Voices in their head

[Raz2k13]

So my two main characters, Zuri (girl) and Zuki (boy), are twins who can communicate telepathically. They have always been able to do it but they also know no one else can do it and keep it to themselves as to not draw extra attention to themselves. They have unspoken communication throughout the story and the only inclination that something is different is I put their conversations in italics.

I am still pretty early on in the story and want the reader kind of in the dark about it but know that something is different with the situation. When they talk other characters don't acknowledge that the twins have said anything so of course readers are going to notice something is different but I don't want to come out and say it until later in the story.

So my issue is how to approach who is talking. I don't want to just be like 'Zuki said' or 'Zuri said'. I don't want to just put their names after but I also don't want it so confusing no one knows what is going on. Originally I just had it set up along the lines of..

--She went to progress on his crumpled form but her brother's voice stopped her.

“You’ve done enough damage.”

“They wanted a show. I will give them a show.”

“This is just the beginning. They want to wear you down. Pace yourself.”

Annoyingly enough for Zuri, her brother was right.--

Which, I think, is pretty clear who is speaking in this instance. However, there are a few other situations where it might be seen as a bit more ambiguous where you kind of have to just know the twins attitudes and mannerisms to put it together..

--Zuri glowered at anyone who dared look upon her. Zuki had somehow managed to keep his hood on so his face remained hidden from the crowd.

“What do you think is going to happen when we reach the Capitol?”

“We either die a gruesome death or they force us to join their military.”

“I think I would prefer death.”

“I am still undecided on the matter.”--

So I am needing to know if keeping it ambiguous would be alright or if it might be seen as to confusing. I know that the little snippets don't have all the context but I just wanted to show a bit of what I meant and not just try to explain it.

 

[Flaviosky]

Well, in the forum I was also told that thoughts are put in italics, so I guess you're going the right way for that.

As for the interaction, I think that it may be alright to keep it ambiguous (and confusing) at first and for a brief span of words but soon making it explicit what's going on to avoid the work of guessing who is who.

I don't see that dialogue tags (or thoughts tags in this case, maybe?) would be necessary if the dialogue is structured in a way that it's obvious who is thinking each thing, since they're only two people. Have them with a distinct way of talking and speaking would be useful to ease things for the reader (for example, that one brother is prone to curse and the other is not).

Annoyingly enough for Zuri, her brother was right.

This type of lines would have to be more present to put context on what's going on inside their heads in a context of ambiguity, that could be used in fast paced situations to enhance the feeling of action.

 

[Wayne Mack]

Telepathic communication is always an interesting twist in a story. However, I feel there is an inherent difficulty in trying to both make the telepathic communication obvious to the reader and keep it hidden from the reader.

Until one is ready to reveal telepathy to the reader, I would suggest staying outside the characters' heads, at least when they are together. This could be through using an objective omniscient point of view or by introducing a third character in close third person. Another approach would be to not acknowledge one of the twins and present only one side of a telepathic communication. The latter would work if one is trying to set up an 'Is the character crazy or not' situation.

I am afraid that trying to both express telepathic communication and hide it will result in one of two reader reactions. Either the reader will not be aware of telepathic communication and be confused (not curious) or the reader will understand what is happening and the later reveal will be spoiled.

 

[Christine Wheelwright]

I don't see the point in keeping it hidden from the reader. Either the reader is going to work out what is going on or be very confused.

 

[Raz2k13]

I don't see the point in keeping it hidden from the reader. Either the reader is going to work out what is going on or be very confused.

It's not going to stay hidden. It's more meant more to make the reader question what is going on and why. It's only for the first few chapters until another character realizes it and calls them out.

I wanted a bit of mystery surrounding it.

 

[Flaviosky]

I wanted a bit of mystery surrounding it.

I like the idea of this ambiguity if kept limited and short...

It's only for the first few chapters until another character realizes it and calls them out

...but a couple of chapters may be too much except if this ability is introduced in tiny pieces as the story revolves on something else.

Also, is this ability something important for the plot? The discovery may be unsatisfactory if such a big mistery wasn't a big deal at all. So this character realizing this and calling them out should have significant effects and outcomes and not be just an artificial moment of tension.

 

[tinkerdan]

I would have to agree with those who wonder why it needs to remain a mystery at all.
I think in the case of telepathic communication that how it is working needs to be established and worked into the story early enough for the reader.

With multiple lines of thought dialogue you will need some sort of attribution with them to identify which of the two is speaking at any given time and if there is anyone else in the scene that could cause immediate confusion when the reader tries to figure out if there are two or three voices in the conversation. Knowing that only the two can communicate this way helps limit that, however it still requires some attribution to establish which lines belong to which of the pair.

Something to think about is that sometimes what we as writers think of as a clever idea might not work well for a majority of readers. If you are okay with that then you probably don't have to ask yourself if you're being too clever and ending up sounding less than clever..

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

There are other ways of identifying who is speaking besides dialogue tags. You can use action beats (or what I call stage business), which are short sentences describing what the speaker is doing, which are used in the same way as dialogue tags (except they are not punctuated in the same way as dialogue tags, but as the separate sentences they are). Or you can use facial expressions, or body language. Then once you have established who is taking which side in a conversation, the content of the dialogue itself should serve to identify each speaker. And all of this works in the same way for telepathic communication. For instance, something like this (not your characters or their situation, but as a demonstration of the way this works):

She widened her eyes. Are you serious?

Of course I'm serious. He crossed his arms and frowned. But perhaps you have a better ide—

Better than practically committing suicide? I'm sure we'll think of something better than that.

 

[therapist]

Either the reader is going to work out what is going on or be very confused.

I agree with this. In theory it's a good idea, but I can't see it working as an intriguing/satisfying mystery and reveal. I am used to associating italics with inner thought, so (i'm pretty sure) I would quickly assume the italicized dialogue to be some sort of telepathy. And then the reveal would fall flat.
I could only see it working if there was no other normal dialogue with other characters. Then I might assume the author just likes to italicize their dialogue for some reason.