I appreciate how you frame interiority as the animating force of fiction, specifically in terms of how desire and contradiction generate meaning. Your emphasis on intention over default habits resonates, too, taking me back to my MFA days. The idea that deepening interiority should be a deliberate craft choice, rather than an unconscious drift toward surface-level scene work, is something I continue to strive for in my own work. Thank you for a craft reflection that avoids being doctrinaire while still feeling essential.
Really enjoyed this. I'm working on interiority, show and tell, etc., right now as I revise a couple of manuscripts. It's eye-opening and feels like a "step up" in craft, or sort of like climbing straight up a mountain. Believe me, it's taking a lot of training and practice to notice bad tell, like cliché tell of emotions that maybe weren't even cliché when I started writing fiction a decade ago, but now have spread through authors and books like they've been franchised.
This was such a great read! I think Agatha Christie's the Murder of Roger Ackroyd is a great example of a work that hides major plot relevant stuff from the reader that the POV character knows, but does it in a really clever and satisfying way. Love that one.
Congratulations on 5 years! Thanks for sharing this piece. I think you're right on the money: in a media landscape increasingly dominated by visual mediums, interiority is a unique strength of prose. It can be so strong that, in some cases, I've found that I care less about the actual material of the plot/setting and more about the protagonist's spin on it all. The type of characters who can make drying paint and growing grass sound interesting.
I first encountered indirect freedom reading Sanderson. I am not well read but am learning how to write studying books I like and reading outside my genre. What I worry about is whether there's a counterbalance to interiority, like mixing it with action, like internal reflection at a crosswalk, then crossing the street. Curious how this relates to "stream of consciousness?" Like, crossing the street and seeing a bagel shop and remembering an event involving dropping a buttered bagel on the floor and how your father had been so upset about that.
I think you can absolutely mix it in with action. Here's a classic example from Virginia Woolf, which combines action, stream-of-consciousness, and free indirect:
Mrs Dalloway said she would buy the flowers herself.
For Lucy had her work cut out for her. The doors would be taken off their hinges; Rumpelmayer's men were coming. And then, thought Clarissa Dalloway, what a morning--fresh as if issued to children on a beach.
What a lark! What a plunge! For so it had always seemed to her, when, with a little squeak of the hinges, which she could hear now, she had burst open the French windows and plunged at Bourton into the open air.
I literally just saw this! I'm also learning to introduce plot elements in order to explain my world versus having it (perhaps, wrongly) as interiority. So, instead of my character reflecting on her journey from such and such, I had a waitress ask where they're from. That then freed her up to have a darker thought about their exchange
"Two roommates might describe the same living room in contrasting ways that reveal their different characters and feelings."
Good example! I've realized this is a good technique to spice up descriptions of a place that re-occurs without being repetitive or sparse. The valence of the description can change based on which PoV is used, the contrast serving at the same time as clues for the reader to better understand the characters.
That is, when you describe a scene, you are also describing the character viewing the scene.
Just took a screenshot of the paragraph about “cheap and irritating” plot twists and sent it to my book club group. It perfectly, eloquently articulates my gripe with the last book we read, but while we were discussing it during club I felt like all I was saying was “NO. BAD!”
Long time reader but I finally just subscribed. This is a fun post, and one of many I will be sure to implement when I start writing fiction again. By the way, I was an idiot and forgot to send you the book shipping details in the message I wrote when I subscribed, and I don't see another way to contact you. What can be done to fix this slightly absurd situation?
Enjoyed this. I write SFF and find interiority also works great for plot-focused books. The character can just think through their plan or decision process, for instance. And this is such a lightweight way of conveying information compared to needing a scene. Or awkward dialog. I really cringe when fiction writers jam info into dialogue that could just be passing character thoughts.
I think it’s interesting when interiority is missing in fiction and it’s done deliberately for effect. Like Anton Chigurh’s POV in No Country for Old Men. Chilling and effective. And Hemingway and his imitators. I feel it’s a niche technique though. And like you say, a lot of times a less experienced writer will be skipping interiority unintentionally.
I love the last point here on character filters. It's one of those sticky fiction rules of thumb that takes the form beyond word choice and grammar. I definitely underuse it, but I always find measurements and distance are a great way to utilize this. I.e. a college athlete doesn't see one hundred yards, they see a football field, a musician might measure six minutes as two songs.
Do you think we can overdo interiority? I’ve been inclined to using it a lot myself, edited it out with embarrassment and then been bowled over with novels that do this unashamedly. Been pondering an article on this observation alone!
This is such a depends question. I think can overdo it in many situations, but there are also great novels that are nearly 100% interiority. My go-to example is Baker’s The Mezzanine (guy goes up an escalator and that’s it in the external world, the whole novel is in their mind)
There's a good writing exercise in Naming the World (a craft book that I very much recommend) that helps a writer create a sense of interiority. In essence, you get the character busy doing one thing, and then make the character pay attention to something else. It's one way to capture the daily experience of split consciousness. Combine this with a character who has a good mix of flaws and admirable traits and maybe some mixed motives, and you can create a pretty good scene or two or three. My students have had good luck with this strategy in their short stories.
It’s nice to find a fellow advocate for Cheever’s “Reunion,” I must say. I’ve taught this story dozens of times, always in the first week of class, and sometimes along with “Bullet in the Brain” as a counterpoint. I’ve also often drawn on Wolff’s “Hunters in the Snow” as the perfect third-person objective story; crazy things happening + zero interiority = gripping tension. I also wholly love how Frank Wheeler’s interior in Revolutionary Road is used as a domain of circular thinking and confusion. Brilliant. Wonderful post!
I appreciate how you frame interiority as the animating force of fiction, specifically in terms of how desire and contradiction generate meaning. Your emphasis on intention over default habits resonates, too, taking me back to my MFA days. The idea that deepening interiority should be a deliberate craft choice, rather than an unconscious drift toward surface-level scene work, is something I continue to strive for in my own work. Thank you for a craft reflection that avoids being doctrinaire while still feeling essential.
Thank you!
Really enjoyed this. I'm working on interiority, show and tell, etc., right now as I revise a couple of manuscripts. It's eye-opening and feels like a "step up" in craft, or sort of like climbing straight up a mountain. Believe me, it's taking a lot of training and practice to notice bad tell, like cliché tell of emotions that maybe weren't even cliché when I started writing fiction a decade ago, but now have spread through authors and books like they've been franchised.
This was such a great read! I think Agatha Christie's the Murder of Roger Ackroyd is a great example of a work that hides major plot relevant stuff from the reader that the POV character knows, but does it in a really clever and satisfying way. Love that one.
Good overview.
Congratulations on 5 years! Thanks for sharing this piece. I think you're right on the money: in a media landscape increasingly dominated by visual mediums, interiority is a unique strength of prose. It can be so strong that, in some cases, I've found that I care less about the actual material of the plot/setting and more about the protagonist's spin on it all. The type of characters who can make drying paint and growing grass sound interesting.
I first encountered indirect freedom reading Sanderson. I am not well read but am learning how to write studying books I like and reading outside my genre. What I worry about is whether there's a counterbalance to interiority, like mixing it with action, like internal reflection at a crosswalk, then crossing the street. Curious how this relates to "stream of consciousness?" Like, crossing the street and seeing a bagel shop and remembering an event involving dropping a buttered bagel on the floor and how your father had been so upset about that.
I think you can absolutely mix it in with action. Here's a classic example from Virginia Woolf, which combines action, stream-of-consciousness, and free indirect:
Mrs Dalloway said she would buy the flowers herself.
For Lucy had her work cut out for her. The doors would be taken off their hinges; Rumpelmayer's men were coming. And then, thought Clarissa Dalloway, what a morning--fresh as if issued to children on a beach.
What a lark! What a plunge! For so it had always seemed to her, when, with a little squeak of the hinges, which she could hear now, she had burst open the French windows and plunged at Bourton into the open air.
Whoops sorry about the copy and paste formatting. Fixed.
I literally just saw this! I'm also learning to introduce plot elements in order to explain my world versus having it (perhaps, wrongly) as interiority. So, instead of my character reflecting on her journey from such and such, I had a waitress ask where they're from. That then freed her up to have a darker thought about their exchange
"Two roommates might describe the same living room in contrasting ways that reveal their different characters and feelings."
Good example! I've realized this is a good technique to spice up descriptions of a place that re-occurs without being repetitive or sparse. The valence of the description can change based on which PoV is used, the contrast serving at the same time as clues for the reader to better understand the characters.
That is, when you describe a scene, you are also describing the character viewing the scene.
Just took a screenshot of the paragraph about “cheap and irritating” plot twists and sent it to my book club group. It perfectly, eloquently articulates my gripe with the last book we read, but while we were discussing it during club I felt like all I was saying was “NO. BAD!”
Long time reader but I finally just subscribed. This is a fun post, and one of many I will be sure to implement when I start writing fiction again. By the way, I was an idiot and forgot to send you the book shipping details in the message I wrote when I subscribed, and I don't see another way to contact you. What can be done to fix this slightly absurd situation?
Thank you! And you should be able to message me through Substack!
Enjoyed this. I write SFF and find interiority also works great for plot-focused books. The character can just think through their plan or decision process, for instance. And this is such a lightweight way of conveying information compared to needing a scene. Or awkward dialog. I really cringe when fiction writers jam info into dialogue that could just be passing character thoughts.
I think it’s interesting when interiority is missing in fiction and it’s done deliberately for effect. Like Anton Chigurh’s POV in No Country for Old Men. Chilling and effective. And Hemingway and his imitators. I feel it’s a niche technique though. And like you say, a lot of times a less experienced writer will be skipping interiority unintentionally.
I love the last point here on character filters. It's one of those sticky fiction rules of thumb that takes the form beyond word choice and grammar. I definitely underuse it, but I always find measurements and distance are a great way to utilize this. I.e. a college athlete doesn't see one hundred yards, they see a football field, a musician might measure six minutes as two songs.
Excellent article, thanks!
Thank you!
Do you think we can overdo interiority? I’ve been inclined to using it a lot myself, edited it out with embarrassment and then been bowled over with novels that do this unashamedly. Been pondering an article on this observation alone!
This is such a depends question. I think can overdo it in many situations, but there are also great novels that are nearly 100% interiority. My go-to example is Baker’s The Mezzanine (guy goes up an escalator and that’s it in the external world, the whole novel is in their mind)
That sounds like my kind of book!
It's delightful! If you read and enjoy, I wrote a piece on it: https://countercraft.substack.com/p/the-novel-as-shaggy-dog-joke
There's a good writing exercise in Naming the World (a craft book that I very much recommend) that helps a writer create a sense of interiority. In essence, you get the character busy doing one thing, and then make the character pay attention to something else. It's one way to capture the daily experience of split consciousness. Combine this with a character who has a good mix of flaws and admirable traits and maybe some mixed motives, and you can create a pretty good scene or two or three. My students have had good luck with this strategy in their short stories.
Brilliant advice with great examples, thanks for sharing this.
It’s nice to find a fellow advocate for Cheever’s “Reunion,” I must say. I’ve taught this story dozens of times, always in the first week of class, and sometimes along with “Bullet in the Brain” as a counterpoint. I’ve also often drawn on Wolff’s “Hunters in the Snow” as the perfect third-person objective story; crazy things happening + zero interiority = gripping tension. I also wholly love how Frank Wheeler’s interior in Revolutionary Road is used as a domain of circular thinking and confusion. Brilliant. Wonderful post!