I think this is the mistake I see most often on CHYOA and it's the one that makes me instantly click onto another story. So what is show, don't tell? I've taken the excerpt below from the website, Reedsy. (I can highly recommend Reedsy, it's a wealth of writing knowledge and tips). In his oft-repeated quoted, Anton Chekhov said, “Don’t tell me the moon is shining. Show me the glint of light on broken glass." In short: showing illustrates, while telling merely states. Here’s a quick example: Telling: Michael was terribly afraid of the dark Showing: As his mother switched off the light and left the room, Michael tensed. He huddled under the covers, gripped the sheets, and held his breath as the wind brushed past the curtain. Telling is an easy habit to fall into and can be hard to get out of. And I get it, you've got a great idea for a killer scene and you need to get it written ASAP! So do it! Write that scene while the inspiration is there, and then go back and edit out the parts where you've told and not shown. If you do this enough then you'll find, (like most common errors picked up in editing), that you'll start writing with show and tell. Telling does have it's place, sometimes it's not just unavoidable but actually works better, especially when you need to be short and punchy. But as a rule telling should be used as sparingly as possible. A quick search of the web will bring up a wealth of tips on the topic of Show, don't tell that will explain it far better than I can. Good luck! Dansak
My personal opinion is that the author should show the important staff, but it's perfectly fine to tell about minor, insignificant things that don't matter. Showing every little detail tends to increase the word count and slow down the pacing without adding anything of value to the story.
Actually, a lot of people misunderstand both show and tell as both can be lazy writing. To illustrate: Lazy tell: Todd had honey brown hair and blue-green eyes. Lazy show: Todd ran his fingers through his honey brown hair that he saw with his blue-green eyes. Both of these are examples of lazy writing. Show is great when it is time to show and tell is great when it is time to tell but the real secret to good writing is "Make your words do double duty." The best way to avoid lazy writing is to say more with fewer words. Good writing: Mary saw Todd with his sweet honey brown hair and his eyes, deep as a blue-green pool. In this way, not only does the reader know the color of Todd's hair and eyes but the reader also has some clues about Todd's personality and Mary's attitude. Make your words describe both the concrete reality and the abstract reality at the same time.
You make a good point, but your examples aren't great. "Mary saw Todd with his sweet honey brown hair" is a really awkward sentence, and "Todd ran his fingers through his honey brown hair" is actually the best version of the three. It already does two things: it tells us the colour of Todd's hair and what he's doing. You could throw in an adverb ('lazily', 'coyly', 'nervously', etc) to also show Todd's state of mind.
Running his fingers through his hair tells us nothing. I admit my "good writing" example could be better but just running fingers through hair is nothing.
Not on its own. But if done repeatedly it could mean something. It could be a gesture the character does whenever nervous, or excited, or worried, or whatever.
Even if done repeatedly, it still lacks. There are only two occasions I can think of that can make that gesture meaningful. 1. If it's done by someone else: "Mary ran her fingers through Todd's hair." which would say something about their relationship. or 2. If it's established as connected to something: "When the crowd started applauding him, he ran his fingers through his hair." But just using the gesture to tell us what color his hair was is lazy writing.
In context, there are a lot of things "running his hand through his hair" can mean as a gesture. Even in absence of context, it's a near-universally accepted gesture of awkwardness or restlessness. However, I'd argue that even without any important context, it gives motion to the scene and makes the characters feel like they're present in it. Furthermore, it allows the reader to pick up on the visualization detail that he has brown hair without making it as distracting that the author is braking the story to detail dump. Back to "show, don't tell," Todd's hair being brown and his eyes being blue-green are basic descriptive details. If you have a really clever way to have those have meaning to the story, show (the example of Mary's impression of them is fine, in my opinion, but also a specific case); otherwise, it's best to tell succinctly and then move past them, as suggested by moonblack earlier in the thread. If you can't make it meaningful (or any more meaningful than forming a clear mental picture of the characters, anyway), you at least want it not to slow down the pace.
I'm not so sure about that. To me, if I read "Todd ran his fingers through his hair" without any context, I would assume vanity or arrogance. Yea it's motion but in what direction? If you leave it to the reader to guess, they might guess wrong. As far as show and tell, I agree with moonblack. I wasn't disagreeing with him. I was just adding additional perspective about how both show and tell can be lazy. Tell can easily be fixed by simply adding a couple of adjectives.
Without additional context, this example looks like a dubious choice for me. The first one informs us that Michael is afraid of the dark. The second one - not so much. Maybe he is afraid of being alone. Maybe he is afraid of the sound of the wind. I am not sure that showing here shows fear, not something milder like anxiety. I am not saying that ambiguity is worse but we have two different messages to the reader Also, the showing example is way longer. It creates a false impression that show requires more words\sentences to work. Something like "Darkness forced Michael's heart to race." is closer to the original message to the reader and original pacing. We can see that it is the darkness that has a strong direct effect on Michael. And there is far less ambiguity on what he feels.
