Four Situations When We Should Tell Rather than Show
By Marcy Kennedy (@MarcyKennedy)
Blasphemy! After my previous post where I gave four techniques to help you show rather than tell, how dare I suggest we should sometimes tell rather than show?! Won’t that lead to weak, flat writing.
I’m not recanting on what I wrote last week. When you come across one of the four ways that suggest you’re telling rather than showing, you should rewrite.
But times do exist when it’s better to tell than to show. In 2011, I had the privilege of being mentored by Randy Ingermanson (of Snowflake Method and Advanced Writing E-Zine fame) at a conference. One of the things I remember best is what he said about showing and telling—it’s all about balance.
In these four situations, telling is actually better than showing.
1) You’re Dealing with an Insignificant Fact
When he needs to decide whether to show or tell, award-winning science fiction writer Robert J. Sawyer asks, “Will it be on the test?” In other words, when you take the time to show something, readers assume it’s important to the story. If you spend two paragraphs showing the snow and ice, later in the story you’d better have someone’s car slide off the road or someone near death from hypothermia. Otherwise, just tell the reader “It was snowing, and ice covered the roads.”
2) During Transitions
Sometimes you just need to get a character from point A to point B without bringing the story to a grinding halt by describing it.
The next morning, Marilyn drove to Bob’s house.
We don’t need to see Marilyn drive to Bob’s house. We just need to know she did. We don’t need you to describe the sunrise or the morning traffic jam in detail to try to get around telling us she went in the morning.
Half an hour later, they arrived at the mountain summit.
If nothing eventful happened on the climb, if it wasn’t essential to the story for us to see them climbing, we don’t need the blow by blow.
Sometimes, narrative is the most efficient, best way to get the job done.
3) When Showing Would Bog Down Your Story or Confuse Your Reader
Sometimes the reader absolutely needs to know a fact that all the characters already know, and creating a scene to show that fact is going to slow down the story and feel forced.
For example, Kim Stanley Robinson’s Red Mars, the first in the series about the colonization of Mars, depends on complex technological and biochemical ideas. Robinson can’t stop and create a scene every time he needs to give the reader a piece of information. The story would be unreasonably long and slow. He also can’t leave it out or the story wouldn’t make sense to readers.
Here’s an example with the telling element in red. Frank is pushing his arm into a special plastic.
[Frank] stopped breathing. He felt the pressure of his molars squeezing together. He poked the tent wall so hard that he pushed out the outermost membrane, which meant that some of his anger would be captured and stored as electricity in the town’s grid. Polyvinylidene diflouride was a special polymer in that respect—carbon atoms were linked to hyrdrogen and flourine atoms in such a way that the resulting substance was even more piezoelectric than quartz. Change one element of the three, however, and everything shifted; substitute chlorine for flourine, for instance, and you had saran wrap.
When you’re telling in a situation like this, make sure you do it in small bites and that you make it interesting.
(4) In Your Opening Sentence
This might sound crazy at first, but look at a lot of the strong first lines from bestselling and award-winning novels. You’ll see what could be considered telling. (Personally I prefer to call it compelling narrative.)
Rivka Meyers knew something was wrong when she bumped into a wall that wasn’t there. – from Transgression by Randy Ingermanson
When I think of my wife, I always think of her head. – from Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn
He had the look of a man who was afraid that tonight would be his last on earth. – from The Forgotten by David Baldacci
Carla knew her parents were about to have a row. – from Winter of the World by Ken Follett
Telling isn’t always bad.
The trick with writing is that we have to learn the rules before we can break them, and when we break them, we have to be sure we’re breaking them because it makes the story better rather than because we want to be rebels, because we’re lazy, or because we think the rules don’t apply to us. The rules do apply to us, lazy writing is crappy writing, and there’s no value in being a rebel just for the sake of it.
What do you think? Am I right about the need to sometimes tell rather than show? Do you have a favorite author who manages to perfectly find the balance?
Image Credit: Via sxc.hu
I hope you’ll check out the newly released mini-books in my Busy Writer’s Guides series–Strong Female Characters and How to Write Faster–both currently available for 99 cents.
I’d love to have you sign up to receive my posts by email. All you need to do is enter your email address below and hit the “Follow” button. You can also join me on my Facebook page.
Feb 18, 2013 @ 23:37:45
There are absolutely times when we need to tell rather than show! One of the most obvious is the synopsis, for those trying to sell to a big publisher. I’m with you on the first lines, too – and I hope it’s a good thing that mine sound pretty similar to some of your examples. 😀
Feb 19, 2013 @ 12:19:47
You explained this perfectly! And you are right, we do need a balance. As I was reading your examples I could think of books where the narration worked and didn’t work and it fit in with what you said. If the scenery is described in excrutiating detail, I want to see why it was important at some point in the book. Usually, those are the parts I skip over. And if the goal is to not have any parts that readers skip over, we have to learn when to show and when to tell. Thanks for another great lesson!
Feb 19, 2013 @ 14:28:10
Great article — great series, Marcy. Thanks for challenging me and bolstering my confidence during my editing process.
Feb 19, 2013 @ 14:55:04
I’m glad I could help 🙂
Feb 19, 2013 @ 14:51:26
I totally agree, Marcy. There ARE times when we have to tell. I just got back from the Writing for the Soul conference in Colorado Springs and I took Steven James (love his writing!) class on the “Six secrets to novel writing that no one ever told you about” and he said (I’m paraphrasing here) that you show something when you want to reveal a change/alter something and you tell when nothing has changed.
He also stressed that “story trumps structure”! Love it.
Thanks for this post.
Feb 19, 2013 @ 14:54:42
His session sounds like it was amazing. And I do agree that story trumps structure. We learn about structure because most of the time, for most stories, the time-tested structure works. Plus, we can’t know when we need to break a rule until we know the rule inside and out.
Feb 19, 2013 @ 16:30:59
Great observations, Marcy. Thanks for articulating this.
Feb 19, 2013 @ 16:57:42
Well put: “In other words, when you take the time to show something, readers assume it’s important to the story.” That explanation’s pithy and easy to remember, so it’s easy to pass on. I find writers are pretty good with transitions and opening sentences. Your numbers 1 and 3 are where problems pop up.
Feb 19, 2013 @ 18:26:42
Ah yes, we must return balance to the Force, I mean writing. Awesome post. Words to remember.
Feb 19, 2013 @ 20:59:34
Maybe learning to balance the Force will help us also balance our writing. That’s my theory and I’m sticking to it 😉
Feb 19, 2013 @ 20:07:04
You know, this is something I’d noticed. Advice on writing likes to tell us “show, don’t tell” ad nauseum, and while that’s generally good advice (like your other post illustrates!), it’s nice to see telling get its little bit of credit.
Feb 19, 2013 @ 20:58:55
Telling is an incredibly useful tool, and you’re right–it doesn’t get enough credit for that. I have a hunch that the reason we so often hear “show, don’t tell” is newer writers tend to learn on telling and do it poorly. Knowing when to tell, and how to do it well, is an acquired skill.
Feb 20, 2013 @ 01:43:46
This post reminds me of another so-called “big No No”… passive voice. Truth is, passive voice and active voice are just different tools in the Writer’s Tool Box. But just as I wouldn’t use a circular saw to hammer nails, I would not use passive (or active) voice for all my writing needs. And I would not always show or always tell.
Feb 20, 2013 @ 03:19:14
Hi Marcy,
Okay, so I knew about the first three points, but never really thought about telling in the opening sentence. Loved it. Tracy 🙂
Feb 20, 2013 @ 15:21:11
Good stuff, Marcy. I love you’re writing posts because they’re calm, methodical, and get right to the point. One of Lee Child’s quotes is that telling isn’t bad, and he’s a master at alternating between show and tell. I use telling to skip things people don’t need to know (like traveling from A to B etc), but I’d never really realized the use of telling in the opening line. Makes a lot of sense now you’ve pointed it out 🙂
Cheers!
Feb 21, 2013 @ 19:16:50
Great points, Marcy. I couldn’t agree more. If we tried to show everything it would bog down the story and who wants to wade through that muck? A nice balance is definitely ideal. I love how you pointed out the opening lines. Nicely done.
Feb 24, 2013 @ 13:52:47
The (quite proper)urge to show rather than tell has produced works far longer than needed. Just as my English book says: “all rules in grammar may be broken provided one is making a valid point”, goes for descriptive prose. If it’s unnecessary, get rid of it.
Feb 24, 2013 @ 14:35:40
Very true. That’s why I wrote the complementary post details when we should tell rather than show.
https://www.marcykennedy.com/four-situations-when-we-should-tell-rather-than-show/