I've looked at some other peoples works (here and around the inter-web) and have scanned the constructive critiques that help the writer improve their faults. A lot of times, people are told that simply, their narrative relies too heavily on telling, and not showing. So my question is "Can you effectively use both to form a story?" obviously using showing much more. As I was re-re-re-drafting my short story, I noticed my earlier draft being guilty of too much telling, and not nearly enough showing. Now that I've redrafted it four or five times in total, I show what happens to characters as they react physically and mentally to events/actions/settings, and also show how they react physically and mentally in relation to other characters and their actions and thoughts. But I've found that I still use some telling narrative. Now, should I change that? and have it all be shown to the reader? Also I assume it's a good thing that when I try to actively show rather than tell, that my short stories are much longer and descriptive. that's a good thing right? I'm still working on what amount of showing is right for the story. as I think some re-drafted portions get a little long winded, although they have their purposes, if they didn't I prollly would not have written them. Should I then somehow streamline them into much more meaningful showing than a long-winded form of the same events?