Posts
 |
| free foto |
It had come to our attention that when we *thought* we were showing so beautifully in our manuscripts (we've all heard the show don't tell stuff, right?) we were actually confusing people. We both received critiques from amazing people that basically said; "Tell us what she's feeling here!"
Okay.
So I went and did a little research (meaning reading) and came up with a shocking idea.
DO BOTH.
Not all the time. Not in some situations. True. But generally speaking when you get to an emotional beat it should look like this:
Action, physical reaction, internal dialogue recognizing emotion.
When you think to yourself, do you say, "I'm scared." Or do you say, "My heart sped up, my palms are sweaty, my eyes are going to pop out of my head, etc."?
Yeah.
So example time, right?
An airplane soared low overhead, vibrating the ground beneath Amanda's feet. She froze, wanting to dart away into the cover of the woods. Her pulse beat louder than the plane and a wave of dizziness swept over her. Memories of the crash flooded her mind, unwanted and uncalled for. She seethed with anger, making her want to punch something. She hated that she could be so panicked and helpless over something as small as a plane.
See? I TOLD you she was angry, panicked and helpless. But I also showed you. It works, right?
What if I didn't finish that?
An airplane soared low overhead, vibrating the ground beneath Amanda's feet. She froze, wanting to dart away into the cover of the woods. Her pulse beat louder than the plane and a wave of dizziness swept over her.
It's okay, but it feels incomplete. We need the depth of the character's internal reaction to round that out and if I just simply went into showing anger it would get confusing. The reader might think, wait, I thought she was scared. Why's she angry so quickly and all of a sudden?
First action, then reaction, then follow up with your MC's thoughts.
Pretty simple formula, and again it can't be all the time, but in important places it's a good roadmap to work from.
What do you think? Did I get it right?
Oh! And please come visit the Cover Contessa today and enter to win a copy of The Binding Stone!
Oh! And please come visit the Cover Contessa today and enter to win a copy of The Binding Stone!
That is the best example of showing and telling an emotion that I've seen, Lisa!!!! :D
ReplyDeleteI agree with Stina. This is a great example. Thanks for sharing it.
ReplyDeleteReally interesting, Lisa. You are right, without the added insight, the characters reaction feels incomplete. It may also be that the intensity of the emotion requires further elaboration. I wonder, if someone isn't comfortable naming the emotion, whether providing additional info on the source of the emotion would also work? it's going to be fun to explore this! Thanks for,sharing!
ReplyDeleteIMHO The show don't tell RULE is there to be broken. Good writers do both seamlessly. You did great with your example.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with the "do both" rule. Showing everything would be exhausting for the reader! (Love your example by the way. Gonna see that in a story???)
ReplyDeleteThanks for laying it out so clearly. I'm having a mental ping pong game with finding the show/tell balance.
ReplyDeleteOmg this is so the exact thing I've been coming up against. I love your advice. My rule thus far has been what I call the "Rule of 3". If I need to get an emotion across, hit it three ways: physical action, description, internal dialog, etc. So basically the same thing :) Great post!
ReplyDeleteSarah Allen
(From Sarah, With Joy)
That's what I always do. Sometimes merely showing can confuse the reader so you need to give a quick word or two adding in the explanation. It's a tricky thing!
ReplyDeleteYou're definitely getting it right, at least to me! I've always enjoyed a little telling amongst all the showing; nothing but "show" can make descriptions overwhelming sometimes...
ReplyDelete