Viewpoint Internal Monologue? I asked. Curious what they would say if they knew that I was genuinely interested?

[Kaihaku]

XKCD: Internal Monologue​

I am curious to hear what you folks think about internal monologue. Let's take a look at the same quick little scene written four different ways to illustrate what I'm taking about.

Minimalist

Galen stepped into the library, dripping wet, and looked around with a scowl. His face flushed as he looked at Abigail and he quickly walked on, setting his bag on a table by the heater and taking a seat.

Descriptive

Dripping wet, Galen pushed open the door to the library with his face twisted into a scowl. He glanced around the library furtively, shaking the water from his bag, but looked away with a wince when his eyes settled on Abigail studying. His face growing red, he shook himself off a final time and rapidly strode to a table by the heater. Setting his bag carefully on the table, he pulls out a chair and plops into it with a sigh.

Internal Monologue

Galen stepped into the library, dripping wet, and looked around with a scowl. Just a prank? Soaking him with a water spell just as he was walking up to the library? They went out of their way to humiliate him. Hopefully no one was here. Wait, was that...? His face flushed as he looked at Abigail. The girl who had submitted that poem to the contest. The one he tore up so that dear Marquis would win. Well, she was an idiot anyway. Who cared if she'd cried in front of the whole class afterwards. He only cared that Marquis had been happy. He quickly walked on, setting his bag on the table by the heater and taking a seat. Ah, there, the warmth of the heater was lovely. It reminded him of pleasant mornings baking bread with Marquis.

Descriptive + Internal Monologue

Dripping wet, Galen pushed open the door to the library with his face twisted into a scowl. Just a prank? Soaking him with a water spell just as he was walking up to the library? They went out of their way to humiliate him. Hopefully no one was here. He glanced around the library furtively, shaking the water from his bag, but looked away with a wince when his eyes settled on Abigail studying. Wait, was that...? His face grew red. The girl who had submitted that poem to the contest. The one he tore up so that dear Marquis would win. Well, she was an idiot anyway. Who cared if she'd cried in front of the whole class afterwards. He only cared that Marquis had been happy. He shook himself off a final time and rapidly strode to a table by the heater. Setting his bag carefully on the table, he pulls out a chair and plops into it with a sigh. Ah, there, the warmth of the heater was lovely. It reminded him of pleasant mornings baking bread with Marquis.

Now I just used a pretty basic approach to internal monologue there but if I was successful you can see how differently the scene could be interpreted by a reader with and without it. There are more refined ways to write Internal Monologue so if you have a preferred way (or ways) to write Internal Monologue I'd be interested in hearing about it.


On my end, I think it depends on the experience that the RP is going for. I distinctively remember an old GM telling us to stop using it because it was 'ooc telepathy' but instead to focus on descriptive writing. No internal monologue definitely leads to more misunderstandings between characters, particularly around motives, but it's sometimes it's nice to clearly reinforce what a character is up. Especially for characters who are withdrawn or who have indirect/conflicting motives. As seen in the comic at the beginning of this post, it can really illuminate what's going on beneath the surface for a character taking pretty normal actions. It's also a way to engage with other characters without dialogue - great for showing in real time how your character is taking the Queen's speech, for instance. It can also be a petty way to snipe at another character, leveling critiques at them but never giving them a venue to respond.

It can be fun to have a RP where everyone is misunderstanding each other's motives but, then again, it can also be good to have everyone on the same page if you're really aiming for a certain outcome. For instance, if you really want your tsundere to ship with a certain person that internal monologue might sell that your tsundere is actually interested rather than antipathic. It's also helpful when you're playing a complete space cadet and want to illustrate that it's the character, not you, who is misinterpreting everything.


So what do you think? I tossed in a poll for the fun of it but I'd like to get a discussion going around this.

 

[Jace Quin]

I did, in fact, enter this thread because when my mouse went over the title up popped a xkcd comic.

Having read it all, however, I'll give you a legit answer:

I've never done a roleplay that wasn't the tabletop kind where we had a GM. No one has ever suggested to me that my writing was 'ooc telepathy'.

As a 1x1er I write in the 4th style. Descriptive with internal monologue. That's also what I expect in response. I have never thought of it as 'saving on ooc needed to keep the roleplay moving smoothly'. Even if we agree in advance 'there's likely to be a lot of tension in this scene because the history of their world makes them untrusting of one another' I'd still expect to see it in the execution of the scene.

Are there traps that people can fall into writing in this style? Of course. If all characters in the roleplay (or even just one or two) spend all their time on internal pontification it's going to be awfully difficult for anyone to interact with them. The problem I see happening with this style is that it could be 'easy' to write 6 paragraphs of reaction and feel like 'well, this post is long enough already' and send it without in any way furthering the action.

Beyond that I agree it's probably a matter of preference. If I went into an 'in progress' roleplay thread and all the posts are exclusively action... I'd get bored before I read very far. I'm sure there are people on the other side of that, too. 'For real did this person just write 17 sentences to walk into the library and sit down? Ouch. Nooooope out of this roleplay.' Executed well, to me, it's beautiful and what I want to see in a roleplay.

 

[Lucyfer]

Generally speaking, and also as a 1x1 writer, I prefer a mix of internal monologue with descriptive. Mostly because "internal monologue" isn't what other characters witness, I feel there's a need to add descriptive aspects that they would witness -- so they can then interpret it.

The internal monologue is more so I know what reasoning the character actually has, even if that's not at all how outsiders are going to view it, haha.

 

[GojiBean]

If I may offer a point of clarification, your "Internal Monologue" example is not actually an internal monologue. It's a 3rd person omnipotent narration. The narrator knows what's going on inside the character's head and is then sharing that information which is why Galen is referenced as "he," instead of the perspective being his own as he uses the word "I."

"Monologue" comes from the Greek word "Monologos," which translates to the act of "speaking alone." So a monologue is when a character speaks with nobody saying anything to them.

An internal monologue, therefore, means internal speaking. Aka, "the voice inside your head."

When you're sitting on your couch at home by yourself and you think (but do not say aloud) "What should I have to eat for dinner?" That's an internal monologue.

Using this same information from your example, a true internal monologue would look something like this: What the hell was that all about?! I swear, if someone used that water spell as a prank just to humiliate me I'll-... Wait. Oh god. Is that Abigail?!... Just move, Galen. Just keep walking. Screw the poetry contest. Screw the aftermath. Marquis is happy, and that's all that matters. Just forget the water prank and keep walking.

Galen is speaking inside his head. Nobody can hear him. His questions are rhetorical and open ended. It's all "the voice inside Galen's head."

I apologize ahead of time if this makes me sound like a jerk, but I have to say this: The GM you mentioned who said internal monologue is "ooc telepathy has no idea what they're talking about. That statement is complete nonsense, and honestly the sooner you forget that worthless nugget the better.

Anyway, let's talk about internal monologue as a literary (and role-play) tool. Because that's what it really is. A tool.

My favorite reason for using internal monologue is to avoid forcing unnecessary external dialogue. In role-playing, and storytelling in general, there are many situations which arise where the temptation to interact with others can outweigh the actual need for doing so. And if you force external dialogue and conversation, you may be going outside your character's true nature.

For example, let's say there's a group of four characters gathered around a corpse on the side of the road: Three of the characters are horrified because they're just everyday people. But the fourth, your character, has a military background which they haven't talked about because they're not proud of some things they did during that time. So talking about their past is a "no-no" for them. And saying anything that could potentially force them to do is is also a "no-no." Your character is able to go quasi-Sherlock and put together what happened to this pour soul based on the wounds, the marks and tracks in the dirt and grass, etc. And while the other characters gasp and mourn, your character thinks We need to watch ourselves in this area.

This internal dialogue is something they could verbalize if they wanted to. It's good advice to watch your back in an area where a murder just took place, after all. However, doing so may force the others to ask questions that your character doesn't want to answer about themselves and their past such as "Wait, why do we should watch ourselves?" That one question, if allowed to be asked, has now put your character on the spot and there's really no way to answer the question without revealing your character's knowledge of why the group may now be in danger which will just raise more questions and potentially lead to the others asking more about your character's past which they don't want to face right now. So the best way to convey your character's knowledge while remaining true to their desire to hide their past and not forcing anything external that's not in character for them or could jeopardize their desire to keep things quiet about their past? Internal monologue.

Something else to keep in mind is that internal monologues don't have to be long. They can, depending on the situation, be as short as a single word. As an example, let's say that your character is a thief. It's night. It's the middle of the city. Streets are basically empty. And your thief slinks through the alleys and finds a pair of cloaked figures discussing something quietly between each other. Your thief hunkers down to hide from view, and thinks Shit!

This one-word internal monologue both conveys your character's current emotional state while simultaneously making us question "why is he/she saying shit?" And one of the most important questions raised is "does your character have a reason to be scared right now?" Because if your character has a reason to be scared, then this is arguably the most interesting scenario for us to be observing them in at this time which makes us want to read more about them.

Internal monologue, when used effectively, does far more than simply conveying internal thoughts and feelings. It can also create intrigue, suspense, tension, and drama not only around your own character, but for others as well. And arguably the most important thing about internal monologues is that they fuel your character's current mentality. Why? Because the "voice in your head" is linked to your current emotional state which is why it's so common to hear things like "I didn't mean to say that!" whenever big arguments break out. Another good example of this link is people with depression. Their internal voice often leads them to very dark places including thoughts of worthlessness, loneliness and isolation, and more. So what we think and that "voice inside your head" has a direct impact on what happens on the outside whether we know it or not in the heat of the moment.

So as a final example of how effective internal monologue can be at accomplishing some of the above mentioned aspects of storytelling, and how it can affect someone's current state in ways they didn't intend, let's look at one final example:

There are four characters in the scene. Rodger, Max, Felicia, and Graham.

Rodger and Max are both good and honest men trying to make a living as a butcher and a sculpture artist respectively. Graham, who is unconscious and bleeding from a wound on his head, is a government figure. Max knows Graham, as he's done art commission work for him in the past and he thinks Graham is also a good and honest man with a clean history all around.

Felicia is your character, and she's friend with Max and Rodger and also knows Graham.

But what's different for Felicia is that she has a broken romantic history with Graham as well. And she knows not long after gaining his governmental position Graham became a violent alcoholic behind closed doors. What ended their relationship is that during a drunken rampage he stabbed her in the lower left side of her back, which is now permanently scarred. He got off Scott free when she tried to press charges because nobody believed her. Why didn't they believe her? Because she's just a dancer for a local street performance troupe and must therefore obviously be out to ruin his reputation. The fact that Graham didn't exactly dispel these rumors only fueled the fire. And not only that, but the scar has also impacted her income as a dancer because she can't wear the same kind of revealing clothing that attracted so many people (mostly men) to the performances.

While Rodger and Max discuss how horrible this situation is and how worried they are about Graham, Felicia thinks to herself Why are you still breathing?

Max asks Felicia what she thinks about this situation, and she says to him "It's unfortunate." He asks why that's all she has to say, and she replies with "I'm not fond of people in his position. So it's hard to feel bad for him. Besides, he's still alive."

As a result, Max and Felicia get into a heated moral argument about the situation while poor Rodger tries to calm them both down.

End of scene.

And just like that, a single line of internal dialogue from Felicia, born from resentment and anger, has put her in a mental state which forces her to come into conflict with Max and Rodger thus threatening her friendship with them. We're left with questions like, "Can and will they resolve their dispute in such a way that Felicia won't lose her friends?" "Will she find justice for what Graham did to her?" "Is Graham going to recover from this injury?" "What caused the injury in the first place?" "Will Graham and Felicia ever resolve their troubled past?"

Questions like these generate interest in the characters and their respective situations and histories. And it prompts the Players of each character to explore the possibilities and start planning for the various outcomes which is how interest in role-plays can be kept alive long-term.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------​

Phew!

Okay, so I went longer than I thought I would. But hopefully this was at least a bit helpful into understanding internal dialogue a bit better.

In the end internal monologue is just a tool to use when the situation calls for it. Sometimes characters won't want to speak openly about something, but you still want their thoughts and feelings to be conveyed honestly and from their own perspective. Internal monologue is perfect for that.

Again, I have no idea what that GM was thinking when they said it was "OOC telepathy." That's not even a thing. So don't listen to that individual about role-playing. Ever.

As a final piece of advice for internal monologues, always know where you want them to lead.

Emotions influence thoughts, and thoughts influence the way the mind reacts to external stimuli and situations like how Felicia's negative past with Graham impacted how she internalized her desire for him to die and then led to her arguing with Max and Rodger.

So plan out where you want your character to end up. And if internal monologues can help accomplish that goal while remaining true to the character's essential nature, go for it.

Cheers!

 

[Idea]

I want to preface what I'm about to say by mentioning that while it is true that I am real planning type- the kind that can enjoy better a well-laid-out plan that's fleshed out in the writing, as opposed to writing into a surprising unknown- this isn't the reason (it is A reason, but only in very small part) why I prefer something more akin to the "descriptive + internal monologue" style.

I think a good way to start talking about my thoughts on this matter is to bring up how I use internal monologue myself. It is a very important tool for me, because I always write from the perspective of the character. I don't mean just in the way that a hypothetical camera doesn't have an omniscient view of every past, present and future, I mean it in the sense that I write things framed in the way the character sees them. I adjust vocabulary choice, how I characterize things and so on to how a character perceives it in an attempt rather than simply describe what's there do it in a way that communicates the character's thought process and state of mind. This is turn is something that can help communicate who my characters are in a deeper level. Actions communicate that a character is angry, but showing how they process that anger internally and what they place their anger on versus what they believe to be the real source can communicate more fundamental aspects of a character's psyche. Furthermore, showing that state of mind can also be made to enhance a scene, by distorting how things are described and the language used in a way that gets a reader in a similar state of mind (or attempts to anyway). Running through the possibilities in one's head only to consider them all unachievable or failures to show helplessness or defeatism, very frantic, short and cut of thoughts to show panic, or perhaps my most commonly used the elongating the description of something compared to the surrounding elements to display focus.

In addition to this, internal monologue is also an excellent tool for bringing in things which would otherwise be too hard to work into a scene. Some kind of description I want to make, or foreshadowing, sometimes just a reaction which might otherwise be too disruptive. That last one is especially important for me, as the reaction element is one parts I most like to read in posts from others (I like seeing how my post impacts things and how their character views it, it's an enjoyable part to read), so naturally its a component I emphasize in my own posts.

Lastly there's the matter of flow. This comes in mainly two aspects. For one, a more descriptive post necessarily implies that the action will be more broken up. Now, this doesn't mean that there is less interaction as a result, but it does mean that an action which comes immediately after the other may seem too distant during reading for that to be the case. Internal monologue helps showcase how an action flows to the next despite the sacrifice of sequential flow.

Spoiler: extra explaining

I feel this particular part warrants some better explaining, so here it is:

Take the sentence "I got up, then I grabbed my coffee and left". In here, while the actions are separate and unlinked, they flow well because we can tell there is an order. You didn't randomly get up, randomly grab a coffee and randomly leave, you got up and grabbed the coffee because you were leaving with the coffee.

But now if we have... "I got up pushing the table in front of me slowly, while scouting the coffee shop with my eyes and examining those windows revealing the busy city streets. I grabbed my coffee. It was hot, it felt like my skin my burn for a second before the warmth finally settled into spreading comfortably through my palm and fingers. Then I left the coffee shop with a confident stride, yet a downward look."

We've added some description, and while I wouldn't say this is bad per say note how the actions feel a lot more disconnected. There is no segway between "the busy city streets" and "I grabbed my coffee". Sometimes, this is intentional, sometimes you want to write in that more abrupt manner, but what if you don't? Then you may want to include something that connects those things:

"Gah, I felt too tired this morning. I got up pushing the table in front of me slowly, while scouting the coffee shop with my eyes and examining those windows revealing the busy city streets. I was NOT ready to deal with those never-ending crowds, just imagining all of them pushing into me like they owned the whole damn sidewalk, it left my throat sore. I grabbed my coffee. It was hot, it felt like my skin my burn for a second before the warmth finally settled into spreading comfortably through my palm and fingers. Alright, I was feeling a bit better. It was fine, I could do this. Just... don't look them in the eye. Don't look them in the eye. Don't look them in the eye.

I left the coffee shop with a confident stride, yet a downward look."

Now some of you may have read my post and been thinking something in the lines of "why do you need to outright show what a character is thinking, when you could just show their personality through their actions/choices/body language?" or "I don't think you should introduce worldbuilding if it isn't called on by the scene" or "Why would you sacrifice the sequential flow?". Those are all good points, excellent and true, as a certain Jedi put it, "from a certain point of view". I find those thoughts similar to the common criticism of internal monologue where one brings up that because internal monologue is non-interactive then it should be minimized. The similarity is the common source of all of these criticisms, the mismatch of the tool and the priorities.

Ever since I discovered or came up with it, I've been discussing these topics under the paradigm of what I call the "simple, casual and detailed mindsets", a spectrum of frames of mind which naturally produce posts closer to one of those three styles. Specifically, I believe that what a person finds valuable in writing greatly influences their approach to writing and what crosses their mind as they write, thus resulting in a particular writing style which has a tendency to be longer and more detailed, or shorter and more concise or even shorter but far more organic and free. Of the three mindsets, the only one which tends to value internal monologue is the "detailed" mindset, because it tends to value things like worldbuilding and structure more than the others, and while the simple mindset focuses on the who (focus on things just being what they are, indepent of surrounding elements, such as only caring about playing a certain character and not really what the actual plot would be about) and the casual mindset focuses on the what (plot/narrative focus mainly), the detailed mindset usually focuses on the how and the why (most focused on how each moment plays it and why it plays out in the way it does, what leads one thing to go to the next). As I brought up, internal monologue can be a great tool for bringing external elements into the scene without actually disrupting it, and it can reveal aspects of the process otherwise concealed, but definitely valued by a detailed roleplayer.

To simplify the above paragraph to make it more intelligible: I find internal monologue to be a great tool, but it is one suited for a certain kind of writing style which values what it brings to the table. A post in the "casual" mindset will demand more focused posts that go the point and focus on demonstrating things about the characters by how they act and considers something with no impact on what is happening to be frivolous. On the other hand the "detailed" writing style will find the action more engaging and immersive precisely in the vivid pictures given by the descriptions and the internal monologue.

 

[Crayons]

If I may offer a point of clarification, your "Internal Monologue" example is not actually an internal monologue. It's a 3rd person omnipotent narration. The narrator knows what's going on inside the character's head and is then sharing that information which is why Galen is referenced as "he," instead of the perspective being his own as he uses the word "I."

"Monologue" comes from the Greek word "Monologos," which translates to the act of "speaking alone." So a monologue is when a character speaks with nobody saying anything to them.

An internal monologue, therefore, means internal speaking. Aka, "the voice inside your head."

Sorry but I'm going to go all ackshually on this ackshually, because if you're unnecessarily nitpicking you should at least do it correctly.

There is no such thing as "third person omnipotent" you are thinking of "third person omniscient" - all knowing rather than all powerful.

What Kaihaku was using, and what most RP posts use is third person limited.

From thewritepractice.com:

• Third person point of view, limited. The story is about “he” or “she.” This is the most common point of view in commercial fiction. The narrator is outside of the story and relating the experiences of a character.
• Third person point of view, omniscient. The story is still about “he” or “she,” but the narrator has full access to the thoughts and experiences of all characters in the story.

Essentially you are writing strictly from the character's perspective, just in third person rather than first person. Your distinction about monologue/internal thoughts of the character being in first person only doesn't really matter in terms of what information it presents. You can do internal monologue in first person or third person, just as you can directly or indirectly report speech.

For example:

John told me that he and Sarah were going to a movie tonight.

has exactly the same sense as:

"Me and Sarah are going to a movie tonight," John said to me.

It's just a matter of stylistic choice which one of those you use. Personally, I would find it annoying to read a ton of internal monologue in first person. I tend to use it when I need some direct thoughts from a character, usually thoughts that would be spoken aloud if the character chose to.