Direct and Indirect correlate with Showing and Telling

The is a followup to my previous entry about direct and indirect interior monologue. I just made this connection this morning, haven't worked out all the details yet, and I'm not sure how closely they correlate. Exactly the same? Somewhat close? Not sure, so I'll explore it a bit.

It will help to keep in mind that telling is also known as Narrative Summary, because it takes place in narration and there are no details, everything is summarized.

Also, I haven't really looked at direct and indirect dialogue yet. Real quick:

Direct (directly reported) dialogue is exactly what the person said, put in quotation marks, like this—"Well I'm not so sure she would do anything like that... " It's usually in present tense because that's the way we talk, unless we're referring to something that happened previously.

Indirect dialogue is a narrative summary of what a person said, told by the narrator. It will usually be in past tense rather than present. Like this—He told me he doubted she would do any such thing. It could also be He said he doubted she would do such a thing. Even though it includes the words he said, it isn't a dialogue tag, because the phrase following is not the exact words of the speaker—it's summarized and presented in past tense by the narrator. It could also be He indicated some doubt that she would behave in such a fashion.

How about direct and indirect action? That's one I haven't thought about or heard about before (that I can remember). Let me try it and see...

Direct action: The car slammed sideways into the big truck and bounced off, careening across 2 lanes and smashing itself over the curb and onto the sidewalk, screeching and squealing and spewing smoke and broken pieces of itself all the way.

Is there an indirect way to do it? Of course there is. It's what's known as Telling: The car hit the side of the truck, veered across 2 lanes of traffic and ended up on the sidewalk.

Honestly I could have developed the Showing version more, added a few sentences to make it feel more immediate. Ideally that's how true showing would be done. I might develop in in situ in a bit.

Yeah, it looks to me like, unless I'm missing something, direct and indirect equate exactly with showing and telling. At least so far. The big question though is, does it work with direct and indirect thoughts?

Well, let me try it and see.

Direct: What the hell do you think you're doing? You're not getting away with that!

Indirect: What the hell did he think he was doing? I wasn't about to let him get away with that!

Well yeah, it does equate, considering in the 1st example you're showing the reader exactly what the character is thinking, and in the 2nd you're reporting it to them (telling them what he thought) through the narrator.

Ok yeah—at this point I'm tentatively convinced. Direct and Indirect equates perfectly with Showing and Telling.

Related thought—while it's true that indirect action (telling) is done in narration, so is direct action. Who else would be relating it but the narrator? With dialogue and thought it's different, because there's a speaker or a thinker who relates the words if it's done directly (shown). But with action there's no speaker except the narrator to relate it.

Ok so, if telling is known as narrative summary, and action is also shown by the narrator, what would be an analogous name for it? Narrative demonstration? Narrative action? I don't know. Maybe I'll come up with something in a bit.