(Writing Talk is a type of short-form article centered around conversations about various aspects of writing/authorship. These aren’t usually long reads, but I think it’s fun to jot down some of my thoughts about the writing process as someone who loves the art of it all.)
I’ve talked before on this blog about how I generally don’t really put much stock in the concept of writing advice. Or, more specifically, the concept of unassailable writing advice. This nebulous idea that there are certain facts or truths with regards to the writing process that must be obeyed at every turn, and are always the correct course of action every writer needs to follow.
There’s obviously nuance here. Spelling is something that is pretty objective, aside from regional spelling differences. Sentences should end with a punctuation mark. Words should flow in an order that makes sense. The first letter in a sentence should be capitalized. That sort of stuff.
(Even some of the rules I listed above are ignored by certain authors, so it really is a creative medium with limitless possibilities.)
But other sorts of broader writing advice? That’s where I start feeling a little less positive. I don’t want to say people can’t share tips about writing. Honestly, that’s part of what these articles right here are! It’s when people try to position their subjective advice as objective truth that I start to get a little bit annoyed. Aside from some of those rules I mentioned earlier (which are more just about grammar and spelling and such), writing is a form of expression that you really can’t get wrong.
For example, one piece of advice that is thrown around a lot is “show, don’t tell“. I do not like this piece of advice at all.
Actually, upon reflection, I don’t think I like how extreme people have become with this advice.
In theory, the idea of “show, don’t tell” makes sense. It can get boring when a story just talks over and over and over again about something that could’ve been shown instead. I can absolutely vibe with that interpretation of the advice.
If you were watching a movie, would you rather there be a scene where a character talks about how beautiful a waterfall is, or a scene where we get to see the actual waterfall? Similarly, would you rather have a scene where the narrator guides us through an action scene from a clinical, detached perspective, or would you rather read the action scene beat-by-beat like you’re existing right there in the moment?
The answer is pretty clear. It’s more exciting to be shown something in a story than to just be told about it. In a visual medium, this manifests as being able to actually see the action play out on the screen, rather than just hearing about it. In a book, obviously everything is just words on a page. That being said, a talented author will be able to craft a story wherein the words on the page are vivid enough that the reader still feels as if they are being shown something cool and not just told about it.
The issue, as I alluded to earlier, is the extreme lengths to which some people will take this advice. It isn’t uncommon for people to hear “show, don’t tell” and think that what it actually means is “remove all dialogue and exposition from your story“.
I have seen and read some perfectly great stories before, that I am later completely stunned to find people take umbrage with over areas that I had no qualms with at all. Very frequently, this relates to dialogue and exposition. I tend to read pretty chunky Fantasy and Sci-Fi novels, getting super invested in those worlds. And yet, I’ll pop online to see what other people thought about it, and find criticism after criticism about being too wordy, too talky, or not doing enough “show, don’t tell“.
In the same vein as the famous line from The Princess Bride, people keep using the phrase “show, don’t tell“, but I don’t think it means what they think it means.
People look at a scene that has a lot of dialogue, and think that the story is failing the core principles of “show, don’t tell“. People read the first few chapters of a big novel that sets up the worldbuilding and lore of the universe, and think that it’s violating the key tenets of “show, don’t tell“. The reality the entire time is that people have mutated what is, in theory, a solid-enough principle of writing, and morphed it into some sort of monster that doesn’t even remotely resemble the form it is supposed to have.
The problem has reached such a systemic level among writers (and sometimes, more commonly, among armchair critics), that I think it’s beyond salvaging. Instead of trying to patiently sit down with each and every person who holds this erroneous belief, I think we just need to start back from square one. We need to return to the beginning, and re-align our focus on a new phrasing for this same sort of writing idea.
That new phrasing is “show AND tell“.
It really boils down to a simple truth. People don’t like to be talked at ad nauseum without reprieve, and people want to see cool stuff. At the same time, dialogue and exposition exist for a reason, and they shouldn’t be shunned. Sometimes, as a writer, there are moments where you have to tell, and moments where you should opt to show. The important thing is finding that balance, and knowing when to use both sides of the coin…and knowing that you should be using both sides of the coin.
Sometimes (especially in sci-fi and fantasy stories) you simply need to spend time telling your audience about the world and how it works. You can toss in a few specific examples of showing them how it works too, but if your world and its characters are dense enough, some telling should not only be expected, but may be required. Otherwise, you run the risk of your audience feeling disconnected from your world and cast because they haven’t learned enough about them to care yet.
I’ve seen a concerningly growing trend online of stories releasing in states that can only be described as “unfinished“. The skeleton of a story is there, but some gaps remain. However, many of these gaps remain due to a seeming obsession with “show, don’t tell“, in such a way that the creator simply opted to not tell the important parts of their story to their audience. But then, those extra little details get added in retroactively through YouTube comments, Twitter posts, or side snippets, like that somehow fixes the issue.
I don’t want to go too far down this rabbit trail, but my point is that a story should stand on its own (though supplemental material is cool, it should never be more than a bonus), and so many stories seem to fail to grasp this due to self-inflicted adherence of “show, don’t tell” even when it is detrimental.
There are other genres that benefit from a healthy dose of telling, of course. Mysteries are a big one. So many mystery stories end with either the revealed killer delving deep into their motive, or the clever detective spelling out how the crime was committed. In fact, it’s almost a little weird how accepted the concept of telling is within this genre, even when the concept faces such ridicule and scorn in other genres.
Maybe it’s an overcorrect caused by semi-justified criticism. For example, nobody likes those “as you already are aware of, the blah-blah-blah” moments in stories where Character A explains something to Character B that they should have no logical reason to, because Character B already knows the information. These moments exist solely for the benefit of the audience, but it’s such an aggressively clunky way of writing that it’s almost embarrassing. People have a right to call out these moments.
That being said, the solution to these types of moments does not involve swinging the pendulum so hard in the other direction that we completely abandon the telling aspect of storytelling. It’s good to avoid cliches and moments of questionable writing (having a character directly spell out a story’s moral is another legitimate criticism), but it’s also good to acknowledge how stories can benefit from a “show AND tell” philosophy.
At least, that’s what I believe!
Keep on writing, friends!
The Contrarian Corner 