Showing is walking in the footsteps of the heroine, seeing what she sees, etc etc.
But how far should this go?
I read quantities of books that don't particularly use show at all.
I keep getting comments that say I should show more. Is it some glib comment tossed around for the sake of something to say? Can a book be written in nothing else but show? Is it ever useful? Are there times when it is not useful? I decided to do some research and came up with this article first time of asking -
https://jerryjenkins.com/show-dont-tell/
I don't know who he is, but his explanation is good and clear, so I will keep it to refer to to when the clouds of confusion set in.
This is what he says:
When you tell rather than show, you simply inform your reader of information rather than allowing him to deduce anything.
You’re supplying information by simply stating it.
You might report that a character is
“tall,” or “angry,” or “cold,” or “tired.”
That’s telling.
Showing would
paint a picture the reader could see in her mind’s eye.
If your character is tall, your reader can deduce
that because you mention others looking up when they talk with him. Or he has
to duck to get through a door. Or when posing for a photo, he has to bend his
knees to keep his head in proximity of others.
Rather than telling that your character is angry, show it
by describing his face flushing, his throat tightening, his voice rising, his
slamming a fist on the table. When you show, you don’t have to tell.
Cold? Your character pulls her collar up, tightens
her scarf, shoves her hands deep into her pockets, turns her face away from the
biting wind.
Tired? He can yawn, groan, stretch. His eyes can
look puffy. His shoulders could slump. Another character might say, “Didn’t you
sleep last night? You look shot.”
When you show rather than tell,
you make the reader part of the experience. Rather than having everything
simply imparted to him, he sees it in his mind and comes to the conclusions you
want.
What could be better than engaging your
reader—giving him an active role in the storytelling—or should I say the story-showing?
Examples
Telling:
When they embraced she could tell he had been smoking and was scared.
Showing:
When she wrapped her arms around him, the sweet staleness of tobacco enveloped
her, and he was shivering.
Telling:
The temperature fell and the ice reflected the sun.
Showing:
Bill’s nose burned in the frigid air, and he squinted against the sun
reflecting off the street.
Telling:
Suzie was blind.
Showing:
Suzie felt for the bench with a white cane.
Telling:
It was late fall.
Showing:
Leaves crunched beneath his feet.
Telling: She
was a plumber and asked where the bathroom was.
Showing: She
wore coveralls carried a plunger and metal toolbox, and wrenches of various
sizes hung from a leather belt around her waist. “Point me to the head,” she
said.
Telling: I
had a great conversation with Tim over dinner and loved hearing his stories.
Showing: I
barely touched my food, riveted by Tim. “Let me tell you another story,” he
said.
Yes, it’s a mistake to take show, don’t tell as inviolable. While summary narrative is largely
frowned upon, sometimes it’s a prudent choice. If there’s no value to the plot/tension/conflict/character arc by showing some mundane but necessary information, telling is
preferable.
For instance, say you have to get your character to
an important meeting and back, before the real action happens. Maybe he has to
get clearance from his superiors before he can lead a secret raid.
Rather than investing several pages showing every
aspect of the trip from packing, dressing, getting a cab to the airport, going
through security, boarding the plane, arriving at his destination—you
quickly tell that this way:
Three days later, after a trip to Washington to get
the operation sanctioned by his superiors, Casey packed his weapons and camo
clothes and set out to recruit his crew.
Then you immediately return to showing mode,
describing his visits to trusted compatriots and getting them on board.
No comments:
Post a Comment