Italicising italics (in-thought passages with emphases)

[Phyrebrat]

Hi,

What is the general rule for emphasis when the text is already in italics? I would usually 'un-italicise' the word I wanted emphasised but I'm starting to doubt this.

My passage is:

Never mind when - an hour would be enough - and she could keep an eye on the road for his car, in fact if it was still on the...

Where is the car?

She looked up and down Urmston Avenue. In the bright morning sun his cherry red four-wheel drive should stand out, but the kerb was relatively free of parked cars; just a few battered and drab saloons scattered along the road like loose stitches.

But should it be:

Where is the car?

It's a close thought of Amy so I would usually put it in italics but I have brain freeze now and want to get it right because so much of Bad Leg happens with Amy's thoughts, I want to get an empirical answer.

Thanks,

pH

 

[HareBrain]

I would usually 'un-italicise' the word I wanted emphasised but I'm starting to doubt this.

Crush those doubts! You're right.

(I must admit, though, that sometimes it doesn't look like it works. I'd rather the convention was to underline emphasised words in italicised phrases. But it isn't.)

 

[The Judge]

Yep, put the emphasised word in ordinary non-italics in an italicised sentence, even though it looks odd, and worse, even though sometimes it's not immediately noticeable.

 

[Mouse]

You div.

 

[Ray McCarthy]

I would usually 'un-italicise' the word I wanted emphasised

... in fact if it was still on the...

Where is the car?

1) Where is the car?
2) Where is the car?
3) Where is the car?

I don't like underlines. Even before hypertext (which existed before Websites in local applications in 1980s). eBooks use links internally.

I'd use 1 to 3 in descending preference. Also "text markup" in text files automatically converted to italics and bold works when imported to most real wordprocessors and is a convention invented for typewriters (which can do underline, hence no markup symbol!).

*Bold*
_Italic_
_*italic bold*_

"Same idea of alternating 'internal quotes' in text" You'd alternate for nested.

I'm sure I have a Penguin book that says option 1 is correct.

Actually underlining reduces readability, perhaps because of descenders?

 

[Venusian Broon]

Excellent!

I noticed you doing it Phyrebrat, and started doing it myself. Keep up the good habits

 

[Jo Zebedee]

You div.

This, you lovely div.

 

[Phyrebrat]

Hehe, thanks all! I'm glad - as HB and TJ point out - that it does look weird so I don't feel like a total div.

oh, wait....

You div.

I wanna 'like' this but I know you'll get all angry

pH

 

[Kerrybuchanan]

I am glad to read this because I had been told recently (by someone who ought to know) that italicizing thoughts was bad practice so I've been trying to break myself of it, but I see from the reaction here that it is perfectly acceptable. Yippee!

 

[thaddeus6th]

I agree.

Phyrebrat is a div.

Oh, and he got the italics right.

Kerry, I bloody well hope italicising thoughts isn't verboten!

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

Whether or not it looks weird depends, to a certain extent, on the font you are using. With some it looks less odd than with others. Whether it is even noticeable to most readers depends very much on the font you are using. With Times New Roman it shows up very well (but looks very strange). With a sans serif font the majority of readers won't even notice the emphasis on a small word when you change back and forth from italics. Which is probably one reason why so many editors and agents don't like to receive manuscripts in fonts like the default one we are using here. (Easy enough to change them before they read the manuscript, but equally easy for the author to change to TMR before they submit their manuscript.)

 

[The Judge]

I am glad to read this because I had been told recently (by someone who ought to know) that italicizing thoughts was bad practice so I've been trying to break myself of it, but I see from the reaction here that it is perfectly acceptable. Yippee!

If it's a direct thought, akin to direct speech but just not spoken aloud and using first person present tense -- eg As if I don't have enough to do. -- then it's certainly accepted in SFF to use italics. You shouldn't put it in quotation marks, and it's best not to add "she thought" afterwards, though.

Personally, I prefer to use mostly indirect thoughts -- eg As if she didn't have enough to do. -- in which case it's not italicised. A personal bugbear of mine is where there are a lot of direct italicised thoughts sprinkled -- well, more like poured -- all over the page, which actually pulls me out of the story because I get so annoyed at the constant interruption.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I hate italics used with I thought - one or the other, cheers. In case I was the critter.

 

[Ray McCarthy]

I hate italics used with I thought - one or the other, cheers. In case I was the critter.

I agree.

I also use Italics for telepathic speech, without quotes, and only explain once, then use regular non-italic speech tags (and commas etc as if dialogue).
I've no idea if acceptable.

 

[Kerrybuchanan]

I hate italics used with I thought - one or the other, cheers. In case I was the critter.

If that's addressed at my gurning earlier, no, it wasn't you!

I used to put both thoughts and telepathic communications in italics, with no tags, but on the advice of that person, not a Chronner, I just put thoughts in quotations, like speech, or didn't distinguish them in any way at all. It never felt right though. I am gleefully replacing all my italics now.

 

[The Judge]

If you've got both thoughts and telepathy, it might be an idea to reserve the italics just for the thinking, and indicate the telepathy in a different way, to avoid confusion between the two. In the past I've used a long dash at the beginning of a line for telepathy (eg – What did you say?) and I might have to do it again in my current fantasy as it caused a bit of befuddlement as to where the characters were when they were talking non-verbally.

 

[Ray McCarthy]

If you've got both thoughts and telepathy, it might be an idea to reserve the italics just for the thinking, and indicate the telepathy in a different way,

I do it the other way round:

Personally, I prefer to use mostly indirect thoughts -- eg As if she didn't have enough to do. -- in which case it's not italicised.

Kindles only do basic stuff. Older ones very limited in fonts (for no good reason! Trivial to add fonts to a "jailbroken" kindle). Printed books are also typographically conservative.

 

[mgilmour]

What a great thread! I have telepathic characters in my book and sorting out how to express it was a little tough. In the end I italicized telepathic thought and internal thinking I kept as regular type. Isn't it a matter of being consistent in your approach so that the reader doesn't get confused.