Tell, Don't Show

[Penpilot]

Simply due to the over-telling that is so common with beginning writing, I don't think that the Show Don't Tell guideline is overused.

I slightly disagree on this because of one point, and I speak from personal experience. Show-don't-tell can be very damaging to a young writer if they're not ready to comprehend what it really means, so they don't know when to stop themselves from overdoing it.

This was me. I wrote pages and pages of absolute vagueness thinking I was doing the right thing but I wasn't. Nothing made sense because it had no context, because I couldn't just tell someone the context of something or anything. The reader had to figure it out for themselves. There were times where I stopped to think of a way to show the color blue or that something was round. I couldn't just tell the reader. Yes, it got pretty absurde. IMHO I would have been better off not hearing of the concept until much later. Sure I was mostly telling in my early writing but compared to my over showing, at least it made sense.

I've since shown some of my 'telling' writing to someone and they made the comment that the prose had honesty in it compared to some of my later over thought out over written and rewritten stuff. They said they could connect with the telling prose.

I used to think that big over showing frak up was unique to myself, but I've found out it's not. I've seen instances of it in every writing class I've taken and every writing group I've been in.

My two cents.

 

[mpkirby]

I think the ultimate of show don't tell is the Aubrey-Maturin series by Patrick O'Brien. The ultimate in never telling your reader anything, but show, show, show. In particular his use of naval dialogue and descriptive texts is sometimes overwhelming. Sometimes he uses "tell" to get into the head of the characters.

It can absolutely be difficult. Another (more recent) example is Neal Stephenson's Anathem. He invents an entire world/vocabulary and does a pretty good job of integrating it into the story in a way you can figure it out even if you don't cheat and look at the appendix. (you know you are in deep when you need an appendix to read a fiction book

Perhaps like so much else in writing it is about balance. Show the reader something, use dialogue, and tell them if it makes sense. Forcing show into dialogue can sometimes come across as artificial (like the character that is "new" to the area and makes the main character explain everything in dialogue).

Mike

 

[Leif Notae]

TV and Movies do not IMHO auto-trump reading. There will always be people who want to watch a film over read a book and the opposite is true too. I have friends who really don't watch TV or Movies but are constantly reading. Books and Movies are two different mediums, each with their strengths and weaknesses. There are things a book can do that movies just can't. That's why some great books can't be translated into movies and TV.

Other factors come into play too. I can either wait a couple of years for the next Hunger Games movie to come out or I just pick up the book and read. The opposite can be true too. Sometimes it takes years for the next book to come out vs. a few months for the next season.



I disagree. I don't think there's a swing either way. There are just more choices out there for Movies and TV as well as books. With the explosion of ebooks, small press, and independent publishing, readers have way more choice now just as Movie and TV watchers have more choice too. There's a lot of static out there and IMHO it's just harder to find the signal now days. I wonder what the ratio of books being published vs the number of TV progrms and movies being produced is? My guess would be that books being produced in various forms out numbers TV and Movies.



Well it depends. If you're going to solve problems with magic then you better darn well explain it's rules and how it works otherwise the reader will wonder why can't they solve every problem with magic. Telling the reader why the king has blue hair could be a worthless detail or it may be incredibly important depending on if it's important to the plot. Yes, you shouldn't have to hold the reader's hand all the way through but you shouldn't be vague and opaque either.

Then we will have to agree to disagree. I see what I see, you see what you see and we will coexist in our worlds. Thank you for your input.

 

[Caged Maiden]

If I were to offer a single piece of advice to a brand new writer, it would have nothing to do with either "show" or "tell".

Write, write, write. When you write, and keep writing, you begin to learn it all.

Couldn't the problem most new writers have, be as easily summed up in the fact that for their first project, they have taken on a multi-volume series in a world they created, with an endless possibilities?

I mean, it's riding the Tour de France before your training-wheels are off, and there's no other way to slice it. "Tell" is newbie-ish, fine. But, "Show" is confusing and distracting, by that same token, ie. IF IT'S DONE BADLY. My problem with trying to be technically perfect, is that I cut up a novel, then cut it up again, and then hung it from the world tree nine days and nights... and it still isn't any wiser than it was before. I spent so much time dissecting everything, I IGNORED some fatal flaws in the plot. I see this all the time when I read for other people; writers so concerned with sticking to a theory, that they forget to do the fact-checking, edits for consistency, develop a unique tone, and a number of other very problematic things which ruin a reader's experience.

Anyone can take a decent story, write it out, and tell or show (or any combination of those), a story. Where you really begin to separate the wheat from the chaff, is in execution, reader reaction, and immersion. These are subtle things, and very difficult to teach. Just as there are no true "rights" there are no "wrongs" when you execute well.

I wish we had a thread for people to just show their technique a little, with some lessons for new writers who are struggling with a particular issue. For me, it was editing. I spent a year editing, and pretty much wasting my time, because I was working on all the wrong things. I think some of these lessons are just really hard to learn without one-on-one help, and I'm genuinely thankful to my critique partners who have helped me overcome and persevere.

 

[BWFoster78]

I spent a year editing, and pretty much wasting my time, because I was working on all the wrong things. I think some of these lessons are just really hard to learn without one-on-one help, and I'm genuinely thankful to my critique partners who have helped me overcome and persevere.

I think it's almost impossible to do a full edit by yourself (for me at this point in time anyway). There are simply too many things to consider. Feedback from beta readers is absolutely essential to move forward.

 

[Chime85]

I think it's almost impossible to do a full edit by yourself (for me at this point in time anyway). There are simply too many things to consider. Feedback from beta readers is absolutely essential to move forward.

I completely agree with this. No matter how much you try, you can never be 100% objective with your own works. What you believe is clear as day, might be a little ambiguous to another. With beta readers, they have a more objective view, enabling them to see some red flags you would otherwise miss.

x

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

I also agree 100%.

This becomes plain obvious the first time you have more than one reader reviewing at the same time. Sometimes their views are polar opposites on the same passages.

 

[Zero Angel]

I think we all know where I fall on the issue of creating "art."

I'm not aware of this...?

 

[BWFoster78]

I'm not aware of this...?

Assuming I'm not missing sarcasm, this may have been established before your joining the forum.

My desire is to tell a story, not to create art. Steerpike and I (and others) have went round and round on this and similar issues for a long time.

 

[Steerpike]

I'm not aware of this...?

All fiction should be generic and lifeless, interchangeable such that it may have been written by any person, or by committee. Never try anything bold or unexpected

 

[Ankari]

My desire is to tell a story, not to create art. Steerpike and I (and others) have went round and round on this and similar issues for a long time.

Oddly, you and Steerpike live less than 30 minutes from each other. I'm surprised you haven't met for coffee in some verdant valley cafe and discussed your opposing ideas of art and technique like true Californian hippies.

 

[BWFoster78]

Perhaps we should sometime, though miles in LA can equate to much more time than the distance would typically indicate.

 

[Steerpike]

Oddly, you and Steerpike live less than 30 minutes from each other. I'm surprised you haven't met for coffee in some verdant valley cafe and discussed your opposing ideas of art and technique like true Californian hippies.

We like to poke fun at each other. I like BWFosters style of writing; I read and enjoy books that are done that way. I'm just glad it's not all there is. I wouldn't want to see any style become all there is.

 

[Steerpike]

Perhaps we should sometime, though miles in LA can equate to much more time than the distance would typically indicate.

I don't know how close you are to Pasadena, but if you like book stores check out Vromans some time. Lots of authors do signings there.

 

[BWFoster78]

We like to poke fun at each other. I like BWFosters style of writing; I read and enjoy books that are done that way. I'm just glad it's not all there is. I wouldn't want to see any style become all there is.

Truthfully, I'm still "discovering" my style.

Steerpike seems much more accepting (though that's not exactly the word I'm looking for) of differing styles than I am, though I don't know if that's even the right concept.

I've always had a low tolerance for things that annoy me and have found that a lot of things do just that. If something is written in present tense, I'd have a hard time even reading it whereas Steerpike, I think, finds that viewpoint hard to understand.

On the other hand, if writing:

a) doesn't annoy me
b) is clear
and
c) makes me feel something

I'm actually quite accepting. Take the Twilight series and the bad portions of WoT and SoT (until Omen Machine. That's where I drew the line). I enjoyed all those despite documented flaws.

 

[BWFoster78]

I don't know how close you are to Pasadena, but if you like book stores check out Vromans some time. Lots of authors do signings there.

Next time we go to the flea market, I'll try to swing by there. I live in Corona.

 

[Zero Angel]

Assuming I'm not missing sarcasm, this may have been established before your joining the forum.

My desire is to tell a story, not to create art. Steerpike and I (and others) have went round and round on this and similar issues for a long time.

It wasn't sarcasm, thanks for clarifying! I want to do both, and it depends on the story which takes the lead.

All fiction should be generic and lifeless, interchangeable such that it may have been written by any person, or by committee. Never try anything bold or unexpected

Thanks for clarifying! So you take the opposite viewpoint?

 

[Caged Maiden]

I think the best part about having crit partners you share work with regularly, is that you begin to know each other personally, and develop a rapport that allows for more honesty. That speeds up the crit process, as far as skipping comments which pertain to personal style and the like, because you're learning the other person's style, and can therefore point out things inconsistent with their personal style, while ignoring things that might be your personal preference, but DO fit in with the person's style. Please don't hold that run-on sentence against me haha. I just tried to be clear, and I'm not sure I managed.

 

[BWFoster78]

So you take the opposite viewpoint?

Not really, but I think that Steerpike is honest, if a little hyperbolic, in the way it's perceived. I think I come across as wanting to develop a system of writing.

In reality, I'm more taking an analytical approach to writing. I believe that certain techniques achieve specific results. I'm searching to understand the techniques, how to use them, and when to use them in order to achieve the result that I want.

That approach leaves little room for improvising, which, I think, people feel is important for writing as an artform.

EDIT: Steerpike's comment also refers to the fact that I support a school of thought that says the writer should be invisible in order to let the story speak for itself. The contrasting view is that authors should have a unique voice.

 

[BWFoster78]

I think the best part about having crit partners you share work with regularly, is that you begin to know each other personally, and develop a rapport that allows for more honesty. That speeds up the crit process, as far as skipping comments which pertain to personal style and the like, because you're learning the other person's style, and can therefore point out things inconsistent with their personal style, while ignoring things that might be your personal preference, but DO fit in with the person's style. Please don't hold that run-on sentence against me haha. I just tried to be clear, and I'm not sure I managed.

True dat. After having a particular comment about technique ignored a dozen times, I tend to give up and not mention it again. Or, as much, anyway.