Show don't tell

[CrispyQ]

Someone in my critique group recommended the book linked below on Amazon. I always read some of the low star reviews. The reviewer below made some comments that resonated with me regarding show-don't-tell. They are in bold.

Write Your Novel From The Middle: A New Approach for Plotters, Pantsers and Everyone in Between
by James Scott Bell

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0910355118/ref=ox_sc_sfl_title_1?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER

3.0 out of 5 stars a good idea padded with general writing advice, April 22, 2014
By Jill - See all my reviews

This book has a fairly good idea in it. It's one I hadn't heard before, and it did inspire me and caused me to ponder books I had read and to reexamine them with his idea in mind. This book is worth reading for his startlingly simple and helpful main insight. However, the book is very short and was weakened, in my opinion, by his attempt to fatten it up with general writing advice. There comes a point in every writer's life when she has no desire to read yet another chapter extolling the virtues of showing instead of telling. In fact, upon examination, this push for showing vs telling has made literature rather dull. It has created a whole mountain of books that are pretending to be films. A film must show because it's visual; a book tells because it isn't. A book is a different work of art that can use all kinds of language to tell a story, including language that is expository or ruminative or descriptive. Having to read fiction that is composed of movie-like scenes is pushing my patience past its limits. But then I came to a part in the book where the author claims that great fiction is ultimately an "emotional ride". That stopped me short. I read it about three times. I've never thought of fiction that way. I've always thought that the primary role of fiction is to engage the mind, not the emotions. Don't mistake me; great literature does both. It's a matter of primary vs secondary function. It seems that James Scott Bell and I have different expectations of fiction. I'm going to have to think about this a little more.

I think she makes a great point that books now read more like films or screen plays as authors focus so much on 'show don't tell.' My critique group are die hard 'show don't tell" fans. Everything should be shown, until you show too much & then you should tell. If I did 'show don't tell' everywhere, my chapters would be 8,0000 words instead of 5,000 words.

What do you think?

[Brainstormy]

1. I think there's some good stuff here

I've long been annoyed by the fact that the "show don't tell" advice is taken to ridiculous extremes. It's absolutely impossible to write good fiction without doing both. But I do tend to agree with Jill that too much current fiction is a string of "scenes," which, however well-rendered, make for flat, dull, unengaging reading.

As for the mind vs. heart business, that's almost silly, too. If one wanted ONLY intellectual stimulation, he or she would not likely choose fiction. But empathy and emotional connection can't be created without engaging the mind. And the change that takes place in the reader after the experience of a great book, is an intellectual one.

Bottom line: We're never going to be able to reduce good fiction to formulas.

[CrispyQ]

3. Your last sentence made me laugh but is very true.

I've just started writing & along with it, reading books on how to write. Some of the "rules" I've read have surprised me. Never have a prologue. Only use 'said' and 'asked' for dialog attributes. Try not to use adverbs.

I find a lot of current fiction to be jarring. Many books have good plot & good characters, but it's like watching a home video, the movement between scenes is jerky, not smooth.

[Orrex]

2. I find much modern popular fiction to be far too screenplay-like

Michael Crichton is an obvious offender, but it's also true of a lot of "thriller" fiction, too. The author structures the novel in a way that seems clearly calculated to facilitate the adaptation to the big screen, because that's where the money is.

I'm not ready to throw out the "show don't tell" mantra, though, because it's possible to be rich and visual without being vapidly cinematic. As far as exposition goes, it only really bothers me when it takes the form of dialog or a conspicuous infodump that disrupts the flow of the story.

[CrispyQ]

4. Oh I agree. I'm not throwing 'show don't tell' out.

My scenes have been greatly improved by working on SDT. I had not thought about the Hollywood connection & that brings up another question. Do you think that if you write your novel more screenplay like, the film product will be closer to the written story? Sometimes I'm amazed at how different films are, but if you are a reader, 9 times out of 10 you will like the book better.

[Brainstormy]

5. and see . . .

you remind me that there's "knowledge" and then there's knowledge. I've got a doctorate in English. Taught fiction and creative writing for years. Have read Crichton, once, but completely loathe thriller fiction. Most all genre fiction for that matter. And I can't imagine writing a novel "calculated for screen adaptation." But hey, my novels don't sell for squat. Crichton's do.

[SheilaT]

6. In general, most new writers really do need to learn to show not tell.

But it has resulted in a kind of formula that has been overused.

I recently attended a writing workshop, and too many of the things we looked at started out with a dramatic action scene with no set-up as to who the people are and why we should care about them.

I also get very tired of every book being part of a trilogy or longer series. I even generally avoid the ones that have the same detective solving the crime, even though in general I like mysteries. Just have a real aversion to series.

[CrispyQ]

7. A friend gave me the book, "Techniques of the Selling Writer"

by Dwight V. Swain. The copyright is 1965. I'm a third of the way through & I think he's mentioned SDT once, maybe twice.

I've trudged through many series, always hopeful that they would get better. Now, I read till they don't interest me & don't have any problem not finishing them.

[SheilaT]

8. I am not familiar with that book.

Do keep in mind that popular novels in all genres are quite different from those published in 1965.

One of my problems as a writer is that even though I read all the time, I still tend to want to write things more in line with what I read fifty years ago, so I'm somewhat behind on how I should pace or structure my writing.

[DavidDvorkin]

9. It's a silly rule

One that gets repeated mindlessly.

Here's my take on it:

http://eyeblister.blogspot.com/2007/04/show-dont-tell-and-other-silly-advice.html

[mainer]

10. "Show, don't tell" is really about portraying emotions, I think.

Tell: "John was griefstricken."

vs.

Show: "John rocked back and forth, shaking, choking back sobs."

I think that show v tell rule is for newbies who waste too much time telling us that Mary is a mean old woman, rather than showing us her interactions with her neighbors.

[Lilyhoney]

11. Good example. Thank you.

As a new writer taking on the challenge of writing my first novel. I hope to strike a balance of showing and telling.


Thanks,

Lilyhoney

[Lilyhoney]

12. I enjoyed your blog. I will be back, Thanks. nt

[valerief]

13. Isn't Show Don't Tell a Tell? It's telling us not to tell, not showing us

not to tell.