Experiences Illustrated

Much of the work of a writer is in describing people, things, actions. We are scolded again and again “show don't tell” but to a lot of writers that statement makes about as much sense as a blind painter. Telling stories is what we do. Movie producers show a story, we put words on a page. I think the meaning might be more clear if we say, “don't tell, lead.”

Recently I took part in a creative writing course and this question came up. The professor asked if anyone could tell her what “show don't tell” meant. The class was stumped. None of my classmates would offer an explanation of the concept. I tentatively raised my hand, not one to usually take the center of attention willingly. My answer? Saying “the girl cried” is telling and saying “tears rolled down her face as her body shook in pitiful sobs” is showing.

It's all in the description. Technically both are “telling.” In the first case we tell the reader in simple terms that the girl cried. In the second case we tell the reader what the scene looked like, they can figure out from the description that she was crying. Thus we lead the reader into making conclusions and we “show” them the girl crying. The real problem then with understanding “show don't tell” is teachers, professors, agents, and editors, not taking their own advice. “Show don't tell” is telling us not showing us.

Readers are an intelligent and imaginative lot. They don't need to be spoon feed the obvious. If we describe the scene well, they can figure out what is going on for themselves. That's part of the joy of reading. Between scene description and dialog the reader should have everything they need to deduce plot. You should not need to tell the reader that Simon Legree is a cruel and evil man, describing his mannerisms, his actions, even his dialog should convince the reader he's a scoundrel.

Another point that generally gets the generic “show don't tell” admonition are info dumps. Okay you've done it, don't try to deny it. You've got a ton of info you want to convey in a short time so you go into a multi-paragraph long summation. Maybe you try to hid it in dialog, but it still comes across as a lecture. You are telling, not leading. That is lazy writing and we're all guilty of it. The craft of a writer is to describe the characters and scene, transcribe the dialog, report the actions, and let the story tell itself.

When we do it right we are no longer mere storytellers, we are reporters of fictional events that, as Hemingway said, are more real than real. How we describe things will naturally lead the reader to make conclusions, judgments, and the all important inferences needed to convey plot. Much of this comes down to trust, we aren't sure the reader will get it unless we spell it out. Either we underestimate our reader's intelligence, or we are unsure of our own skill. Trust the reader, and trust yourself. Another word of wisdom from Hemingway, what we leave out is as important as what we put in.

When I make my first edit of the first draft I look at everything and wonder, how can I give that to the reader without saying it. Instead of “he said, suspiciously.” How about “he said, raising an eyebrow.” That not only conveys the idea, but also adds to the character's personality. It's those little things that really make a story sing with the angels and not drown with the fishes. Forget “show don't tell.” Lead your reader into your world and let them experience it for themselves.

max

The burning issues of modern literature

or, Wake up and smell the kerosene.

In this day of multi-media, internet, mind-numbing reality shows, facebook, twitter, and always connected smart phones, where is the simple, lowly book in our lives? Our minds are inundated by thirty-second blurbs and 140 character text messages. Our lives, our world, are reduced to a twitter feed or a headline. Even blogs begin to seem long and wordy. Our attention span is shorter that our index finger as we click through to the next splashy come-on.

Over half a century ago, Ray Bradbury, in Fahrenheit 451, warned of a world where sensory overload equated to entertainment and thoughtful reason to sedition. He described our twenty-first century world with startling foresight and clarity. In our modern media, flash outweighs substance even in so-called journalism, and literature is reduced to so much verbal mind candy. Young writers are hammered to follow commercial formula—powerful first sentence and first chapter, action right up front (no time to build into it), the next Harry Potter or Twilight clone—or their works are deemed unmarketable.

Pop-literature—the only thing most agents will represent or editors will look at—is reduced, like prime-time television programs have been for years, to follow-the-leader cloning. One story, one concept, hits big and there are a hundred more like it. Plot and substance are irrelevant, as it seems sometimes writing skill as well, and only concept and marketing matter. That's why that first chapter is all important, no one reads the entire book before they buy it. Marketers only need to hook the buyer and get them past the point of sale.

The advice of so many agents who love to loll about online and blog about how important and literary they are, often follows the very pattern Bradbury describes to explain the decline of civilization through the dumbing-down of the population. To follow their advice is to rip the heart and soul from literature and produce nice Stepford-novels. I always find it telling that if their own rants and raves about why they reject manuscripts is applied to most literary classics they would have never been published. I can see it now...

Dickens: “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way. . .”

Agent: “This first sentence just goes on and on. You need to break that up or just drop it all together. It's a lot telling and not showing, and I'm not really sure what you are telling me. You should rewrite this whole first part. How about starting out with some action, maybe part of that guillotine scene from later on, sort of a precursor, then you could get into this part in the second chapter.”

The fall of our modern media into attention-deficit-friendly format is as much the fault of the buying public as the media moguls, agents, and publishers. Everyone wants a quick fix, an instant answer, some mindless entertainment. In our capitalistic, consumer driven society suppliers simply want a quick sell. The agents are right when they berate writers for our indignant cries in defense of our art. They want something they can market. We can't blame them. Publishing is a business.

Our modern culture reminds me of the character of Joseph II in Amadeus and his infamous quote to the young Mozart. “My dear young man, don't take it too hard. Your work is ingenious. It's quality work. And there are simply too many notes, that's all. Just cut a few and it will be perfect.”

So what's a writer to do? If we want our work to be published and read, do we write to the new standards and write mush? It amazes me how many best selling books I've read that were crap. No other way to say it. Or how many wonderful works I've read that never sold very well or couldn't even get in the door. If Mozart had wanted to be commercial, he could have cut a few notes. He didn't. He died a pauper and his work will live forever.

Are our only choices selling out to be commercial or else dying in obscurity? NO! There are still great writers out there selling great books and there are still people who want to read them. Like the book people in Fahrenheit 451, we are the keepers of literature—the writers and the readers. We are those who chose not to mindlessly follow the multi-media, mind-numbing stream of modern entertainment. We chose to think and read and write. Literature will live as long as we keep it alive.

Write your literary fiction, your poetry, your experimental prose. Publish it however you can—small press, e-press, or your own copy machine. Keep banging on the door of big media, but don't expect a lot of interest. Remember, most of the great authors were also bludgeoned by editors and publishers in their day. They held their ground, stayed true to their muse, and some only became well known after many many years of small first printings and a slow building of support from readers.

That brings me to my final point, readers. As I said, publishers print what sells. If we as readers want great books, we have to buy great books. If there is an author you like, buy their books, tell friends to buy their books, give books as gifts, write the publisher and tell them you want more good books. Don't just pick up the newest best selling, front-counter-display book. Be discriminating. Look for great literature, new authors, established authors you admire. If you buy the crap that grabs you on the first page and loses you by the second chapter, then they will keep printing it.