Showing You How to show. · 4:39pm Jun 15th, 2012
Today’s question, and this one I really encourage you to comment on, is: Is showing important, and how do you do it?
Alrighty, this is one of the big ones, and I honestly can’t cover it all. So I’ll try my best and hope that it isn’t horrible.
Showing is a form of writing, one that allows the reader to immerse him/herself into the story and to visualize the world that the author is creating. Because of the powerful impact that it has, and the incredible ability to aid in storytelling, showing has become one of the most powerful tools at an author’s disposition. So much so, that a lack of show, will usually be denied. So, how do you “show” in fiction. You can’t post images, or picture diagrams or sketches. You need to paint with words. For obvious reasons this can be difficult.
Telling (in regards to fiction) is the act of writing part by part what’s going on, for example:
“Applejack went to Sweet Apple Acres. She was afraid and in a panic”
I just told you something. It’s simple, concise and easy to understand. Unfortunately, it’s far from immersive, nor is it really interesting. There’s no atmosphere, or feeling or emotion, it’s raw, worthy of an outline perhaps, but not an entire story.
“Applejack ran towards the quickly approaching barn, the red edifice glowing in the afternoon sun. She panted, exerting herself as her hooves struck the ground with thundering blows.”
That one was a little showy. Note how it has a lot more feeling to it, you can almost feel that Applejack is in a hurry, or that she is panicking. And yet, it covers the same material. Showing is always better than telling, but that does not mean that telling has no place in fiction. Telling can be used for quick transitions, or blatant exposition. And in the end, Showing is telling, but indirectly.
Now, I know you guys want to know exactly how to show. So here’s a few (and by that I mean two) methods.
First, imagine the scene. No, I don’t mean like an outline, ‘this happens, then that, the she says this...’. Immerse yourself in it, imagine yourself there. Look at the characters, the world around them, note the smaller details your mind conjures up. Writers and readers have six senses use them.
--Sight. What you can see, this is where most writing is done. Use sun, moon, lighting and colours to your advantage, show what’s going on.
--Hearing. Basically all sounds, dialogue isn’t part of this, unless a tone is added (she squeaked, hollered...ect). This includes parts of the environment. Outside? Are birds chirping? Foals playing? A fire crackling?
--Smell. Rarely used, which is unfortunate, it can have quite an effect on the reader. Covers all odours, things you could smell, from the cloying smell of garden flowers, the thick smoke of spent gunpowder to the twingy, copper-like smell of blood.
--Taste. This one is fairly hard to use, simply because the character has to put something in its mouth. Still, it’s a valid sense. Pickled eggs have a very different taste than a hay sandwich.
--Touch. Another that is overlooked. Make your character touch things, feel them. Objects all have their own textures and readers can easily relate to this. Cold and warmth are also part of this, as is temperature.
--And finally, thought. Yes, thoughts are a sense, not in the real world, but in fiction they are as important as any of the rest. In first person, this is easy, and it’s almost a must. In non-omnipresent third, it’s a little tougher. You can reach it via dialogue or body language. A pony that’s leaning forward, face red with a huge frown on their face isn’t having happy thoughts. One that is leaned back, with a small, contented smile on its lips might be.
The general rule of thumb is to use all five within every thousand words. That will really immerse the reader, and it’s also an effective method of showing.
The second tip I want to give is a bit of a cheat, and that means that I use it all the time.
Instead of outright telling:
"Twilight punched Spike. He flew backwards and crashed into Stephan Magnet."
Tell the reader of the consequences or effects on the environment of each action:
"Twilight’s hoof flew forward, rending the air until it impacted with Spike’s face with a sickening crunch. The tiny green and purple dragon flew into the air, shrieking in pain as he vaulted across the ground. Behind Spike’s tumbling form, Stephan Magnet’s eyes widened, but he didn’t move until Spike crashed into him with a dull thud."
I just used tell, three times. About little, unimportant thing. But together and arranged in the right order, it looks as if I’m showing you a scene. Apply this trick with the one above (using sense) and you can actually get away with quite a bit.
The amount of showing and the depth of the details depend upon prose, and the writer (context too)
Yes... it's important.
Of all the gods-be-damned shennanigans!! WTF!!!!
./sigh Lost this stupid chapter TWICE now!.
static1.fjcdn.com/comments/hey+guys+check+out+my+new+meme.+It+s+called+quot+rage+_463c729636ab40a35fb0284ea7da288d.jpg
This is the area I struggle with the most. And honesty, I just don't get it.
Even when I see plain examples like the ones you used, I can never seem to wrap my brain around it. If showing ever happens in my writing, it's usually by accident.
Sigh.
Some authors get it. Some don't. I'm in the latter category and it will be some time before I will ever move up into the former.
176010
Don;t worry, took me three or so moths to figure it out. Still not that good at it, I look at the work of some and drool.
176015
I've been doing this for about three years, and it wasn't until I moved over into this fandom that my fallacies have become glaringly obvious. Getting nothing but praise for my earlier stuff over on fanfiction.net didn't help me. Over there, as long as the story concept and plot are interesting, telling isn't really that big a deal. It's been difficult for me to adjust my writing style to conform with what's expected over here.
Rather funny how a fandom with colorful ponies has such strict rules on storytelling as compared to more adult series.
'Show don't tell' is one of the first rules of writing I remember being taught in English class. The problem with it is they don't tell you when to use it. I'm writing a story that's in first person but it's really difficult to show vs tell.
I think it's good to show when you can, but never feel like you have to do it. It always depends on the circumstance or the character you're portraying. There's also the idea of letting the reader imagine things.
176025
I know tha feel, mate. I had no idea what showing was until I got here. And it took me almost 2 months of being beaten around by my proofreader for the message to sink in.
One thing I notice that is very common in showing is the use of adjectives. When you tell, you are normally unbiased. You are stating a fact. He walked and She ran are quick, short messages that are only telling what is going on. But when you insert adjectives to the sentence and use them to describe what is going on it shifts towards showing. It's not 100% showing, but it's a start.
Overall, showing means describing something, whilst telling is just stating a fact. But that's just me, I could be saying complete crap
Well then, I guess I'm just gonna go now and start to rewrite my story so that it is more descriptive
...
Pretty good explanation here! I've seen others try to explain this and most of them fall way short, but you do a pretty good job at showing (haha) how it's actually done, with sight and sound and such. Your little "trick" at then end is something I appreciated. I've told young authors to show more and tell less, and sometimes instead of simply improving a scene that was already coherent, if dry and such, is that they just infuse it with tons and tons of superfluous stuff. I may work off of this next time I have to show a young writer what I mean!
Are you thinking what you'll do for the next one? If so, I do have a question! How do you handle distance? Like, geographically gettin' character 1 from point A to point B smoothly, without any sense that you're dragging it out? Sustained narrative is a weakness of mine. I can ruminate on things, explore ideas, I'm pretty decent with dialogue... but narrating is difficult.
It's vitally important. It largely boils down to the ancient rule of "Show, don't tell."
Really great explanation!! that's a great to explain one thing, that in my opinion, makes the stories in this website one of the best iever created.
Really showing can be something really difficult if you don't have a good grammar , but it totally worth it when you see so many bronies liking your story.
I suppose one of the good things is about fan fiction is that it limits the amount you have to show and tell. Everyone knows what Ponyville looks like so the only things you should describe are things that aren't the norm. For example: weather, perhaps some ponies going about their business etc.
To be honest, I don't think I'm very good at knowing if I'm showing instead of telling so I just cram in descriptive words.
Showing is almost essential to any narrative. After going back through some of my stories to reread, I find out that I show more in the slower parts of the narrative and it sort of slides a little out in the really accelerated bits. I feel proud of myself for actually using smell in the opening of my big story.
I'll use two moments from a flashback sequence in Night of the Shy (Revamp) for my example to add to this. One deals with a largely establishing/expository moment, the other will deal with showing vs. telling in a more active sequence:
Moment A is basically establishing the location and the situation. This would be the bad version:
Interesting - you get at least a general idea of what's happening. You know it's affecting one of the story's characters. But it's almost as if the whole moment is being thrown in as "Oh yeah - this happened. Here, really care about it." It barely has any feeling. It tells you everything is wrong and sad, but it doesn't let you know why.
Moment A - The final version:
A bit longer, but now you can get a true sense of what's going on - signifcance is explained, and you realize this is a major moment in the lives of one of our characters. Some of the descriptions and dialogue also give a sense that something weird is going on...
...which leads into Moment B. This concerns when this flashback breaks into an action sequence. The bad version:
That's nice - but really? I mean, yeah, Nightmare Moon took out a battalion, but how many is "a lot of lightining bolts"? How many soldiers are in a battalion? For all some readers know, a battalion is, like, 10 soldiers. We're told Nightmare Moon is powerful because she kills a lot of soldiers - but if a battalion's ten soldiers, that's...not really that powerful. That's not much of an obstacle to overcome.
Moment B - the version in the final chapter:
Same thing - but now, it's so much more "HOLY SHIT!" and effective. Because I've shown you the power of the obstacle the character needs to overcome. How's the character going to escape that?
You'll notice Moment A's final version is lengthier than its bad version, and vice-versa for Moment B. That's because Showing vs. Telling isn't just about adding/subtracting description and/or exposition. It's all about using those tools wisely. Sometimes you need more, sometimes you need less. It all depends on the needs of the story at any given moment.
Oooh. Tips. Helpful. I will have to remember this. Thankyou.
It's a complicated issue, and I think the admonishment, "Show, don't tell" frustrates some writers partly because what a proofreader calls "telling" is usually a lot of different things, all of them distinct. I can think of at least four:
1. Narrative summary; recording what happened without describing it in detail.
2. Redundancy; delivering the same information more than once.
3. Stating the obvious; this often comes in the form of unnecessary adverbs attached to dialogue attribution, such as this: "I hate you!" he yelled angrily.
4. Pedantic description; this one's more trickly: lengthy description can set a scene vividly or it can turn into a boring laundry list of every item in a room. Whether lengthy description works or not depends heavily on the author's mastery of style.
If a proofreader merely makes the note, "You're telling," it might frustrate a writer who can't diagnose the problem himself.
"Telling," at least in the form of narrative summary, is actually an important tool in a writer's toolbox. You can't "show" absolutely everything or you'll have a mind-numbingly detailed and sluggish story. The trick is to know when to summarize to move the story quickly and when to slow down and give detail. A reviewer going over a chapter of mine recently told me to skip some detail to speed up the action in one section--because of the nature of the scene, he wanted more tell and less show. (I'm still wavering as to whether I think this is good advice in this instance or not.)
To some degree, it's a matter of style. It's typical in action stories to give a play-by-play of action sequences without a lot of exacting detail because detail slows down action. I usually write action without lots of detail, but it works only if the action scenes are short and tightly "choreographed," in the sense that every described motion is important to the outcome. I've read professional writers who advise cutting down on detail during action, and I've read others who encourage ramping up the amount of detail (as you've suggested here). Neither is necessarily right or wrong. It depends partly on the goal of the story.
It may be worth noting, too, that narrative summary used to be much more acceptable in a novel than it is now. Nineteenth-century novels are usually full of it. Of course, the good nineteenth-century novelists were also much better stylists than most modern authors and could therefore get away with it. Most of today's novelists write like newspapermen, so their narrative summaries are as dry as newspaper articles.
176600
Ah, that's why in the previous tip-post, the one about prose, I mention the amount of detail needed depending on a situation. Aciont is usually less, emotion and devellopement more, and of course, there's always a time to move on!
An overuse of prose is one of the traits of writing that IRKS me quite. When I write, I use words out of their original context. It's subtle yet detailed, and that is how I like it.
There's a fine line between showing well and showing too much, so much that the story doesn't progress. If there's too much telling, it feels like a literary rice cake; if there's too much telling it's like a thick chocolate cake that just kindof gums up everything and it's hard to get through.
But yes. There always needs to be show, not tell.
183579
I helped someone!