What does it mean to 'Show Don't Tell'?

If you're a writer (and honestly, even if you aren't), chances are you've heard the age-old adage, 'show, don't tell'. There's a reason this seems to be the go-to advice of all time- and that's because nobody wants to sit through a novel that reads like a manual (looking at you Dune). 'Show, don't tell' is generally accepted as the quintessential writing advice, but what exactly does it mean? How do you know when you're telling and no longer showing? Is it okay to tell sometimes? I'm glad you asked because that's exactly what I'll be discussing in this post.

Simply put, 'show, don't tell' exists as a shorthand to stop writers from falling into the trap of a boring, monotonous tempo that drains all life out of the story. Telling takes all the joy out of reading and reduces a story to a list of sequential events rather than the all-consuming, life-giving experience that it should be. What are some devices and techniques we writers can use to facilitate this 'showing'?

What is 'Telling?'

'Telling' is simply relaying information. It's a step-by-step rendition of all the events in a scene as they occur(ed). The reader will know everything that happened but nobody could accuse them of enjoying how they learned it. It removes all the flair and the art from the storytelling. An example of 'telling' is:

Mary went to the park. There she sat on the bench at the west-end corner and ate her strawberry ice cream while she waited for Johnny. Johnny arrived ten minutes later carrying the morning newspaper and his cellphone. He greeted Mary before sitting down next to her and they were both quiet for a few minutes. He wondered if he should risk trying to hold her hand after the last time, and decided against it. She was too unpredictable. After ten minutes of silence, she reached for his hand.

Why is this 'telling'?

'Telling' is passive. It almost makes the reader feel like they are reading a laundry list. It paints a picture, so the reader knows exactly what is happening, but it's also quite detached. As a result, it's easy for the reader to feel unconnected to the story and not quite care as much as they would if the information was relayed more actively.

What is 'Showing?'

'Showing' is narrative writing as it was meant to be. It's the writer taking the reader for an exciting ride, using all the tools available to them. It's being a word magician, able to create an immersive world within which the story takes place. An example of 'showing' is:

Mika rubbed her hands together before shoving them in her pockets. She let out a sigh and watched the breath as it left her body. She shivered and walked on. Of all days for that stupid car to not start, she thought with an acute annoyance. That's the last time I do anything nice for my stupid brother!

Why is this 'showing'?

'Showing' is active. It makes the reader inhabit the character. It often gives us information in a live, yet indirect way. For example, we know that it's very cold, yet we weren't told that directly. But Mika is shivering, and that happens when someone is cold. So there is space for us to interpret the information, and to actively engage with it.

How does Showing compare to Telling?

A good way to think of 'showing' is allowing the reader to inhibit the character or to be an actor in the play. 'Telling', in contrast, is making the reader an audience member watching the play.

'Showing' assumes the reader is smart enough to fill in the gaps, and because the reader has to participate in understanding the story by filling in those gaps- they are more engaged. In contrast, 'telling' implies the reader needs to be spoon-fed every detail. As a result, the reader's mind can (and usually does) easily start to wonder.

To demonstrate, let's look at the same scene told differently.

You could write it like this:

Tony boarded the 6 pm train at Penn Station, sitting through one stop before getting off in Newark. The train was five minutes late, he assumed due to all the people from New Jersey. Tony resented having to leave New York, even for one evening. He hoped the lady would be waiting for him at Newark Station.

You could also write it like this:

Tony looked at his watch and rolled his eyes, the train was already five minutes late to leave. It was as if people didn't know how to use the subway. He looked around. It's probably all the people from New Jersey. He resented having to leave New York, even for one evening. At this rate, he'd only arrive at 6:21 pm. That lady better be waiting for me at the Newark station.

In the example above, the two passages give the reader the same information, but one is more interesting than the other. The first passage is passive and demonstrates what we call 'telling'. It tells us exactly what is happening but has a way of feeling detached (perhaps even clinical), like the story is happening over there.

The second passage is active and demonstrates what we call 'showing'. It feels to the reader that the story is happening here and now. It makes the reader curious about Tony. Why does he dislike people from New Jersey? Why is he irritable? Why is he going to Newark? Who is the lady waiting for him in Newark? All these questions result in the same thing, the reader keeps reading in hopes of finding the answers. The reader gets hooked.

Is it ever a good idea to 'Tell'?'

All of this talk of 'show, don't tell' can sometimes lead writers to think they must 'show, never tell', but this is simply not true. 'Telling' or writing in a more passive voice can be a great tool for storytelling. It's the most natural way to tell a story (because most stories are of events that have already happened) and as a result, is the default for most writers. Thus, developing the skill of 'showing' is in a sense an upgrade to the writing technique. It's useful for adding urgency and excitement to a scene, but not all scenes need that. In fact, for some scenes, an overly active voice would detract from the essence of the message being conveyed.

Think of a situation where the writer wants to convey just how bored the character is- writing an active scene would defeat the purpose. In such a case, 'telling' is the only option- but you can tell better. Let's look at an example:

Passive: Lina was bored sitting on the deck. There wasn't a single thing to do. She picked up the bright green tennis ball and threw it in the air before she caught it, feeling how firm and fluffy it was. She threw it again, this time with her left hand before she caught it with her right. She sighed and threw it up in the air again.

Telling: I can tell the character is bored and I also feel bored.

Passive: Lina looked around her on the deck, failing to find anything exciting to do. Picking up the bright green tennis ball, she threw it in the air before catching it, feeling how firm and fluffy it was. She threw it again, this time with her left hand before catching it with her right. Sighing, she threw it up again.

Telling better: I can tell the character is bored, but I am not bored.

The differences here may be subtle, but over the course of an entire manuscript, they compound to make a net positive or negative impact. Thus, the story will crystalize into either an excitedly engaging or a deadly boring reader experience.

Remember: It's never okay to bore the reader.

Conclusion

In summary, 'showing' is passive and thus dull in comparison to 'telling' which is active. Showing puts the reader in the middle of the action while telling dictates it to them. Wherever possible, a writer should opt to 'show' and not 'tell. That said, 'telling' is not synonymous with bad writing. There are instances when a more passive tone is better suited for a particular passage. Good writing is as much about discernment as it is all the technical components.

All a writer has to do is keep the reader hooked enough to get to the next page, then the next, all the way until the end. This is no easy feat, so devices like the one I just illustrated are important for keeping the writing interesting and exciting. Good writing is also about developing a personal style that suits you. Some authors are naturally more passive while others are more active. Often the art is in how these are blended together to produce the desired outcome.

Take advice and experiment, but in the end, the most important thing is to make sure your voice is preserved, and that your writing sounds like you. The rest is just details.

Happy writing,

Nonjabulo