is there any other kind of thought?

Telepathy. But that's probably not very common in historical fiction

Not in mine, that's for sure, because I don't think I believe in it... But loads towards the counterfactual/fantasy edges of the genre.

Emma

Terry Pratchett uses italics for telepathy.

Emma, I knew you were going to say that

Ben

Ben!

Emma

too, Ben. I almost posted the same reply, but decided it was too corny a joke even for WW

<Added>

Terry Pratchett uses italics for telepathy.

I hadn't realised he was telepathic, or that he sent his thoughts in print.

too corny a joke even for WW

Gosh, is there such a thing?

Coming to this late (and probably shouldn't - it being a Friday night...).

I like the parts detailing your mystery man in italics, as there is a complete change in emphasis. However, this works if these sections are short but would be really hard to read if you extended these sections.

I prefer thoughts in plain text but where text - thoughts or body text - has added meaning/emphasis, this should be in italics.

This is a personal preference rather than accepted technique.

Sharley

I'd be interested to know what people think of my analysis of the ways of integrating thoughts into narrative without using italics, as free indirect style is going to be part of the workshop I'm doing in York... Clear as mud? Useful? Perversely wrong-headed?

Now that I've found the time to read them through again and think about them, the free indirect style seemed to me to work best of the examples you gave. It's clear which parts of the narrative come from the head of the man observing Mary. The silent speech form jolts a little (to me) because of the switch from past tense to present without anything to inform the reader of the reason. This is a case where I might consider using italics to delimit the thoughts, as I feel that they would then jolt a little less. The narrated form has less immediacy to it, and seems not to put the reader so directly into the story as either of the others.

I guess what I'm saying is that, if a character's thoughts are given without any 'he thought' to mark them, then I might consider using italics as a substitute for quotation marks. But I think I'm more inclined to use free indirect style, in a situation like this.

Alex

the free indirect style seemed to me to work best of the examples you gave.

I do think the great merit of free indirect style, which so many - possibly the majority? - of novelists have used in the last two centuries, is exactly that fluency: it can slide, rather than jumping, into and out of heads at will, and so it becomes a way of integrating all the different elements that go into a novel into a coherent, single piece of narrative.

You could even argue (John Gardener does argue) that free indirect style with a knowledgeable narrator is THE supreme, the grown-up, the only narrative form which can do everything and exploit all the possibilities of fiction, compared to all the limited kinds of third-person, and first-person.

James Woods' How Fiction Works has a very interesting exploration of free indirect style, but it's rare to find one. Much writing-about-writing seems to take it for granted, which is daft because it's something that many aspiring writers, understandably, struggle with. And with so many weak-kneed or ignorant writing teachers and editors saying 'don't do it' or even, horror of horrors, 'it's old-fashioned', anyone wanting to .

I would say, though, that my examples were very rough, because I wanted to match them as exactly as possible, so the differences stood out. In real life you'd probably find that they evolved away from each other, as you worked with the technique you'd chosen, and any one of those possibilities would read better than they do at the moment.

Emma

<Added>

doh!

"And with so many weak-kneed or ignorant writing teachers and editors saying 'don't do it' or even, horror of horrors, 'it's old-fashioned', anyone wanting to use free indirect style is hard put to it to find much help.