Internal struggle? - Page 2 - Writers Forum

Kane · 03-18-2007, 11:36 AM

http://www.hatrack.com/writingclass/index.shtml

Rob · 03-18-2007, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fegaril

It just seems strange that so many writers would recommend it if it was such a faulty maxim. Maybe to get rid of the competition...

Yes it is faulty. It's faulty because it suggests to novice writers that they should always show and never tell. They tie themselves in knots trying to avoid tell in the way you're now trying to. That's what happens when you try to dumb down advice into a soundbite. The truth is, it's okay to use tell. Understanding how and when it's best to use tell and how and when it's best to use show can't be gained from a soundbite.

First, tell yourself that "Show, don't tell" is a lie. Then go read a lot of good fiction and see how tell is used effectively.

Cheers,
Omni

HarryG · 03-18-2007, 12:12 PM

Well, some interesting comments in an interesting debate; it reminds me of an agent and a publisher disagreeing loudly over Showing and Telling. They were both women (irrelevant, I suppose) and both at the top of their profession. After much imbibing, it nearly came to blows, and I didn’t learn much from what was said. I had a good laugh, though. Good link, Kane.

cyberspecter · 03-18-2007, 12:35 PM

Excerpt from The Elements of Fiction Writing Characters and Viewpoint. by Orson Scott Card. (Writer’s Digest Books) Chap 15 Entitled Dramatic VS. Narrative, page 142
last paragraph.
(This paragraph is referring to an earlier example in which the author wrote a narrative and then a scene involving two characters in which pretty much the same information was relayed to illustrate the difference between showing and telling.)

Quote:

Which of these is the “right” choice? Either one could be right; either could be wrong. Factors like rhythm, pace, and tone come into play- these are outside the scope of this book. However, if the author wanted the reader to get a feel for the murder victim, to remember him as a character instead of simply getting the narrator’s attitude toward him, this or some other scene would be essential. Characters are made more real through scenes than through narrative.

Kane · 03-18-2007, 12:49 PM

Of course there are times to "show" action. However, trying to do so where inappropriate really kills the flow of a story. The problem is that so many would-be writers, and even writers, pass off the phrase, "show don't tell," as if that's all that needs to be said, when that's not true. They do this because someone told them that, and they don't really understand it, even though they think they might. I had several people tell me show, don't tell, many moons ago. The result was that I tried to SHOW everything, including character motivation. I had to keep pushing the beginning of my story farther back in order to show the motivation or the actions that led to the current dilemna. Some of the best prose in the world is "telling" and there's nothing wrong with that. In a single page of "telling," you can tell thousands of years of history. With showing, it would take annals.

captdallas2 · 03-18-2007, 02:58 PM

Gasp! I agree with Kane. I feel it is all in the flow. Even a poorly written story that has good flow is readible. Show or tell? Which maintains the flow?

Hodge · 03-18-2007, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kane

Unfortunately, you're deluded by what everyone else has told you about "show don't tell." I know what showing and telling is, Hodge. When I first came to this site, I was plagued by constantly trying to "Show" and not "Tell." It totally stifled my writing. Now I know better, and now I write better. Showing and telling work for specific areas, and telling works for far more than it's advised for. Some of the greatest books "tell" character motivation, rather than show it, even GRRM's Song of Ice and Fire. But, if you "lose" respect for Card, blow him off, and refuse to admit the truth of what he says, plus the truth of what so many good authors do, just to win an argument, I don't know what to say... except that your ego will be your undoing.

That's a stylistic choice. If you're working from a dramatic POV, then you CAN'T get inside a character's head. If you're working from a limited POV, then you can only get inside one character's head. Same with first person.

But go on. Keep speaking in absolutes and acting like a super-genius. It's amusing.

HarryG · 03-18-2007, 03:53 PM

It’s gotten better. Who do we writers take our advice from? I read some years ago that five of the last six American winners of the Nobel Prize for literature were alcoholics.

Some of our best singers and songwriters wrote and strutted their stuff while under the influence of drugs, remember Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds, by the Beatles and the Rolling Stones wrinkles need no further comment.

Does it mean that our writing would be better with a bottle of Jim Beam at our side and a Spliff dangling from our mouths?

Or, does it mean that if we don’t indulge we will just churn out tons of mediocre nonsense, following the guidelines of those who advocate showing more and telling less, or the opposite, or whatever?

I don’t know the answer and I’m going to stick my head in the sand.

Rob · 03-18-2007, 04:22 PM

I'm a little confused right now. You talk about the 'best singers and songwriters' and then mention the Beatles and the Rolling Stones. I don't see the connection.

Cheers,
Omni

HarryG · 03-18-2007, 05:38 PM

Sorry, Omni, we don’t seem to share our taste in music and I didn’t mean to confuse you.

Umogrim · 03-18-2007, 06:33 PM

Show and dont tell is mostly correct, but there ARE moments when telling is better, if you are going to tell most of the book, its going to be more boring. I dont want to read a book to scan through it just to be told how the bady was killed, i want to learn about the motivation, the thoughs and inspirations of the characters.

Kane · 03-18-2007, 07:42 PM

Quote:

But go on. Keep speaking in absolutes and acting like a super-genius. It's amusing.

Oh, quit being a twat.

Shawn · 03-18-2007, 08:18 PM

By showing, doesn't that mean revealing characters through dialogue? Shakespeare did this a lot, where he would have one line that would effectively explain all exposition that was necessary. For instance, in Julius Caesar, Caesar says:

"Forget not in your speed, Antonius,
To touch Calpurnia; for our elders say,
The barren, touched in this holy chase,
Shake off their sterile curse."

These four lines tell us that Calpurnia is barren, and this is very important to Caesar's insecurity. This also allows Shakespeare to show that women were oppressed, just like in all of his plays, and it is most likely Caesar's fault a child can not be conceived.

A lot can be drawn from four lines.