Support for Indie Authors discussion

Does the old creative writing axiom "Show, Don't Tell" give you trouble when trying to apply it? It still gives me trouble, and I have written eleven good novels. So let's talk about it.

Will Gibson
Novelist

Great topic! That statement infuriated me in high school and college. And I think as a result, many authors over describe and attempt to get too "pretty" with their words.

Then again, I don't subscribe to the famous author -- can't remember who -- who believed that if you have to use any word other than "said" (He said, she said) you hadn't written the scene properly.

Has anyone found the happy medium?

Will wrote: "Does the old creative writing axiom "Show, Don't Tell" give you trouble when trying to apply it? It still gives me trouble, and I have written eleven good novels. So let's talk about it.

Will Gibs..."

No, in fact that's why my wife and I make such a great team. I write the story, she translate the gibberish on the screen into english. It's awesome.

According to Lee Child 'Show Don't Tell' is a b****** rule and he seems to be doing okay. Watch his funny expletive masterclass where he covers this: CFA Master Class: Lee Child

O-kay, I can't get the link to work so I'll tell you rather than show you... find the masterclass video on Youtube!

One of the reasons I am drawn to writing is that there are few hard, fast rules. Some will tell you there are, but there really aren't. "Show, don't tell" is one of those rules that some seem to think is a hardcore rule that all writers must obey, some writers think it is absolute trash and will say to steer clear of it.

The problem I have with the rule is that it's a bit mislabeled. Really the "showing" is just more telling, isn't it? I'll explain.

Within my world of Super-Champions, there is a middle-aged man who heads up a team of young heroes. Often times they frustrate him. I could say this:

"Howard was getting a headache."

I've simply told you Howard was getting a headache. I could show you this way:

"Howard closed his eyes, pinched the bridge of his nose and wished he had an aspirin."

So, I've "shown" but not told, right? Well, according the rule, yes. But, really all I've done is substituted telling with more telling. I didn't tell you Howard had a headache. I told you Howard closed his eyes, pinched the bridge of his nose and wished for aspirin.

I understand the argument that telling can make a story flat and boring, but too much "showing" can drag a story out, making it much longer than it need be. A writer needs to think it through and decide when it's best to "tell" and when it's best to "show". I don't believe there's any hard, fast rule for all writers as to when it is better to do one or the other.

I had a whole serial on my blog that I used to TRY to discover the meaning of this rule. I don't like to tell other writers this. I rather say that their writing could use more intuitive description or more overt explanation.

Dwayne has a really good explanation on this, the one I have always followed. Recently I have seen two other big parts of this that, beyond exposition which everyone seems to hate these days, that seem to turn off readers.

The biggest one seems to be passive phrasing. When you have something that was happening rather than showing that it happened a lot of readers feel they are being told and you take on a dry lecturing tone. It loses your audience because you are telling them what happened that than past tense showing them how it occurred. Much like deciding when to show and tell in the traditional sense both have their place but falling into the was is dangerous.

The other seems to be in your voice and that of the characters. The thing Ann mentioned about anything more than said is kind of part of that. Though in truth a lot of it is the opposite. When you have dialogue if you look at your tag lines can you remove the ones that don't describe an action taken mid speaking or a tone of voice? Can you remove all the the he said she said from it and still keep track of who is speaking each line? More importantly, can your reader? If you can then you have distinct voices for your characters and are showing the reader who is talking. If you can't then they are all speaking in your voice and they must be told who is doing the talking. I have never found a reader who will run away from a book when they have to be told who is speaking but almost all of them get drawn in much more deeply when they don't.

There are so many ways this can be viewed and so many little things about it. Those two are key to me though. All of the rest of showing climbs out of them. I have a lot more to work on but I have found better responses focusing on them. In the end if my reader feels the story is a voice they would here at a party or a bar I am telling them a story. If they are sucked in and living it with my characters then I am showing them this alternate world that wanted out of my head. Both can be compelling and interesting but showing them will keep them coming back for more.

That was kind of rambling, but you know, words and stuff. Guess that's why I keep being told I'm a literary writer.

I agree with you, Dwayne, 100 percent.