Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Post History

60%
+1 −0
Q&A How do I contrast the thought processes of different characters in one scene?

I should think that alternating paragraphs should be enough, as long as the tone/ voice that each character uses has been sufficiently different. It's not too dissimilar to two different people ha...

posted 8y ago by Mike.C.Ford‭  ·  last activity 5y ago by System‭

Answer
#3: Attribution notice added by user avatar System‭ · 2019-12-08T05:43:36Z (about 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/25173
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#2: Initial revision by user avatar Mike.C.Ford‭ · 2019-12-08T05:43:36Z (about 5 years ago)
I should think that alternating paragraphs should be enough, as long as the tone/ voice that each character uses has been sufficiently different.

It's not too dissimilar to two different people having an extended back and forth dialogue and not including the 'he said', 'she said' parts in order to preserve the flow of the conversation. The reader should be able to distinguish the two if they know the characters well enough already.

Doing it as third person limited will be just that: limited. If you want to do it from both perspectives it will need to be omniscient, particularly if you're delving into their thoughts. If the internal dialogue is distinguished from the rest of the text, with italics for example, it should be quickly clear that they are internal thoughts without having to explicitly state it constantly.

For example:

> _Is he suspicious? Quick, distract him._ "So, Bob, what do you think about the plan to diversify the customer base?" _Good, that should throw him off guard._
> 
> _Don't mention aliens. Don't mention aliens. Don't mention aliens._ "Hmm, well I would be worried about losing money by alienating current customers." _Dammit Bob._
> 
> _Why is he mentioning losing money? Does he know about the embezzling? How does he know?_
> 
> Alice chuckled and ran her hand through her hair, "you know, I suppose there's no reason to worry about it. That type of thing is well above our pay station."
> 
> _Above our station? Oh Geez, could she be one of them?_ "Haha, yeah, you're probably right. Anyway, I should probably just keep on marching." _Argh! Why did I say marching? It sounds like Martians! Run, just run now before you say anything more stupid._
> 
> Alice watched him run awkwardly down the corridor. _He's going to tell someone. I need to tell Frank right now._

As long as you throw in the names of the speakers/thinkers every so often, the reader should be able to keep up who the paragraph is focusing on.

#1: Imported from external source by user avatar System‭ · 2016-11-08T15:25:45Z (about 8 years ago)
Original score: 7