Luisa yesterday posted a very useful link to National Editing Month (thanks Luisa), with tips on editing your own book.

One particular piece of advice was to remove all interior monologue eg 'Is it just me?'.

I realised I use interior monologue, only occasionally but crucially.

Would it be better to rephrase, eg 'She wondered if it was just her'? Remove it altogether? Or is this another one of those pointless Rules? Does it irritate anyone as readers?

Andrea

Ooo! Good question.

Taking your example, I think 'Is it just me?' leans too much towards dialogue and would possibly make the reader stop to wonder if the character had actually spoken aloud.

On the other hand, 'She wondered if it was just her' feels too detached from the character.

How about: ‘Is it just me?’ she wondered.

I’ll have a look at that link.

Dee

Dee,

That's how I've tended to handle it, 'Oh God, she thought, was it worth it?' kinda thing.

Like you, I feel 'She wondered if it was worth it' would be too detached. I like the immediacy of occasional interior monologue, but after reading that piece of advice wondered was it just a cheap trick that marks you out as an amateur? You know how these things start you wondering ...

Andrea

Thanks for asking this here, Andrea, as I'm really interested to hear what people have to say on the matter.

This is the article I was talking about, to save people going to other forums to look for it:

http://nanoedmo.org/content/view/9/57/

Remove all interior monologue, e.g. 'He knew it was time to go, but why should he? Hadn't he sacrificed enough? Hadn't his heart bled enough for this family?'

Luisa

Thanks for posting that here as well, Louisa - be interested to see what people have to say on the other points raised too, and there's some really useful advice in there.

Andrea

<Added>

My, Louisa, aren't we polite? ;)

I think it depends on the way you write it. I'm not a fan of thoughts in speech marks. In fact I don’t know why I put that example in them…

LOL, I've just seen the sample Luisa has posted! I was just about to post this little section from TWH as an example of the way I do it. The first paragraph sets up the scene and the mood, then it trails away (using an ellipse) into Fynn’s thoughts.

He spent the remainder of the afternoon on the site, measuring, taking photographs, making notes and drawings. As daylight seeped out of the clouded sky he sat on the front bumper of the Land Rover, facing the pile of rubble that used to be the original house, making some initial sketches of his ideas for a replacement. The owner wanted something unique but it would still have to comply with the constraints of the National Park regulations. The sea view dictated the orientation of the house, and the way the land fell away to one side could be used to great effect… Georgia would love it here. Every day, every moment he was with her, he wanted to ask her to move into the Winter House with him. But he couldn’t do it. He couldn’t take the risk. Until she understood her own feelings he would never be sure of her motive. Him or the house? Would she live anywhere with him? Or only in the Winter House?

Now I'm starting to wonder if we all mean the same thing by internal monologue. The way I understand the term, the second paragraph would switch into first person POV, and present tense, as it would if he was actually speaking.

‘Georgia would love it here… I want to ask her to move into the Winter House with me... but I can’t do it. I can’t take the risk. Until she understands her own feelings I’ll never be sure of her motive. Me or the house? Would she live anywhere with me? Or only in the Winter House?’

That, to me, is internal monologue. The first version – and the example from nanoedmo – is the character’s thoughts.

Now I'm confused!

Dee

I think that what Dee has posted is what is called free indirect style (style indirect libre) where the characters thoughts are rendered in the third person. Although it's often discussed in relation to French novels Jane Austen uses it too and George Eliot. It can be very flexible and subtle, avoiding the crudeness of first person 'speech-in-thought' but retaining the the speech patterns etc of the character. And exactly as Dee, implies it allows the writer to segue from narration to character interior without a break. One advantage is that a writer who is clever enough can actually blend the character's own perspective with the different view of the narrator/author. For example in Chapter 18 of Eliot's 'Adam Bede' Hetty is in church but all she can think of is the man who has been (in the nineteenth century sense) making love to her. The text slides from first person narrative by the narrator author, to third person narrative to Hetty's thoughts still in the third person but in her distinctive manner with the vocab and sentence structure restricted to what she would use in actual speech. It works brilliantly: if shows from the inside how Hetty feels but it keeps a kind of judging distance on her folly too. Hope this makes sense.
nr

Dee,

Yes, it is confusing. I was thinking of internal monologue as per your second example, when a character actually asks themselves something direct in their own mind, which I occasionally do (though still in third person) but only in very short snatches at dramatic moments, eg -

Dexire tilted her head and regarded him. Her eyes flicked to the table and back to him. How did she know about the table? He hadn’t looked at it. Christ, could she read his mind? Then don’t waste any more time thinking.

but Caro Clarke doesn't seem to be talking about that, but about revealing the character's internal questioning at all, even if it's the writer reflecting the internal monologue rather than just quoting it direct (jeez, these are fine lines).

eg (from mine again) -

With a jolt, she remembered why she’d persuaded him to make love to her, to gain herself and Alexander another day, but would she need it now?

???

I don't think I'd have a problem reading work in which internal monologue was used in either of those ways ... but I'e never specifically looked for it, so maybe I'm kidding myself. Anyone else have a problem with it generally? I'm trying to think as a reader, rather than a writer here, because I think that counts more than what an editor has to say about it.

Andrea

What a great article.

I think what he's saying is that you remove it all initially to see if it's essential to moving the story forward, and if it is then put it back in.

Internal monologue can be a little tedious if it's used a lot. Also, if it's used as the only way to gain insight into character, emotion etc. I think it falls under the dreaded 'telling not showing' heading.

Cheers

Harry

Naomi, is that what I do? Wow… I've got Adam Bede in my attic – in a manner of speaking but I still haven’t read it… will have to dig it out now. Welcome to WW.

if it's used as the only way to gain insight into character

Too right, Harry. That’s just lazy – and maybe it’s what he means. If so, he hasn’t been terribly clear about it.

Some of the advice is good, but I disagree with the bit about removing all eating and drinking, or even references to a meal, unless something really important hangs on it.

OK, I've been accused, more than once, of having my characters eat and drink too much – in fact I've had to remove several references to alcohol in the final version of TWH (hehe!) – but I think it’s unrealistic to pretend it doesn’t happen. It’s a social ritual as well as a necessity, and I think people do tend to at least have a cup of coffee or something when they’ve gathered together to discuss something.

It’s like… do you ever read a novel and find yourself asking, doesn’t anyone in this story go to the toilet… know what I mean? As writers, we want readers to believe our characters are real people. And real people get spots, and fart, and – shock horror – eat food.

Dee

I love food references in films/books when they're well used - where would 9 1/2 weeks have been without food? Or that scene in the Godfather where the Corleones plan a gang war while they make spaghetti? Or that scene in the Sopranos where Ralph is teaching Jackie to make sauce and breaks off to get him his first gun before continuing?

Food, and other everyday mundane minutae, can ground a scene in reality and so make it far more powerful.

Andrea

Or Sleepless In Seattle when Walter and Annie decided they were made for each other because they chose the same sandwich filling? OK, maybe that’s a bit trivial…

But when people decide they're made for one another, they are that trivial

Andrea

I'm sure she won't mind (and if she does then whoops), but Emma D's 'Russian Tea' is an exemplary example of how you can move in and out of characters in a natural and effortless way, without having to resort to too much interior monologue:

http://www.writewords.org.uk/archive/12696.asp

D.

Okay, this might look like a shameless plug but it isn't (well, only partly ). One of the reasons I was wondering about interior monologue is because I've been busy this weekend rewriting the Prologue and Chapter 1 of my young adult novel, and in that I use a fair amount of interior monologue.

If anyone has time to read and comment and cares to let me know whether in particular the interior monologue works or is a problem, I'd be really grateful. (Of course, all general comments gratefully received too.)

Andrea