I do think that most writers will agree that it's a matter of finding the right balance between showing and telling. It's not as simple as ideally only doing one or the other.
Don't short change this answer, guys. His first example is probably the BEST and most coherent, easily detectable demonstration of mixing showing and telling together that I have ever seen.
I would have to respectfully disagree. I think you're best served by reading as much contemporary science fiction as you can. The genre has moved on. Cheers, Rob
But it hasn't just evolved in a vacuum. People still build on what other writers have done before them. Its still rare, even in contemporary scifi, to find an author free from the influece of Wells and Asimov, for instance. So while you should be aware of what is going on in the genre now, knowing what came before and how that is still being used today is never a bad thing.
that was what was asked for and what i supplied, robert, so how can you disagree? and what aaron says is true... to become a good writer, one must not read only the current writers' works, but also read and study the works of the finest writers of all ages, to learn what it's possible to do with words, when one has the highest level of skills and talent... of course you have to then be aware of what people of your own time are buying and reading, but to be able to write well enough to succeed as a writer, you should study what came before, as well...
I have to agree with maia here on this. The creative writing classes I took did help me immensely with knowing the difference between showing and telling. My first story that I did for my class was so full of "This is telling, try showing it" that I almost gave up. I didn't though and I learned how to change the telling to showing. Almost all authors will fall into telling from time to time. You will know these parts as the slower, slightly more boring parts of the book. But then, for pacing, sometimes authors use them on purpose, but most times they could either be cut out completely or changed to showing to give it more excitement. Third Person POV is the most apt to falling victim to telling. It's much easier to start telling the reader what's going on when going with this POV. First person POV makes it a little harder, though still can fall into the trap of telling. An example of telling: We sat around the table discussing what to do next. That is a very simple sentence, and while it could work if you were trying to hurry into the next scene, you could also cut it, or expand it into showing them sitting around the table discussing what to do next. Showing: Bob squirmed in his chair, "We just don't know what's out there. We can't go running off half cocked into something dangerous." "But we can't sit here and starve to death. We have to go out eventually," Jim argued. "We need better weapons before we go anywhere," Nina said. "Fine. Let's start looking around to see what can be used to protect ourselves." Bob shoved back from the table and headed out of the break room. Now if you can see I showed their conversation of what to do next, rather than telling it as the first sentence did. Bear in mind this was from the seat of my pants and not edited to perfection... But just a thrown together example. You don't always have to "show" everything in a scene. There are some times when a simple "telling" sentence can work to get a point across and move the story along to get to a more interesting place to be "showing." Personally, I avoid telling as much as possible. If I don't want to show it, I probably should just cut it, at least that what I learned from my professor. That works great in shorter stories, but sometimes in a longer piece of work a short telling paragraph can get the reader to where they need to be to start the next scene of showing, or sometimes it's just the writers laziness or need for less wordage that motivates a telling part. I've read enough stories with bits of telling in them. I usually notice them, since I'm a writer, but I can usually forgive them when they only happy every now and then in a story. If the entire story is telling I won't read it. I have recently come across a story that was almost purely showing. John Dies At The End only had a sentence or two of telling throughout the entire 100k+ word story. I read it in three days of almost non-stop reading. It sucked me into the world and gave me nightmares! It was a really good book in my opinion for a sci-fi book.
Also, the creative writing course doesn't replace reading lots of writing by the best writers. It merely provides a framework for studying those writings.
true, cog, but in saying that i was referring only to the 'show, don't tell' question, as in how to learn that particular aspect of writing good fiction...
I saw 'show, don't tell' being written on a blackboard of our yr 6 class (11/12-year-old kids), yet in reception a few doors down a lesson on 'show and tell' was underway. There's an incling for a study here on just how much the educational system play in screwing up kids minds over this issue. It annoys me because show and tell in a classroom (age 4/5) is no different to show and tell in writing. In the classroom, you're asked to bring a teddy along one week, point out (show )it's torn stomach, ripped ear, missing eye, (also showing how well-loved it really is) then we tell them a little bit a bout it: this is my favourite teddy because.... In writing, we'd simply write (show) 'stuffing fled its ripped ear, cotton dangled from its eyesocket' how 'the boy pulled it close to his chest eveytime another kid got close to it), then we'd tell the reader a little bit about it: James had many teddies, but this was his most favourite of all... If they're teaching creative writing, I think teachers should atleast take a creative writing course. Might cross out a few of these bloomin hiccups for those authors coming into the craft.
Good teaching approaches the same ideas from multiple directions. Some people learn best from comparison lists, others learn better by reading examples and drawing their conclusions from a few general guidelines. Some learn better from listening aloud, others by seeing it in text, still others from mapping it out as a diagram. A good teacher will try to present the same material in several ways, especially key concepts like balancing showing and telling.
I am usually very shy when it comes to my writing. I want to show others my work to get critiqued but I am nervous that they will destroy my confidence in my novel. Like how I want to post it here but I am terrified to do it. What do you guys do?
I'd suggest starting with writing that is less important to you than your novel. That's a bit safer anyway - you don't want to essentially publish parts of a novel that you might be hoping to get published someday; publishers don't like that. Try vignettes, short stories, related to your novel or totally unrelated. And I'd also suggest _assuming_ that people will have large, upsetting criticisms. If you haven't had a lot of criticism on your writing, that's pretty much inevitable, because essentially no one starts out really good, and essentially no one gets _to_ good without criticism from others. People who are geniuses without practice are vanishingly rare. ("Even Mozart put in ten thousand hours.") So critiques on your writing, no matter how negative they might be, do not tell you whether you can be a good writer. They just give you a partial map of the path toward being a good writer. I'd say, write a scene, polish it to a reasonable but not obsessive level, and put it up for review. (After you do a couple of reviews of others' work, if you haven't yet.) ChickenFreak
Being terrified of other's opinion or criticism won't get you anywhere. You need to know what can be improved and what doesn't need to be improved. That helps you identify your strong and weak points. Just don't post whatever you've jolted down in your attempt for a first draft, polish and try to figure out the mistakes you can see then let other's see. It's often different how we look at our own work and how others look at it, so get yourself some confidence and show it. What's the worst that can happen? Finding your weaknesses that is. ;]
What Pheonix Hikari said is right on target. In the end, if you hope to be successful in publishing/as a writer, you're going to have to develop a thick skin. Even if you write an excellent novel, there are still those who won't like it. You'll get less than glowing reviews. It won't make you happy, but it's part of the business. Even during the process of getting published, submitting your work--rejections are common. Somebody read it, and said it's not right for us. Also, remember that you cannot please everybody. If you put your work up for review/crit--on the forum here for example, consider what others have to say. If there is a trend where multiple readers are commenting on the same concern (or strong point), then there may be something to it. But, in the end, it's your work and it'll be your name behind it. Even with an editor, while the publisher is paying for the rights to publish your novel, you don't have to agree with every change suggested--but often what an experienced editor suggests will make the story better. Good luck.
When you post here, be sure to keep it in perspective: our advice might be worth listening to sometimes, but truth be told, we're a bunch of nobodies on a writing site. I speak for myself, of course; I'm sure there are people here whose work has been published and know the trade. But there are many of us who don't really know what we're doing or are writing just for fun. Our opinions are just opinions, and almost invariably, critics are going to disagree. One will love your characters and hate your story, the other will hate your story and love your characters. Criticism is important, but it isn't everything. If you're new at receiving critiques, it's good to post something you feel kind of neutral or lousy about, as Chickenfreak suggests. That way, if people rip it to shreds, you won't be inclined to care all that much. It might also be a good idea to tell people in a little prelude paragraph that you're new to receiving critiques. That way, people might be more helpful in explaining their criticisms because they won't just assume you know what they mean. They'll also hopefully be a bit nicer and more forthcoming with positive suggestions. Good luck, but don't freak out. Nothing we say can hurt you. I'm a twenty-year-old with a laptop who's never been published in her life and probably never will be. So what if I don't like your story?
So, basically, they'll all agree? Might wanna correct that. But, yes, all these others said the truth. All true. Don't be afraid. What we say doesn't matter. It's what you think.
I kinda agree with this. It's the worst idea ever to post it online for everyone to chop to bits. If you want advice and critique, get it from an agent or publisher. You'll get plenty. Or at least get it from someone you know has the same "taste" as you.
For me my writing is there to be read and to entertain. So, I post it happilly and take the positive with the negative. A publisher or agent won't give me the fun feedback or actually in the early stages useful feedback. Feedback turned one of my character's black (it actually made a lot of sense) and last night helped me decide on whether not to cut a chapter. A publisher is unlikely to ask me how a character is doing or tell me off for calling him wimpy, ugly and pathetic (unless it was going to hurt sales). That is when my stories have the life it feels they were meant to have- when I cannot convince anyone that has read it my MC of my first novel is butt ugly. One advantage of putting it online is learning to deal with critics and harsh criticism BEFORE your book goes into print. These days with internet interaction a number of authors have got themselves into stupid situations arguing with their reviewers. Whereas letting online people at my work I now know to smile and say thank you even when they are ranting about my characters sexual orientation and foaming at the mouth. Also i tend to laugh at them. I know with a review that has me scratching my head to shout at hubby for a bit about it instead. I also know agents/publishers are wrong about the lack of market for it as I am building that market. Agents/publishers often give just opinions and learning to take them, work out what to accept and when to say stuff it (more politely) is useful. Also putting my work out there has actually gained some attention from publishers and editors.
I have this problem too which is why I started writing blogs. I was amazed with the praise I got back which is, in effect, boosting my confidence. I also got my boyfriend to read a few chapters of the novel (he doesn't have a long enough attention span to read it all) and he will tell me honestly how he feels about it. But be careful who you show your novel to.
Orson Scott Card to the rescue. "Writers have to simultaneously believe the following two things: 1. The story I am now working on is the greatest work of genius ever written in English. 2. The story I am now working on is worthless drivel. It's best if you believe both these things simultaneously, so that you can call on Belief 1 when you're deciding whether to mail the story out, Belief 2 when going over the story to revise it, Belief 1 when choosing which market to submit it to, Belief 2 when the story is rejected (of course, I expected to get this back), and Belief 1 again when you put it back in an envelope and mail it again to the next-best market. Of course, believing two contradictory facts at the same time is sometimes referred to as madness - but that, too can be an asset to a writer." -How to Write Science Fiction and Fantasy, page 109, Writer's Digest Books, Cincinnati, 1990
