One speaker.
A clear aim.

Start with a speaker doing something through words

For this exercise, a monologue is a sustained passage from one fictional speaker. A useful starting question is: what do they want the listener to understand or do by the end? “Explain the accident” is broad; “persuade my collaborator not to replace the damaged panel before seeing the test” gives the speech a direction.

A listener may remain silent, absent or imagined in the scene. Decide who the speaker addresses so the language has a relationship behind it. A speech to a colleague will withhold and explain different things from a speech to a stranger.

The Northern Illinois University theatre assignment by Gibson Cima links original monologue writing with situation, objective, tactics and stakes. Our examples and planner below are original fiction, not excerpts from plays or audition selections.

Plan the moment before the speech

1. Name the listener.

   Who is being addressed, and what do they already know? You can write their name above the draft without saying it in every sentence.

2. Choose a change the speaker wants.

   Ask for permission, revise a misunderstanding, keep an object in place or persuade someone to try a test. Make the desired change concrete.

3. Give speaking a reason to happen now.

   The box is about to be sealed, the display opens soon or a label has already been printed. A small deadline can give ordinary words urgency.

4. Let the first approach meet resistance.

   The listener may not accept the first explanation. Show the speaker trying evidence, an admission, a question or a narrower request.

5. End at a changed position.

   The speaker can ask for something different, admit a limit or make a decision. You need not settle the entire relationship.

Original example: a request becomes a test

Situation: Faye speaks to a collaborator who wants to discard a damaged paper panel. Faye wants the panel kept until they check whether a repair works.

Before you put it in that box, let me show you the back. I know the tear is the first thing anyone sees. It was the first thing I saw too. But the join underneath is still holding, and I have a strip left from the same sheet. I was going to say we could make it disappear. We cannot. The surface will always catch the light differently there. What I can ask is ten minutes with the spare strip. If the repair bends when we lift it, I will help you take the panel down. If it holds, can we stand it beside the replacement and choose in daylight?

Where it turns: “We cannot” gives up the promise of an invisible repair. Faye replaces an absolute defense with a limited, observable test. The last question gives the listener a choice instead of declaring them persuaded.

Original example: an explanation becomes an admission

Situation: Imani speaks to a neighbor who has asked why a borrowed table has not been returned. She wants one more afternoon, but has avoided making that request directly.

I could tell you the varnish is taking longer than expected. That would explain the table being here, except I finished it yesterday. I kept moving the lamp and trying another photograph. Every time I thought I was done, I found a corner I had missed. You asked for a table, and I started acting as if you had asked me for proof that I knew what I was doing. You did not. If you need it now, I will carry it down with you. If tomorrow morning works, I would like one afternoon to finish my own pictures. That is the request I should have made first.

Where it turns: the excuse is withdrawn before the actual request appears. Imani separates the neighbor’s need from her own wish. The speech ends with a clearer request and a real alternative, without inventing the neighbor’s response.

Revise the tactic, not just the emotion word

Instead of writing “Faye becomes more emotional,” mark the action each section tries: stop the disposal, offer evidence, admit a limit, propose a test. Those actions can guide a revision without prescribing a performed voice or assuming how every actor would deliver it.

Try removing one sentence. If the speech still changes approach in the same way, you may not need it. If the next request becomes confusing, restore enough context for the reader to follow the turn. An interruption or a silent action can also matter, but it should not replace a clear reason to speak.

A written inner monologue can explore private thought instead of an outward address; stream of consciousness has its own questions of association and form. Those are different tasks from the outward, purposeful speeches practiced here.

Fictional speaker:
Listener or imagined addressee:
What happened immediately before:
What the speaker wants to change:
Why it matters now:
First approach:
What makes that approach insufficient:
A different approach or admission:
Final request or decision:
A response I will leave for the next scene:

Use the speech to discover a character’s priorities

You can write a monologue privately as a character exercise even when your finished scene will be much shorter. Look for what the speaker explains first, what they avoid and the moment they revise a claim. Then keep only the useful discoveries in your written profile or dialogue draft.

In honeygram, you are the only human in your world; the other identities are AI characters. The writing exercise can inform a fictional character concept for photo-and-comment exchanges. It is not a voice feature, a performed recording, a long private chat or a promise that the app will deliver these speeches.

For alternating speakers, continue with dialogue writing. For a claim that conflicts with the speaker’s behavior, explore direct and indirect characterization.