The ‘Thought Verb’ Debate

If you haven’t read Chuck Palahniuk’s essay on the subject of Thought verbs please do so now. I’ll wait.

You done? Good.

It’s a pretty interesting piece and actually not a wholly bad idea (although I think it’s something to be done when editing not necessarily while free writing a first draft).

But then, as I often do, I read some of the comments. And this particular comment got me thinking:

Remittancegirl August 17, 2013 – 8:46pm

Although I agree that too many ‘thought’ verbs can bog writing down, human experience is made up of both the concrete and the abstract. One of the reasons I can’t get through half Palahniuk’s books is specifically because the abstract element of his characters is missing. I feel so ambivalent about them, I can’t be bothered to care for them – either positively or negatively or a nice crunchy mix.

This approach to writing is a consequence of the enormous influence film and visual narrative has had on writing. Although it has the very real effect of aiding readers in ‘seeing’ the story unfold in their heads, it also can leave them entirely emotionally unengaged…

Now, I’m going to admit something that most people probably won’t believe. I have actually never ready any of Chuck’s books. I know of him of course, but for one reason or another I’ve never had any interest. That said, she brings up a very good point… there’s something to be said for getting into the minds of characters, knowing what their thinking and worrying about. Something Chuck says quite clearly you shouldn’t do:

But your character should spend very, very little time alone.  Because a solitary character starts thinking or worrying or wondering.

I would agree you’re characters should spend very little time alone, just because that’s boring. Very little interesting things happen when characters are completely alone, sometimes they dream (which can be interesting and telling) or they reminisce. But a lot of interesting action happens when characters interact with other characters.

I’m really of two minds on this debate. On the one hand, I do agree that a lot of what characters think, or know, or feel (I feel like opinion verbs might be a better word), would be more interesting if they were shown rather than just stated as shown in his own example:

Instead of saying:  “Adam knew Gwen liked him.”

You’ll have to say:  “Between classes, Gwen was always leaned on his locker when he’d go to open it.  She’d roll her eyes and shove off with one foot, leaving a black-heel mark on the painted metal, but she also left the smell of her perfume.  The combination lock would still be warm from her ass.  And the next break, Gwen would be leaned there, again.”

However, I also feel that there’s something to be said for getting into the thoughts of your characters, sometimes, it’s what they don’t say but rather want to say, or imagine they should say that can be important to the character. But perhaps this is just me.

What do you think? Is it more important to give readers concrete action or is a mix of concrete and abstract important in creating a well rounded story?