Why “Show, Don’t Tell” Is Bad Writing Advice (STOP Worrying About Your Style!)
First-time authors get preoccupied with the idea of “show, don’t tell.” They’re told that narration should be avoided at all costs, and what’s meant as a stylistic suggestion gets taken as a rule. Here’s why “show, don’t tell” isn’t always the best advice.
Sorry for all the noise - I didn’t realize how breezy it was outside.
0:00 Intro
0:35 Reason 1: “Showing” means writing more than you need to
3:03 Reason 2: “Showing” through dialog has its limits
5:39 Reason 3: It’s a suggestion, not a rule
7:03 Wrap-up
Check out my ROUGH WRITER blog at: joey-durso.com/blog/sdt
Read my novel “DEVILS IN SUNDAY HATS,” a tale of redemption, coming of age and the death of the American dream: amazon.com/dp/B078RRC9RJ
Or if you’re a libertarian sci-fi fan, read “THE AETHERVERSE,” where outer space is NOT a safe space: amazon.com/dp/B019L2YBMA
FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA:
IG: @joey_durso ( / joey_durso )
Twitter: @joey_durso ( / joey_durso )
Facebook: @jdursowrites ( / jdursowrites )
Minds: @joeydurso (minds.com/joeydurso)
Gab: @joeydurso (gab.com/joeydurso)
GETTR: @joeydurso (gettr.com/user/joeydurso)
Help support ROUGH WRITER:
Patreon: / roughwriter
SubscribeStar: subscribestar.com/roughwriter
#writingtips #writingadvice #creativewriting
Basically it comes down to how much showing is actually compelling and how much of it is a case of 'this meeting could have been an email' syndrome.
That is the best analogy I’ve heard so far lol
For hundreds of years "show, don't tell" was a motto among playwrights where it makes intrinsic sense. Plays would often have an actual narrator on stage to exposit directly to the audience, to set up a scene. The first time "show, don't tell" was published, it was published as advice in a in a screenwriting guide in the 1920s. Again, it made sense there, for screen and stage. "Show, don't tell" was only applied to general storytelling and novel writing in the 1950s, and even then only retroactively. They'd pull up a quote by Hemingway about being implicit rather than explicit and claim, "look, that's show, don't tell right there!" It was never a rule for storytelling. Storytelling has been around longer than stage, and much longer than screen, yet it's somehow a rule we only recently discovered? Storytelling *is* telling. It has been telling ever since they were oral stories shared around a campfire. Even when you are "showing", you are still telling. You are the narrator at that campfire telling us what a character said. The only difference is now we have those words on paper.
I agree - especially writers learning overdo this - or they use a kind of alibi "show" - Suzy stood in front of the mirror and sighed. Then she thought about all the things the writer wants to tell the reader.
I guess my biggest issue with all of this is that people are holding themselves back from finishing their WIP because they’re second guessing every sentence they write based on one general guideline. Things can always be revised in later drafts if it really is such a problem!
Great video! I'm so tired of this catchphrase. When I first got into writing fiction, I used to second guess everything I wrote for the sake of "not telling." It's a catchy-sounding catchphrase, but it implies that there's no place for telling in fiction, which just isn't true. And, yes, when everything is shown, the pacing slows down to a dirge.
This is true for most writing advice. It is giving some useful tip, but you can't just blindly accept it. Like the advice that you shouldn't use adverbs, which is useful to cut down the number you use, but if you don't use a single one in an entire story, your writing would probably sound very unnatural.
I hear that adverb advice all the time! I feel like people end up having to scour through a thesaurus to find a "stronger" verb when they're told not to use adverbs to add meaning, but then they start using verbs that are either really uncommon or just plain antiquated, all to avoid having to add a "-ly" word after it!
It's also important to know what your goals are for a scene, or the trajectory of the story or your ideas. I'm writing an action story, so it's pretty important for me to exercise "Show don't Tell" in certain moments, because how can I exercise proof of concept in a narrative about fighting without showing the Techniques, Skills, Magic, etc, doing damage and causing the fight to go in different directions? "Show don't Tell" is very important, but Telling explicitly is also very important. Because if you fill in the audience on what the Magic Systems are, and how they can be used frankly, and in dialogue scenes discussing the nuances, means that I have to Tell less *WHILE* Showing. If the audience knows what's up before the characters put up their dukes, it means I don't have to have as much dialogue and can focus squarely on the physical storytelling and don't have to explain techniques while action is happening. It should be a symbiotic relationship. Almost all good fiction is achieved by finding a good balance of using all the tools at your disposal, not just throwing them away because they "don't work/are bad"
"show dont tell" gets less important with fewer visuals imo. Like in a movie you wont see as many monologues as in a book. You can still show information with the actions in a more implicit way if it isnt needed right in this moment
The way I see it, that mindset only works for visual stories only.
That seems to be the general consensus here! I actually hadn’t really thought of it that way, but that’s been the most common take in the comments so far, so clearly there’s something to it 😀
The way you see it isn't what the phrase is supposed to mean. It has nothing to do with visualizing, it has everything to do with including scenes and actions relevant to the plot and characters. Don't just tell me a character got in a fight, if it's causing something to change in the story then it should be included as an actual scene, not just a memory from a character.
_The thing is: first-time authors get really preoccupied with the idea of “show, don't tell.”_ I wish they were. Maybe it's true in some other areas of writing, but I've recently encountered _so many_ stories that are maybe 2/3 telling - most of the plot - with a handful of scenes of showing thrown in at random places - these "stories" might have been useful as outlines. ETA: word order.
You are totally right.
I think most cases where I would use "show, don't tell", is more in the visual medium. I am not sure where to apply this necessarily in written media. I think there is a lot of bad righting (film, comics, video games) where they would be instantly improved if they applied this almost as an axiom. This is mostly because these are visual and not just written. I can see you argument as valid for writing, but I am not sure I have ever heard someone make that comment before in the context of writing.
Funny enough, I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone in my personal life bring it up (not even in English classes), but it’s something I see all the time on Twitter and Reddit. I’m not really sure where it’s coming from, either. It’s like people went online one day, randomly read one post saying “show, don’t tell” is a central commandment for authors, and then ran with it.
I love how you NEVER BLINK! Also great advice. Congrats on your new home.
Haha clearly I cut out my blinking and my 15 minutes’ worth of “ummm” and “uhhhh” 😂😂
I’m in total agreement with you. Showing is subjective. The reader has to interpret too much and can get the feeling of being hog-tied.
I had a beta reader (more accurately, my beta reader's granddaughter who was in college and thought she knew everything about writing from that one course she took) who, at the beginning of my YA story wrote "show don't tell" whenever my main character talked internally about his day and what was happening in his life - you know - to just set up what was to come in the actual story. Now, I could do that, but where should I stop showing his past and how he came to be in this moment? By that logic, I would need to go back to his birth to show how he became who he is at the moment the story actually starts! And then maybe I should go into how his parents met and how he was conceived!
Thank you for this!
My pleasure!
I'm ngl, I found this cause I was searching for commiseration on how bad "show, don't tell" is as advice lol. I feel like you put it well, tho I take it a step further - and maybe this is me being petty and pedantic - but if we're talking about written word and not filmmaking, it's literally story*tell*ing. It boggles my mind that somebody made common advice out of "don't tell" in "storytelling"; it feels like a bad joke. The way you described the problem, I would say more precise terms for it would be something like "explicit vs. implicit" style, where explicit style is where you state something blatantly, as if it is factual and "implicit" style is where you leave room for the reader to interpret. This, I feel, would make the problems and the choices much more clear: sometimes, depending on the type of story (such as in mystery or a questionable POV) you might want to lead the reader down some tricky paths, so you can pull the rug out and surprise them later, and *implicit* style would shine there. But also, even then, too much implicit style and the reader may not trust the POV character at all, as reliable and grounded. Every human being is going to have some firmness on how they perceive things, no matter how unreliable their perspective is, so if you write purely in implicit style, you're writing about I don't know what, a person with a concussion? It doesn't make a whole lot of sense, does it.
I so completely agree!!! Ty for pointing out the clash of show dont tell with plain up story TELLING!!! ❤ all your other points too.. I feel them.. your writing is spot on. I've never shapeshifter or time travelled yet but dang it's fun in writing!!!
"Tell, not show", was said to be bold way to scare the audience with realism said by KZheadr, "Accented Cinema", in his Noroi video essay. The film he was reviewing showed details the monster's possible existence instead of showing the monster front in center in the beginning. "Noroi: Realistic J-Horror | Video Essay": kzhead.info/sun/gcuhit6XgYVspHA/bejne.html
I guess, how you do it matters more than whether or not you do it. For me, it is often interesting, if there is possibility for interpretation. You could tell in a slightly ambiguous or cryptic way or you could show details that catch the attention without giving too much away. Often, contrast also adds to the tension. If you have everyone tell how rude and arrogant a guy is and then show him being gentle, so you are not sure if he is severely misjudged (and as a consequence, ask the question, why) or just being sadistic.
By telling and not showing you can leave a lot to the viewer's imagination, and sometimes a short sentence can convey an entire story that would take more effort to show. A good example of "tell, don't show" is The Great Time War in Doctor Who where they created this mysterious large war that fascinated audiences but never showed. Then the next show runner showed some parts of it and it lost its awe.
A lot of writers do seem to underestimate their readers’ imagination and leave no room for them to “fill in the gaps” so to speak. (I’m probably guilty of this too sometimes, at least with my sci-fi.) You can definitely lose some of that allure when you deny readers the chance to imagine scenery/events for themselves.
Here's the problem with catchy summaries of writing advice. People don't actually go through and read up on what it means. Show don't tell has never meant never tell. It means you should show more than you tell. Always has. But too many writers hear Show don't Tell and assume they know what it means.
The interpretation that seems most common on social media right now is that any telling at all is a sign of horrendous writing, and therefore it should be avoided at all costs. It’s unfortunate!
@@roughwriter That's funny, I've come across more people calling BS on Show Don't Tell for believing it is saying show never tell. Yet no middle ground.
Exactly. It is bad advice, same as "avoid adverbs". The point is to KNOW when to show and KNOW when to tell. With adverbs, it's not the adverbs that are bad, it's weak adverbs and weak verbs that are bad.
Oh thank the lord that this is not as necessary… I recently had the problem that I had to explain why a major character (a spy) could tell the liturgical calendar (an undercover job that has her work in a church for a year), and doing a show don't tell just would have taken up so much more space than a mentioned memory.
This really jives with me. My writing lately has turned into a slog because I've been raking myself over the coals trying to pull off show dont tell effectively, when really, looking back on my older works, I was doing it just fine. But current events in my life and the input of my one friend who was willing to read through my works has pulled me out of my usual flow state. He writes army manuals, I write fantasy romance. You can imagine how that went. And really it boiled down to the thick-headed confidence he has when he says XYZ is wrong and says no to something, but I realized he writes army manuals because he hates whimsy and artistic fervor and cant underatand them. Technical advice from him is great, but I've realized he has no business critiquing my stylistic choices.
Sounds a bit frustrating!! I can imagine that some who’s used to writing technical manuals would be the type to immediately judge standard fantasy-romance writing as “purple prose” simply because it’s not as direct.
people dont think about what showing actually is.
Tell help clarify why they are saying this or what they are thinking. Show is describing the place or scene that happened. The focus of story is the plot. So, kill your daisies! Or recycle them if necessary. I believe style is how you present the story. The easiest to see this is between minimalist style and comical style. The hardest however is to use a style that help carry the story intention.
Reading my fave authors and others I dont like has proven adverbs and telling and rambling sentences are fun for the story. Ty for your channel!! You have a great presentation presence!!!
Thank you so much!!
He even wrote more about "Max" than he needed to. Simply having Max say something sarcastic when someone speaks to him, rolling his eyes, sneering at people etc is enough
When it comes to being creative there can be no set of rules, you have to be a heretic and break them.
Taking any advice as an absolute hard rule without the benefit of situational context and an interest in being sensible is faulty way to interpret any general rules about complex concepts.
Really, you just have to learn when and how to bring out the right details.
Agreed - the issue is that people seem to believe that there is literally never an appropriate time to “tell” instead of “show.” I just think people are taking that guideline too literally and blowing it out of proportion when they deviate from it.
@@roughwriter If it's a guideline that people don't understand, why is your video titled ""Show, Don't Tell" is bad advice"? Why didn't you write a correct title that said something like ""Show Don't Tell." is misunderstood." or maybe ""Show, Don't Tell." is misused."? Why did you title your video with a click bait title that didn't even represent what you claim to think? Why? My guess is because you're not turning down the views from people disgusted by your terribly misguided, and inaccurate title.
"Show, don't tell" started as the playwrite guild's motto... not a rule, a motto... for a VISUAL medium of story telling. Novels are VERBAL; you have to tell. What is "show, don't tell" really saying? Well, to put it simply, "Show" can only mean one thing in verbal story telling, Imagination. there is nothing else you can do to achieve "show". so what does "don't tell" mean? it's none-sense. it's saying to not be verbal... in a verbal medium. That is why it doesn't work. what people really need to start saying in stead is "your writing should encourage the readers imagination". Now, obviously you can't do anything for people with Aphantasia, the inability to imagine something, but for the average person they should be able to "see" the scene in their mind. This does not mean describe everything, if you do that you bog down the story and bore the reader, you also give nothing for the imagination to do so it's counter productive. describe just enough to get a picture and move on.
Nonsense. "Show, don't tell." still works just fine in text. Your attempted breakdown of the concept is entirely incorrect. It's about being presented with a scene of something happening as opposed to just having it all inserted via exposition. Don't skip scenes that effect the characters or the story, SHOW them. Don't write what happened on Monday, then skip to Thursday if something important happened to the character on Tuesday. If it's important to the plot or character development it should be included as a scene. Don't tell me something happened yesterday that made the character feel something, include that scene and show the character having those feelings. THAT is what "show, don't tell" means. It's not about visualizing, not even a little bit. It's about including relevant scenes instead of just throwing in a bunch of exposition.
@@simpleanswer8954 that's odd, bcause whenever I write exactly like how you describe, people still say that I need to to "show not tell" it's almost as if no one can agree on what it means. Now that obvious answer is that I am bad at describing things, something I very much agree on. That is because description is a key part in encouraging the reader's imagination. Don't describe EVERYTHING, just enough to get the image across. Obvously, one should not use exposition for the entire story, and scenes should be acted out, but that's not what people are trying to teach when they say "show, don't tell" or at the very least that's not that whole lesson. This is why I say it's a bad phrase because it's not getting the whole point across. Yes, scenes need to be acted out, but there also needs to be effort taken to encourage the readers imagination to get them more mentally engaged in your story. Both can be interpreted as "show, don't tell," but more often only one is interpretation is taught when both is needed.
@@Cevonis The phrase itself is fine, it's not supposed to be an entire writing lesson or guideline in a single sentence. It's a reminder phrase that's supposed to make the writer think about the concept. It's just a succinct summation of the idea. I think a big part of the problem is that too many of the people you see attempting to discuss these concepts are amateurs that didn't understand them to begin with. The message is muddled. I rarely venture in to discussions like this online, and this is one of the biggest reasons why. I have friends that are legitimate professional writers for both novels and movies. I don't really care what some self published hacks or amateurs on Reddit think. Not until I'm having a bad day and I run across a video that hits my main pet peeve with amateur writers. Then my attitude gets the better of me and I find myself doing this. Maybe you do truly understand the concept in the non-visual sense. If that the case just ignore the people who argue without understanding. You have to learn how to weed out useless feedback. It doesn't matter how good you are at something, there's always going to be a moron that thinks they're better. It's on you to have the knowledge to learn which ones are the morons so you can ignore that feedback.
@@simpleanswer8954 it's fine that's it's a catchy way to remind oneself of proper writing, but the problem is that most aren't being taught that way. Most literature teachers 'teach' "show, don't tell" without breaking it down into simpler concepts. The best I've ever got from a teacher was "paint me a picture with your words". A picture is worth a thousands words and spending that much time describing something bogs it down, so that clearly isn't what it was getting at. It is obvious that most people don't know what it's getting at because it's a point in which a lot of amateurs needlessly struggle with. By rewording the phrase into something clearer and more direct we can eliminate confusion. "Your writing should encourage the readers imagination" clearly tells you the objective that your writing should achieve. After that the topic can be expanded to include nuances, tips, and tricks, and more importantly, it's better adapted to verbal storytelling. "Show, don't tell" clearly says to not tell, that's the major cause for confusion. like what the video says, sometimes you have to tell and sometimes it's better to tell. My phrase doesn't have that confusing part in it .
@@Cevonis The phrase "Your writing should encourage the readers imagination" isn't a replacement for "Show, don't tell". I have always viewed "Show, don't tell" as a reminder to show the audience changes in the character or situation. If two characters argue, don't skip that and tell us about it in the next scene. Write a scene for the argument. If something changes, write a scene where that change is happening in a present tense. As a basic guideline, it's a solid concept. It's more impactful to the reader to see the characters in those situations. Leaving things to the reader's imagination is fine. Especially if you're writing horror, fantasy or sci-fi. But in the case of fantasy or sci-fi you're allowing them to imagine the world around the story. With horror it's a good tool for atmosphere. You shouldn't be leaving moments of plot to the audience's imagination. Think about Rocky. They can't just say Rocky trained a whole lot. They could just write a scene where he talks to someone and says that he trained a lot, but that seems empty and weak. So they show him training, and THEN they skip the repetitive portion because the audience has an imagination. They don't want to show him training over and over, but it doesn't work to just tell you he did either. Show it happening, even a little. "Show, don't tell." isn't bad advice. It's misunderstood and misused. It's also not a rule, just a basic guideline to help remind you to include relevant info as actual scenes instead of using exposition to do all the work.
No, that's not how show don't tell works, is more "describe not explain"
A big problem I keep seeing is that everyone online seems to have their own definition of "show don't tell," which makes the whole subject a lot tougher to address. I tried to speak to the most common definition that I've been seeing on social media, which is the idea (erroneous or not) that character information should almost exclusively be conveyed through actions/dialog and not narration.
@@roughwriter”i started with incorrect information, based my thesis on that wrong information, and decided i am right by arguing with myself” please take a writing class.
Show dont tell isnt about never telling and always showing, but to not over explain everything and be on the nose. i would expect my readers to pick up on most things with out them needing to be spelled out all the time. Its also about the satisfaction of being right when picking up on the hints that where shown and then come to the conclusion yourself. and of cause there are things better told then shown. but maybe its more about ppl needing to understand why show dont tell is the rule, so they can know when its the right time to show and not tell.
The problem I’m seeing is that people get so preoccupied with following these guidelines so strictly that they never end up finishing their WIP - instead, they go online to get input on literally one sentence and waste their own time doing it. I generally agree with you, but I just wish people understood that deviating from that suggestion when appropriate isn’t some sort of creative crime.
@@roughwriter I MASSIVELY have this problem and I’m going to use this advice so much thank you
You don't understand the advice. All it means is the closer you get to saying nothing other than "Max is defensive" without any poetry, that adds any feeling about it, the worse you're doing. You've decided to take this very literally. I notice a lot of people doing this now. The idea that a character explaining another character through expositional dialogue "is not telling" because it happens "on screen" is a particularly bizarre and humorous assertion. All throughout this video, in your examples you are instinctively following the advice while attempting to shoot it down, which is ironic. It's not a "style suggestion" either, it's recognizing that narrative storytelling is not a historical textbook, and if you try to write it like one you won't have a style, because anyone can simply state information flatly without any unique perspective or artistry. An ideal situation is one where the reader knows what you're communicating because you've given them the tools to piece it together. It's about intrigue, and the dynamic between author and reader, trusting that they don't need you to hold their hand. "Gordon made his way through the train car, struggling to get through the door, as he often did, out of breath as he often was, and immediately ordered a salad, as he always had." An exceedingly simple and straightforward example of showing over telling. I didn't tell you what Gordon looks like. You know what Gordon looks like. You even know a little bit about his personality.
Thank you for sharing this video and great advice. Show and not tell never works, doesn’t make you a good writer, not important and doesn’t improve your writing. I never use show and not tell technique. The only time show and not tell technique is used in movies, shows and plays. I show and tell in my writing.
Right?? I think it’s the right balance that matters, not avoiding one completely!
@@roughwriter Exactly.
Sounds like common sense to me. Thanks.
Glad you agree! Some people are so married to this idea that they instantly dismiss any deviation from it.
lol no. bad video, the point isnt completely wrong, but your examples are completely wrong. nothing you said was actually showing. you just told, but called it showing. the comments agreeing with you are being misled badly. the truth is that you can just cut out scenes that mess up the pacing, but you cant just tell instead. what you are suggesting is to just dumb down the writing. you dont have to do that, readers have more than 2 brain cells. we can understand that pacing has to be considered, and not every single first person bit of info needs to be in the story for the story to make sense. if you have time constraint issues, just telling the info is wrong, you should restructure your narrative so that you stay in first person. you are basically taking a huge short cut and it is making your story way way worse. being lazy isnt a style
I strongly disagree with this advice. I think the main problem armature writers and indi writers in particularly have, is that they rely on TELLING important information way too much. If something's not important first see if you can cut it from the story without affecting the plot, if you can then just cut it. However, if it's important for the reader to know something then you're best off SHOWING that thing. Yes, there are some places where telling is best, like transition scenes, or summarising info that's already been shown etc. However, character traits, motivations, feelings are best shown. If it's a minor character that doesn't effect the plot then the reader probably doesn't even need to know that character's motives, traits and feelings. You can just cut that and get on with showing the reader the things they need to know in order to appreciate the story. There's a reason why Show Don't Tell is such a writing cliché, and it's not because armature writers show too much. In fact, I can pretty much tell if I'm gonna enjoy a self pub book by just reading the first chapter and seeing if the author TELLS us the MC's goals, motives and feelings. The ones that do are usually bad books that don't leave much of an impression on me. My advice to new writers is not to think that your STYLE is somehow unique and great (because it probably isn't. In fact, your early style is probably shit writing.) Instead of ignoring basic fiction writing principles, do what Picasso said: Learn the rules like a pro, so you can break them like an artist.
I agree with you that new writers might TELL at the wrong times, but I think the more important message is to know WHAT and WHEN to show and WHAT and WHEN to tell. Major events, desires, emotions should be SHOWN but many small details should be told. Every book has to tell at some point. You've never read a book that is all SHOW. It wouldn't work. You need both.
I am fed up of amateurs turning short stories into novels with endless descriptions.
I think some people get really caught up on meeting some word/page count goal and end up writing way more than they need to, so I see where you’re coming from. Same goes for overusing “telling.” Moderation and balance are what matters!
Wrong. I'm not watching the video. Look at all the greatest books ever written. All of them follow this rule. The endless poop train of crap books cranked out recently dont.
🤓
Hope you found something more worthwhile to watch, friend!
The greatest books ever written... to you* . Sorry. Just had to add that minor correction.
@justsomeguy727 lol. Leave it to the internet to send you someone to correct a minor semantic detail 8 months after you post. And of course to me, dunce. All entertainment is subjective. I'm sure you like really annoying books about characters who go around saying "actually..."
Good advice, thank you. :) I think showing depends on how important it is and whether you need to do it or not. Telling is just as good as showing!
Thanks! I feel like people just need to find the right balance between the two and not completely toss out one as an option.