“Show, Don’t Tell”

[worldofmutes]

as far as reading a book goes, I have trouble reading between the lines. Rather than read a bunch of plot and decipher some kind of moral within it, I actually prefer if I’m actually told what and how I should think about this and that.

So, say I write something like-wise:

The petrified gargoyle nocturnally scanned the isthmus of merrymakers prancing and clattering below, in the castle on an evening of jollity and teasing. The beast considered in that moment whether their peculiar bodies, made of flesh, blood, guts, vital organs {and very soft, tender bodies that they were}; did they, in fact, brood on top of a spire of a cathedral on a damp, cloudy dusk- did they actually stop to ponder the fatalism of living seemingly and respectively for, at least; hedonism, the intoxicating arousal of sensation? What did it mean to live for sensation? As a gargoyle, they lived only in their head, without ever an anxiety about trifling human affairs.

I don’t know whether this gets my point across, but the way I prefer writing {and reading} is very intuitively. So, what do you think about the phrase show, don’t tell; and, cannot one do both?

 

[Valtharius]

So, what do you think about the phrase show, don’t tell; and, cannot one do both?

I think it's a bunch of horse hockey, as is most writing advice.
Of course good writers can and should do a combination of both.

 

[Oochillyo]

hey Worldofmutes how are you

This seems very interesting after double reading what the post was about I thought you meant you had trouble reading (no offence) but now I get your point how ironic considering the topic

I think its possible but very hard to show and not tell in books unless things like the general setting of something for example counts as in a Castle with people stuck to the walls , the writer/author has to tell us about that in some way less direct and literal from others although both are possible but I think if we infer from that text that lots of people have tried to climb the Castle or have just died generally and have since been pinned to the Castle wall this tells us that its hard to get through (lots die) the people who put these decorations up are telling us a warning and implying that they are fierce or powerful people and generally to cut it down this Castle is protected and a threat to live if you try and get past/through it

Is this 'Show Dont Tell' in books like if you give the reader the main idea or set the scene then this added bits like detail of people hanging off the side of the Castle and what can be inferred from that is the 'Show Dont Tell' , is that how this works and what you mean like extracting meaning or inference ?

Although if that's the case can that not be a bridge to confusion through our different views, of course if many of us see a Castle wall lined with bodies and heads that tell us danger run ect more detailed inference like these people who put the bodies there are a threat and the punishment is high ect ect like what I said before but if somebody from a different culture, view, time or perspective saw that same thing and they thought it was a symbol of sacrifice or you know anything other than somebody else's idea/view on the scene they are looking at then the message/meaning extracted is different and if this scene was in a book then does 'Show Dont Tell' break down and therefore given age ranges as well ect ect is it likely that 'Show Dont Tell' is liable or almost certain to break if you show the extract or image whatever it is to enough people that arent all clones as in dont share the same perspective/view ect and so does this impact a writer, yes cause we all know if we write something that goes against somebody's else views or a whole culture although we tried to aim for our meaning implanted on them they are likely to not see our intended meaning like Death to the Author Theory I was taught in school.

What do we do as writers/story tellers ect if this 'Show Dont Tell' is very tricky to implement 'well' as authors or film makers (to a lesser extent) ect if it can be broken so easily, is it worth the hassle of implementing it ?

P.S. if I have gone soo far side tracked I'm sorry and I wanted to say a little bit cause I didn't really understand the question at first and then it all started clicking and I'm in a bad head space so wanted to be important, hope I haven't said a bunch that doesn't correlate to the question.

Regards - Declan Sargent

 

[Swank]

I don't think the "show" is really so much about theme and philosophy. It is usually about baser description like "she was sad".

If you want to display a philosophical context, I would try to couple it to a reason for having that outlook. Why does the gargoyle care? How did it come to have an interest, and how will it affect its future actions? Otherwise it can appear to be an unmotivated imposition by the author.

 

[Wayne Mack]

I get the feeling that you have mixed emotions about this.

I actually prefer if I’m actually told what and how I should think about this and that.

the way I prefer writing {and reading} is very intuitively.

To me, it seems that being told how to think about something removes intuition. Being given a bread crumb trail of associated facts relies upon the reader's intuition to put the pieces together. I suggest that showing means to engage the reader in the current point of interest. Describe how the situation is sensed by a character and let the reader derive how the character feels.

 

[worldofmutes]

hey Worldofmutes how are you

This seems very interesting after double reading what the post was about I thought you meant you had trouble reading (no offence) but now I get your point how ironic considering the topic

I don’t have trouble reading; I have trouble finishing a book. Recently I just lose interest if there isn’t enough philosophy to sift through. I like to think a lot.

 

[worldofmutes]

If you want to display a philosophical context, I would try to couple it to a reason for having that outlook. Why does the gargoyle care? How did it come to have an interest, and how will it affect its future actions? Otherwise it can appear to be an unmotivated imposition by the author.

That’s a very good point; thank you. As writer’s we don’t exactly write as detailed as we ought to. I think I’m writing something profound when really it’s just a baser and shallow projection of my feelings at the time of writing. And that’s not the kind of thing I really like reading anymore, either. Maybe in moderation.

 

[worldofmutes]

To me, it seems that being told how to think about something removes intuition. Being given a bread crumb trail of associated facts relies upon the reader's intuition to put the pieces together. I suggest that showing means to engage the reader in the current point of interest. Describe how the situation is sensed by a character and let the reader derive how the character feels.

There are many moments when I have opened up a book and read through some passages that have shaped my world view irrevocably; had I never read this one sentence or passage I never would have realized that was the truth of the way of the world. What is truth?

 

[The Judge]

I think there's possibly a misunderstanding of how the show-don't-tell rule relates to writing -- for anyone who is a little confused I did a post about it in the Toolbox some time ago which might be of help The Toolbox -- The Important Bits (There have been a number of good posts on the subject since then which I really ought to track down and add to the thread, but in the meantime a trawl through the back pages of Writing Discussion might throw them up.) But as Valtharius suggests, we should all learn to be adept at both and recognise when one is better than the other.


To be honest I can't really follow the opening post and the paragraph about the gargoyle or the intended argument, so I may be barking up the wrong tree, but for me themes and philosophical issues should run under the surface of a story, so those who are interested in analysing a piece or who want to think deeply can go ferretting for them. If they're deliberately forced into the writing, as opposed to arising naturally from one's own views and the story itself, it's all too easy for it to become a polemic. Personally, I react badly to being told what I should think, and any books that attempted to lecture me -- even when I agreed with the sentiment -- would be immediately rejected.

 

[Oochillyo]

I don’t have trouble reading; I have trouble finishing a book. Recently I just lose interest if there isn’t enough philosophy to sift through. I like to think a lot.

hey Worldofmutes how are you

At first I thought you meant trouble with physical reading but I re - read the question and information about it which helped me understand what your point was but I still struggled to comprehend and therefore analysis and give my take on the question.

I hope what I said made sense for the question though I feel like I lost the core of the question along the way and I didn't mean to cause any offence just trouble with understanding the question and the meaning of it ironically again for the topic.

Take care buddie

Regards - Declan Sargent

 

[Christine Wheelwright]

Show-don't-tell is really most powerful when applied to the feelings your characters have for each other. If you write a passage in which two people who dislike each other are having a conversation, it is possible to get this fact across without explicitly stating it. Describe their mannerisms and expresions. Perhaps they might be distracted by certain mental images during the conversation. That could tell the reader a lot. Their choice of words too. Cold, technical statements rather than relaxed familiar prose. It really is a very powerful technique to have the reader feel the emotions rather than be spoon-fed.

 

[Pyan]

Personally, I think that "show, don't tell" is about as as valid advice as "lots of short sentences are better than a few longer ones" and "write what you know".
The first two are vaguely and mildly insulting to my intelligence, and the third one, while it may win the Booker prize, is, frankly, stupid when you apply it to speculative fiction.

 

[Swank]

Personally, I think that "show, don't tell" is about as as valid advice as "lots of short sentences are better than a few longer ones" and "write what you know".
The first two are vaguely and mildly insulting to my intelligence, and the third one, while it may win the Booker prize, is, frankly, stupid when you apply it to speculative fiction.

I don't know if you are the contrarian, or I am about to be:

Short sentences are better when you are figuring out how to write better, as more complex sentences are problematic to control and harder to read. Short sentences teach emphasis. When you have that down you can construct more complex sentences because you understand how to maintain individual ideas without getting lost in compounds and participial phrases.

Write what you know isn't about knowing how a spacecraft engine works, it is writing from the perspective of a technician vs. a supervisor. Human experience isn't about the specifics but the kinds of activities and competencies we are comfortable engaging in.

 

[jd73]

as far as reading a book goes, I have trouble reading between the lines. Rather than read a bunch of plot and decipher some kind of moral within it, I actually prefer if I’m actually told what and how I should think about this and that.

So, say I write something like-wise:

The petrified gargoyle nocturnally scanned the isthmus of merrymakers prancing and clattering below, in the castle on an evening of jollity and teasing. The beast considered in that moment whether their peculiar bodies, made of flesh, blood, guts, vital organs {and very soft, tender bodies that they were}; did they, in fact, brood on top of a spire of a cathedral on a damp, cloudy dusk- did they actually stop to ponder the fatalism of living seemingly and respectively for, at least; hedonism, the intoxicating arousal of sensation? What did it mean to live for sensation? As a gargoyle, they lived only in their head, without ever an anxiety about trifling human affairs.

I don’t know whether this gets my point across, but the way I prefer writing {and reading} is very intuitively. So, what do you think about the phrase show, don’t tell; and, cannot one do both?

I think of telling as "informing readers that something is so" and showing as "making it happen just so". For me, the above is mostly show, with the exception of the phrase "on an evening of jollity and teasing" - this is clearly what is happening (shown) so it doesn't need to be stated explicitly (told). There is a place for telling though, if done well. When it's done poorly, the text can read a little amateurish.

 

[Montero]

@worldofmutes

How do you get on reading Terry Pratchett? Especially the later ones?

I find them multi-layered, with adventure story on the face of it, with layers of commentary on our own society and the quirks of people underneath. Just wondered if they provided the reading experience you are looking for.
I also find them quite narratorial, rather than immersed in the moment first person. (I like a range of writing styles, I am not saying I prefer narratorial over first person or vice versa.)

 

[Guanazee]

I think it depends on your market audience, genre, and mode of publishing. Show and tell should both be used, but how successful it is depends on market factors. The reality is most modern readers want more showing (I would argue less so in SF though) and so too do traditional editors. Whether that's "good" or "bad" is less relevant than whether that aligns with your goals.

 

[Swank]

It might be useful to emphasize at this point that many of the writing saws that get discussed aren't really for people about to be published, but writers that are striving to write something that makes it past a friendly critique. Newer writers tend to make the same sort of mistakes that make their writing unappealing, and telling them to 'show' or use active sentences goes a long way to addressing that.

Once you've become a reasonable creator o' prose, all bets are off and you should have a very good idea when to show and when to tell without anyone prompting you.

 

[alexvss]

So, what do you think about the phrase show, don’t tell; and, cannot one do both?

Writing Excuses has a When to Tell episode, as well as a complete show, don't tell tag.

 

[JunkMonkey]

I'm always like it when people manage to do both show and tell simultaneously. It happens a lot in comics. (Well, the crappy comics I read....)

"Kryptonite... sapping.... my powers..."
"My God! Dinosaurs with machine guns!"
"The ghost! The one that looks like you -- There it goes!"
"Werewolves -- two of them! and just moving in to the attack!"

etc.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I'm always like it when people manage to do both show and tell simultaneously. It happens a lot in comics. (Well, the crappy comics I read....)

"Kryptonite... sapping.... my powers..."
"My God! Dinosaurs with machine guns!"
"The ghost! The one that looks like you -- There it goes!"
"Werewolves -- two of them! and just moving in to the attack!"

etc.

I'd read that.