Yes, it's another 'show, don't tell' debate discussion. (Title is supposed to say, examples.) Why? Because the more I discuss it, the better I get at doing it. And, because I want to specifically address the misconceptions as I see them about what the concept is. Also, it's an off-topic discussion in the Secret to Length thread and I don't want to keep hijacking that thread. I don't claim to be an expert, certainly everyone's opinion on a topic like this should be considered. This is my take and some explanations of show, don't tell contradict my POV. I see again and again people thinking showing just means a better description of what is going on in the scene. It's a natural assumption, and I think a natural step along the road to better writing. But the way I see the issue, it's not exactly what show, don't tell is about. I can see why people get the wrong idea. When I look at a lot of the writing advice blogs on the subject, your find overkill examples filled them with so much showing the forest gets lost in the trees. Take this example: Instead of illustrating the concept, Jerz, the blogger, gets carried away with 'showing' an elaborate story that wasn't in the 'telling' sentence. No wonder people don't understand the concept when the example is so cluttered with showing it doesn't convey the point. Let's try it again.[Telling] Winning is important to me. It doesn’t matter to me what I do, so long as I win. There is one main point to be conveyed, the guy wants to win at any cost. The 'showing' example was all about bragging and an inflated ego. That's not even the same thing.[Showing] I kissed the trophy then held it high over my head to the cheers of the crowd. If they didn't see me cheat, that was their problem. There's no need for elaborate descriptions or introspection. Think instead what symbolizes winning at any cost? Here's one of Grammar Girl's examples: In that example, it's longer and more elaborate. It also enriches the writing. I think it's a good example of showing, not telling. But it might be distracting to the author trying to learn the concept. If you just wanted to show the original telling sentence you have two concepts going on, Mr Bobweave's weight and one trait, ungrateful. Mr. Bobweave heaved himself out of the chair and cursed that dreadful girl who was late again with his coffee. The example Grammar Girl gives elaborates the showing and is much more interesting than just the bare minimum 'fat and ungrateful' symbolism. Just don't let, "As his feet spread under his apple-like frame and his arthritic knees popped and cracked in objection," distract you from the point. Here's another example I think misses the point altogether: Most people can easily see that passage is all telling. Instead of illustrating showing, the blogger, Joe Bunting, takes the 'describe it more fully approach': It continues, that's only half the example. It's awful. No wonder when people see examples like that they come to believe showing is no more than filling out the details. I don't like his example. I see filling out the details in the story as something different from show, don't tell. It overlaps, certainly. Many of the filled-out details will be showing. And filling out the details is an important part of writing an interesting story. But the concept of showing is to let the reader experience the story rather than hearing the story. It's not necessarily filling in more details. Grammar Girl's examples in this case are good ones, the other two bloggers, not so much.