If there's one topic that's rammed down the throats of writers, especially new writers as if they're force-fed ducks, is to show and not tell. It all sounds so simple. Don't tell us that Jack is rich; show us how he lays a crisp fifty-pound-note in the church collection plate. Don't tell us he liked to make sure people know how rich he is but show it by having him say to the sidesman holding the plate, 'I never carry small-change.'
The problem is that sometimes the alternative to, say, telling readers that Peter overslept and that put him in a bad mood during the all-important meeting at work by showing can end up with something like this:
Peter woke up and automatically checked his clock. 'Oh no,' he groaned. 'How did that happen?' He stumbled out of bed and into the shower. In his rush he dropped his bottle of shampoo on his foot. Hurrying to dress, a button flew of his shirt. He threw it on the bed, muttering, only realising he hadn't another clean one so he would have to make do. The late train was crowed and he didn't have time to buy himself an espresso at the station By the time he got to the office, he was in a bad temper.
Apart from increasing the word count, all this does is stretch the telling out into tedious and dull waffle. Far better to write Peter overslept that morning. He arrived at the meeting craving caffeine, struggling to hide a missing shirt button and proving as successful in subduing his tangled hair as he was his mood.
Trust readers to fill in the gaps.
Whilst showing can offer more opportunities to engage readers, there is absolutely nothing wrong with telling. And don't let anyone try and persuade you otherwise. And don't pay any attention to those who always tell you not to do something! Telling is essential for bridging passages where there is no need for scene-setting or character-painting. The art of writing fiction is knowing where to tell and where to show and why. It's a fine balance and easy to overdo one at the expense of the other.
But that's enough from me. If you what to read a more detailed and better expressed account you can't do better than read this. There's a lot of misinformation out there in cyberspace. Emma Darwin can never be accused of that.
Great advice Sally - and thanks for the link to Emma's excellent post. We need to take advice - and 'show, don't tell' is one of the most frequent and useful pieces doled out - but we also need to know when to take it, and when (occasionally) not to. No-one said it was easy!
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed this post - thank you Sally. Such good advice about 'knowing where to tell and where to show and why'. I like that.
ReplyDeleteThank you for clarifying this. It always seemed such an extreme piece of advice to me. And I have read wonderful novels and stories where occasional bouts of 'telling' played their part without appearing to spoil my enjoyment of the story.
ReplyDeleteI feel I understand the 'rule' much better now - many thanks!
This is wonderful, thank you :)
ReplyDeleteGreat post, and I love Emma's explanation too. With short stories, a successful structure can be to tell the start and show the end.
ReplyDeleteThis is a great piece. New writers are, I think, frequently boggled down with rules that are dispensed as absolutes. It can be very discouraging.
ReplyDeleteSpot on, as usual!
ReplyDeleteI wonder if it's as simple as looking at a situation and identifying the two key elements: cause and effect, which is ably demonstrated in Sally's example above. Readers don't need the in between bits.
ReplyDeleteI think you hit such a key element here: it's not about always showing, but knowing when to show versus tell. I believe this same rule can apply to passive versus active voice. It's always better to write in active, but sometimes, passive voice works more effectively. A good writer will know when to use either/or.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the great post!
When I was a kid I used to love watching Rolf Harris paint at the end of his weekly show. He would open a huge roll of paper, chuck half a dozen splashes of paint at it with a stiff brush and wait a second for you to see what he saw: a tiger leaping from between two palm trees or a boy drawing water from a well.
ReplyDeleteAnd I love the example you've given here, for much the same reason. Talking about showing and telling has never helped me that much. As Emma says, it's more useful to think of it as evoking and informing, and in many sentences you are doing a degree of both.
What you've made me see in this post is that getting the balance right is all about what to leave for the reader to fill in. With your Peter Overslept example, you've told us the basics then shown us a great deal more, but with just three or four brush strokes. You've made me see more clearly than ever that a lot of the pleasure in reading comes from filling in the thousands of tiny gaps the writer left for you.
Very useful. Not having been to writing classes I'm picking these tidbits up as I go along. I realise that I do a lot of telling in my writing, but then so do many of the authors I admire.
ReplyDelete