across America.
What book or resource did you use to know these things? You seem so adamant in your answers (and I mean this in a good way) I'd like to know where to learn these rules so I can be confident that the style I'm using is within the norm. Thanks in advance!
Each publisher will have their own house rules, but The Chicago Manual of Style is probably most widely used for novels. It's not as black and white as Cogito says, hence this epic thread full of people disagreeing
Beautiful! Thank you very much, I will dig into it right away. After seeing so many opinions following strict guidelines (again, with no disrespect) I've concluded that one should better learn the rules before one can break them. I'm glad to hear. I was under the impression that if the prose is well written and the story is engaging the style doesn't really matter. A particular case I find very interesting is Blindness by José Saramago, where he wrote all the action and dialogues in a row with no breaks, spaces, quote marks, NOTHING. Just words, words, words! I'm relieved to see that there is some room for grey after all. @Victorian girl my advice to you (such as it is, I'm still a newbie) is to study the rules first, and if you think it suits your story and it is easy for your readers to understand what's going on, use the italics as you see fit. If the story is good enough to attract a publisher, let the editors be the ones to decide if the italics need to be replaced or not.
You seem like a purist, I respect that. But there was a time in art when all one could do was to stick to what The Academy said about perspective rules, anatomical canons, composition guides, illumination techniques... even painting materials. Then Japan ended its isolationist policy and the Japanese art was introduced in Europe. This art had no traces of any norm imposed by The Academy: No perspective, no anatomy, no proportions, unrealistic color use, etc. This approach was outrageous for The Academy standard, but it inspired European artists to break the norm, and that is how modern art came to life. Publishers aside (because it is known how picky they all are), wouldn't you agree that if a person has a very unique approach that reads well and is engaging for the readers (and we are talking true genius writing here, not some inexperienced amateur trying to cook up something new) his or her style would really not matter?
Matter in what sense? If he's violating normal style, that should be a decision. Decisions matter. If you're saying that the writing can simultaneously be good and violate standard style, yes, of course it can. But that violation needs to have a reason. One way or another, good or bad, it matters. But if we're talking about whether errors matter, as opposed to considered and carefully crafted style decisions, they absolutely do.
Writers can have full creative control, no problem. What they can't have is full creative control and a publisher investing thousands of [insert currency here], and taking on all the risk, to publish their book. If you want an Academy Award, best to produce art The Academy likes, no? If that makes you angry, there's always self-publishing.
Yes, this is what I meant. If the story is good, and the text reads well, and the person writing it knows what he/she is doing, I think that he/she can skip the standard and be creative with his/her style. PS: I meant no disrespect before. I apologize if it seemed like I was being rude or sarcastic.
You say "angry" as a figure of speech? Or it really seemed like I was angry? If the later, no, it doesn't make me angry All I'm saying is that in if Michelle wants to use italics in her story, and after doing so her story reads well, she can (even if it's not the norm). If her story is truly genius and attract a lot of interest, the publishers will want it regardless of the style. That doesn't mean that someone with no experience (like me, for example) can go ahead and invent some style and expect it to be great—just like not everybody can pick up a brush and draw a couple of lines and call it a Miró. That's what I mean. Sorry if it wasn't clear.
I myself tend to prefer to write thoughts like: 'these are some very nice thoughts' italics to me are things a character reads or perhaps hears on the tv or radio to me it never matters what style I read... as long as it is consistent
Sure, but I'll tell you what I tell all the guys who ask me the same question about programming... If you're one of those geniuses who knows when to break all the rules, you're not asking other people for advice.
He/she can, but there's a whole lot of creativity to be found inside a publishable standard. I wouldn't be prepared to give up being traditionally published unless my breakage of that standard were absolutely at the core of what I was doing.
