When to throw show, don't tell out the window

[Nikky Lee]

Another blog for any who are interested:

When to throw show, don't tell out the window

This was inspired by the speech/article from Cheryl Kein about the "good telling" in Harry Potter. It made me take a closer look at my favourite writers and realise that they all use telling to some degree.

So while showing is best practice, telling, it seems, has its place too. And it's quite a useful tool in certain situations.

 

[Amber]

Good blog.

I think telling is useful when there's information that needs to be conveyed that the writer can't assume most people know. Sometimes it's 'most people who read the genre'. Some fantasy or sci-fi readers will get pissed if you try to explain something they've read about a thousand times before, even if that something was something they read from other authors.

Maybe fantasy and sci-fi and other speculative fiction sub-genres (and all genres and sub-genres for that matter) are almost like pre-made worlds with rules and laws. Those who read them already know certain things. You can only break the rules of the genre world if you're real careful.

 

[Sea-shore]

Interesting blog, thanks @Nmlee.

 

[NickP]

hmmm

At the risk of annoying those enemies of the "how to write' book, the best way to decide whether to "show" is from Dwight Swain.

He recommends we write in scenes and sequel, and the scenes should be made up of action and reaction - things happen and people respond.

So in a scene we live the events through the senses (my definition of "show"). A scene is basically a character striving for something or faced by something, trying to gain or avoid, and failing, often making things worse (until the end, of course).

Between the scenes we have sequel, and this is about a character resetting for a new goal and is about emotion, really. You can tell all you like, write poetry if you must - just don't bore the reader. And at the end of the sequel we are ready for the next scene.

 

[Marc Joan]

I like that approach. Never heard of Dwight Swain though; must look him up.

 

[NickP]

Wiki explains it well

Scene and sequel - Wikipedia

The concept of a scene in written fiction has evolved over many years. Dwight V. Swain, in Techniques of the Selling Writer (1965) defined a scene as a unit of conflict, an account of an effort to attain a goal despite opposition. According to Swain, the functions of a scene are to provide interest and to move the story forward. The structure of a scene, as described by Swain, is (1) goal, (2) conflict, (3) disaster.[1]
In The Art of Fiction (1983), John Gardner described a scene as having an unbroken flow of action without a lapse of time or leap from one setting to another.[3] Over the years, other authors have attempted to improve on the definition of scene, and to explain its use and structure.[4][5][6][7][8]
In addition to defining a scene, Swain described a sequel as a unit of transition that links two scenes, adding that a sequel functions to translate disaster into goal, telescope reality, and control tempo. Swain also described the structure of a sequel as (1) reaction, (2) dilemma, and (3) decision.[9] Other authors have attempted to improve on the definition of a sequel and to explain its use and structure.[10][11][12]

 

[Nikky Lee]

I think telling is useful when there's information that needs to be conveyed that the writer can't assume most people know. Sometimes it's 'most people who read the genre'. Some fantasy or sci-fi readers will get pissed if you try to explain something they've read about a thousand times before, even if that something was something they read from other authors.

SFF is always challenging as you never know whether readers are new to the genre or not. And then there's all the world building that writers have to do to establish how their world works. Sometimes you have to tell so you can just get on with the story. But as @NickP rightly says, telling doesn't have to boring. Douglas Adams was the master of the entertaining info dump.

At the risk of annoying those enemies of the "how to write' book, the best way to decide whether to "show" is from Dwight Swain.

He recommends we write in scenes and sequel, and the scenes should be made up of action and reaction - things happen and people respond.

I haven't heard of Dwight Swain either (must also look him up). But this method does make sense, I think many writers do this unknowingly(?).

 

[Amber]

I haven't heard of Dwight Swain either (must also look him up). But this method does make sense, I think many writers do this unknowingly(?).

I like Dwight Swain's writing on writing. Yeah -- I bet authors do it without thinking.

Dwight Swain's most popular book is Techniques of the Selling Writer, not the bestselling writer but the selling writer. I appreciate his restraint.

 

[Magicman]

Good Blog Nmlee.

Another point to add - Emotions - It's best to show emotions. Why? People rarely feel only one emotion, nor do they always know how to express exactly what they are feeling. When shown, the emotion(s) can be left up for interpretation.

Example: Samantha slammed the door, wiped the first tears from her eyes and pounded the wood frame with her fist until blood dropped from her knuckles.

Did she say no to a proposal? Did she just win the lottery? Did she say yes to the proposal?

 

[Nikky Lee]

Good Blog Nmlee.

Another point to add - Emotions - It's best to show emotions. Why? People rarely feel only one emotion, nor do they always know how to express exactly what they are feeling. When shown, the emotion(s) can be left up for interpretation.

Example: Samantha slammed the door, wiped the first tears from her eyes and pounded the wood frame with her fist until blood dropped from her knuckles.

Did she say no to a proposal? Did she just win the lottery? Did she say yes to the proposal?

Ah, yes, this is a very good point. I'll have to go back and add it in

 

[NickP]

Good Blog Nmlee.

Another point to add - Emotions - It's best to show emotions. Why? People rarely feel only one emotion, nor do they always know how to express exactly what they are feeling. When shown, the emotion(s) can be left up for interpretation.

Two things - first making the reader experience emotion through writing is what fiction is all about, I think.

Second - and a Swain technical point, when in sequel you tend to start with one emotion and end with a different one - basically reaction (shock!), dilemma (what shall I do now?), decision (ok - let's go again)

I like Swain but i wouldn't build my life around him! Can be a good way to plan a book - if planning works for you.

 

[Nikky Lee]

I like Swain but i wouldn't build my life around him! Can be a good way to plan a book - if planning works for you.

I'm on the panster end of the spectrum when it comes to creative writing (but, interestingly, on the other end for blogging and copywriting), however, this could turn into an interesting exercise to experiment with for one of my novels (especially those that I intend to turn into a series).

 

[HDKeller]

Another blog for any who are interested:

When to throw show, don't tell out the window

This was inspired by the speech/article from Cheryl Kein about the "good telling" in Harry Potter. It made me take a closer look at my favourite writers and realise that they all use telling to some degree.

So while showing is best practice, telling, it seems, has its place too. And it's quite a useful tool in certain situations.

*Gasp* You mean we don't always have to follow the rules? I enjoyed the post. Thank you!

 

[Nikky Lee]

@HDKeller to borrow a line from a famous fictional pirate: "They're more like guidelines than actual rules."

 

[NickP]

Mr. and Mrs. Dursley, of number four, Privet Drive, were proud to say that they were perfectly normal, thank you very much. They were the last people you’d expect to be involved in anything strange or mysterious, because they just didn’t hold with such nonsense.

Telling or showing? Whose post of view?

 

[Nikky Lee]

I'd say telling and it's the narrator at this point.

 

[NickP]

I'd say telling and it's the narrator at this point.

Really? If so, it is the narrator reporting upon the Dursleys' POV, perhaps ironically?

The interesting thing about the "tell" is you can hear the voice of the point of view - "thank you very much", "hold with such nonsense". It's 3rd person but it's really using the point of view of Dursley Drive, suburbia, itself.

 

[Nikky Lee]

Really? If so, it is the narrator reporting upon the Dursleys' POV, perhaps ironically?

Yes, I think so. It's a clever piece of telling as it very quickly establishes who the Dursley's are and how they view the world and their place in it.

It's 3rd person but it's really using the point of view of Dursley Drive, suburbia, itself.

Yes, it starts out as quite an omniscient 3rd POV isn't it? I think this is why I did not like the first chapter when I first read it as a teen. It was only when the POV drew in and came to rest on Harry's shoulder, did I get interested. I think it was the same for a lot of people, but I'd be curious to know if anyone else felt differently on that 1st chapter and why?