Show don't tell...but...

[Rhush]

I'm having a bit of a problem with one of my chapters. The thing about it is, my characters are going into a murky river at night. They have to swim across. There are several icky things in this river such as flesh eating fish, alligators, snakes, and so on. Now the problem is this... I want the reader to be nervous about the characters running into any one of these things to create tension. They actually only run into an anaconda, but I want the reader to be concerned about several possibilities. How can I do this without listing off the "watch out for this, this, and this" before they enter the dark river? Or is that ok?

[reph]

One person in the party is more nervous than the rest and has to be reassured every time he hears a ripple: was that a piranha? was it a crocodile? The ones who do the reassuring aren't awfully confident, either.

[astonwest]

To create fear in the reader, I'd think the best way would be to have the characters experience said fear in front of the reader...

Perhaps have the characters feel objects of unknown origin brush across their legs while they're wading (and ensuing dialogue amongst the characters), as an example.

"Crap." _____ turned and slapped at the water behind him.
"What?" I asked, and wiped streams of water from my face.
"Something just brushed the back of my leg." He quickly searched the murky surface.
I shook my head and sighed. "Just your imagination."
"I'm not making this stuff up. I just felt...oh, crap, there it was again."

(overly simplified, of course, but.........)

[MarkEsq]

They "only" run into an anaconda? Holy crap, lucky them!!

Seriously, though, I think the above suggestions are good. Can you get into the mind (i.e. write from the POV) of one character and have him hear splashes from the bank, see low silhouettes in the water etc and picture the nasties coming for them?

One other thought, and you may well have this covered already - depending on how much factual accuracy matters to you, check to make sure these beasts actually inhabit the same waters in real life. I always forget how it goes, but some places you have crocs not alligators and pirhanas are either fresh water and not sea water creatures so you can't mix them with sharks. I have no idea which way is which, but you get my drift! :)

[Julie Worth]

I become the POV character, letting tension build inside me as I write. I’m not really aware of the words, or even of the screen in front of me, only what’s happening in the story. Since I haven’t plotted it out in advance, anything can happen, and that makes it scary. The tension builds on the page, and I don’t have to think about technique.

It’s a very linear way of working, so it’s hard for me to go back and connect chapters 44 and 46 with a chapter 45. If I don’t write them in sequence, it’s ten times as difficult.

[James D. Macdonald]

Why are they going into the river? Is it only to get to the other side?

Have we seen other rivers before in this book? Did a school of piranha reduce a cow to a skeleton in minutes in front of our protagonists' shocked eyes?

Or ... dialog:

"Are there alligators in the river?"

"Probably, hungry, too. Pull you under and bite you in two. But that ain't the worst thing."

"What's worse than alligators? Is it piranha? Tell me it isn't piranha."

"Yeah, there's piranha. Strip you to a skeleton in minutes. But they ain't the worst thing."

"What could possibly be worse?"

"Ever hear of candirú fish, kid? That's the worst. They swim up into your pecker, spread their spines so you can't pull 'em out, and start eatin'...."

Rodrigo crossed his legs and cupped his hand over his crotch.

"Yeah," Godfrey said. "That's how everybody feels about 'em. So stay out of the river, okay?"

[brokenfingers]

LOL!!

Damn, Jim - you're good!!

There goes my whitewater trip this spring.....

[maestrowork]

Is it really a "show vs. tell" issue? I think it's more a POV or narrative issue. What to disclose to the readers and how to create tension and suspense. You need to choose your POV (the characters who don't know what are in the river) vs. one that is ominscient (there are snakes and man-eating frogs and mermaids who marry their victims and spend all their money...)

[Rhush]

Thanks for the ideas guys!

[Jamesaritchie]

Why are they going into the river? Is it only to get to the other side?

Have we seen other rivers before in this book? Did a school of piranha reduce a cow to a skeleton in minutes in front of our protagonists' shocked eyes?

Or ... dialog:

"Are there alligators in the river?"

"Probably, hungry, too. Pull you under and bite you in two. But that ain't the worst thing."

"What's worse than alligators? Is it piranha? Tell me it isn't piranha."

"Yeah, there's piranha. Strip you to a skeleton in minutes. But they ain't the worst thing."

"What could possibly be worse?"

"Ever hear of candirú fish, kid? That's the worst. They swim up into your pecker, spread their spines so you can't pull 'em out, and start eatin'...."

Rodrigo crossed his legs and cupped his hand over his crotch.

"Yeah," Godfrey said. "That's how everybody feels about 'em. So stay out of the river, okay?"

Yeah, NOW I'm going to enjoy skinny dipping!

[James D. Macdonald]

Yeah, NOW I'm going to enjoy skinny dipping!

If you go skinny dipping in a river up the Amazon basin -- you're on your own.

[Jamesaritchie]

If you go skinny dipping in a river up the Amazon basin -- you're on your own.

Good point. I'd never, ever do that. . .unless someone said, "Dare you!"
Sometimes I'm a prime example of Darwinism in action.

[DaveKuzminski]

One other thought, and you may well have this covered already - depending on how much factual accuracy matters to you, check to make sure these beasts actually inhabit the same waters in real life. I always forget how it goes, but some places you have crocs not alligators and pirhanas are either fresh water and not sea water creatures so you can't mix them with sharks. I have no idea which way is which, but you get my drift! :)

Okay, saltwater crocs and sharks have both been known to travel up rivers as much as a hundred miles. There's even a recorded case of a fatal shark attack in a creek in New Jersey.

It's been claimed that piranhas can travel along the coast in salt water to reach other rivers. This could be true for short distances since salmon are definitely known to go from fresh to salt and back in their lifetimes.

Oh, one more thing. People do swim in the Amazon. Just don't have a fresh cut on your body or go swimming at a prime feeding time.

[Jaws]

There are recorded shark attacks in just about every courthouse in the country. I've performed a few 1100 miles from the nearest salt water.

As an aside on the actual topic, though—from an extremely theoretical point of view—I recommend reading (at least once) Wayne Booth's The Rhetoric of Fiction to understand the real distinctions between "show" and "tell," and to understand why telling isn't always evil (although it should probably be minimized). Yeah, I know it's 600 pages of "literary theory," but it's well-written literary theory that's actually useful to practicing writers, and you'll at least be able to shove it back in the face of a creative-writing instructor who tries to tell you there's a formula.

Of course, the preceding advice comes not just from a shark, but a shark who is a refugee from a theory-oriented PhD program in English in the 1980s…

[Torin]

"Ever hear of candirú fish, kid? That's the worst. They swim up into your pecker, spread their spines so you can't pull 'em out, and start eatin'...."

Rodrigo crossed his legs and cupped his hand over his crotch.

"Yeah," Godfrey said. "That's how everybody feels about 'em. So stay out of the river, okay?"

That was one of my favourite scenes in the movie. I laughed my butt off, and replayed the scene just to see the look on his face. :popcorn:

[Kate Nepveu]

I recommend reading (at least once) Wayne Booth's The Rhetoric of Fiction to understand the real distinctions between "show" and "tell," and to understand why telling isn't always evil (although it should probably be minimized).I personally hate the advice "show don't tell," because unless you're scripting a graphic novel or planning to work with an illustrator, you _have_ to tell--all you've got is words, and telling is all words can do. Taken literally, it conveys no useful information: and since you're going to have to move up a level of abstraction to make it useful anyway, you might as well just say "exposition should vary by the pace of the story," or whatever more specific thing applies to the situation at hand, rather than have people tie themselves in knots over what's "showing" and what's "telling."

(Sorry--pet peeve.)

[Jamesaritchie]

I personally hate the advice "show don't tell," because unless you're scripting a graphic novel or planning to work with an illustrator, you _have_ to tell--all you've got is words, and telling is all words can do. Taken literally, it conveys no useful information: and since you're going to have to move up a level of abstraction to make it useful anyway, you might as well just say "exposition should vary by the pace of the story," or whatever more specific thing applies to the situation at hand, rather than have people tie themselves in knots over what's "showing" and what's "telling."

(Sorry--pet peeve.)

I don't think show versus tell is bad advice at all. Words are all you have, but they can be used in very different ways. It isn't necessary to tie yourself in knots over the subject, but there's a very real and very distinctive difference between using words to show and using words to tell.

Telling is not all words can do by any stretch. Words can tell, and words can show a picture as clearly as any TV. Clearer, in many ways, because words use the imagination. Pace of exposition really doesn't have anything to do with show versus tell, except sometimes as a byproduct.

Tell is just that. It's telling the reader someone can dance. "She's a good dancer" is tell. Show is simply letting the reader see that person dance. Show is the dancer in motion.

Tell is saying, "The sunset is lovely." Show is describing the sunset so the reader can see it, and thereby decide for himself whether or not it's lovely.

Some tell is always desirable and necessary, very few stories should be written with 100% show, but words certainly can tell OR show.

I don't think there's any abstraction to it. Both are very concrete terms, and very concrete ways of writing.

Show/tell is really pretty simply. It's the difference between letting the reader see something, and just telling the reader about something.

A professor of mine once came into the classroom and said, "I have a leprechaun in my pocket. Do you want me to tell you about the leprechaun, or do you want me to take it out of my pocket and let you see it?"

He did the same thing with a cassette of Mozart. He held up the cassette and said, "Do you want me to tell you how beautiful this music is, or do you want to hear it for yourself?"

It got the point across to most of us. You can do the very same thing with words. You can tell the reader there's a leprechaun in your pocket, or you can take the leprechaun out of your pocket and let the reader look at it.

Now, it might be said that music is impossible to show. It isn't. You show how beautiful music is, or isn't, by showing the reaction of the listeners.

If the listener says, "That stinks," or "That's beautiful," it's tell. But if you show the facial expressions and the body movements of the listener in reaction to the music, that's show.

Yes, we use words, and words are all we have, but words can, and should, do far more than simply tell. Words can paint pictures that are brighter and clearer than anything taken with a camera. And certainly brighter and clearer than any graphic novel. The imagination always paints better pictures that the eyes.

I never have quite understood why writers tear themselves up trying to decide which is show and which is tell. If the reader is told about it, it's tell. If the reader gets to look at it, or to watch it happen, it's show. There's no abstraction to either. Boiled down to the simplest terms, tell is usually a statement about something else, but show is that something else. Show is action and reaction.

[Kate Nepveu]

I am fully aware that it's a pet peeve of mine, so I'll just reiterate that the appropriate level of detail in a story is a variable thing and a far more interesting and useful question, in my mind, than whether something is showing or telling.

Oh, and here's a con report I did on an exposition panel at the last Worldcon that might be of interest here: http://noreascon4.blogs.com/live/2004/09/panel_report_as.html

[TashaGoddard]

Boiled down to the simplest terms, tell is usually a statement about something else, but show is that something else. Show is action and reaction.

I also have some problems with show vs. tell, I'm afraid. I do get the general gist of it and completely rewrote something recently when I realised that it was almost almost all tell and no show.

What I'm not sure about is how dialogue (and also thoughts) fit in. For example:

My enjoyment of the party was marred by getting stuck talking to a really arrogant and self-centred guy. He seemed to think he knew everything and, when he did let other people talk, he immediately contradicted whatever they said. I'll certainly do my best to avoid him in the future.

'So, are you going to vote this year?'
'There is no point in voting. All the politicians are exactly the same. None of them is going to do anything for me.'
'What do you want them to do for you, then?'
'Lower taxes for one. Everyone wants lower taxes.'
'I don't want taxes lowered, actually. In fact, I think they should be higher.'
'Well, you're wrong.'
'Why?'
'I work hard to earn a living and I don't see why it should go to line some politician's pocket.'
'I work hard too. But I don't feel I have the right to keep everything to myself. I can't defend the country myself. I can't give my children the full education they need. I don't want anyone starving.'
'Uh huh. What you actually want is to feel good about yourself. You don't care about everyone, otherwise you'd care about my getting to keep my money instead of paying for people to sit on the butts all day when they should be out working.'
etc.
etc.

I think that the blue is telling and the red is showing. Is that right? In which case, how do you show "I'll certainly do my best to avoid him in the future."? Can POV thoughts count as showing? For example:

'People need to just get on with their lives and look after themselves. If everyone did that we wouldn't need taxes and politicians telling us what to do.' This guy is a real jerk. I hope he's not going to be a permanent fixture around here.

Specifically, what concerns me is getting across the kind of information that is not openly on view or said out loud. People's spoken or physical responses can often differ from their internal responses, which they may well bottle up and never externalise. (I know I do that myself a lot, anyway :).)

Anyway, if you can enlighten me, I'd be very grateful!

[James D. Macdonald]

"What a dickweed!" I said to Marcia, as soon as I'd broken free. "If you ever see me talking with Charlie again, do me a favor and shoot me."

===========

Beware of showing that someone or something is boring by boring your readers.

[Jamesaritchie]

I am fully aware that it's a pet peeve of mine, so I'll just reiterate that the appropriate level of detail in a story is a variable thing and a far more interesting and useful question, in my mind, than whether something is showing or telling.

Oh, and here's a con report I did on an exposition panel at the last Worldcon that might be of interest here: http://noreascon4.blogs.com/live/2004/09/panel_report_as.html

I'll agree that detail is a variable thing, but in and of itself detail doesn't make one thing tell and another show. A tiny bit of detail can be show, and three chapters of detail can be all tell. I can tell you about something in great detail, and I'm still telling you about it. I can show you something with very little detail, and I'm still showing it to you, not telling you about it.

Tell is simply when something is talked about, and show is when something is seen. You can write a hundred pages of detail, and have every bit of it be tell, and only a couple of small details in a single sentence can make something show. If you're talking ABOUT something, it's tell, no matter how much detail you go into. If you're simply showing that something, and not talking ABOUT it, then it's show, no matter how little detail you use.

[TashaGoddard]

Thanks, UJ. That would work in a lot of situations, but there are still plenty of things that I think to myself, but never say to anyone else. Maybe I just need to make sure I have characters who are very different to me!

As a follow-on to this. Would emails/letters/instant messages/text messages/ etc. count as telling or showing? (Actually, I think I can answer my own question there. It would probably depend on how it was done.)

"What a dickweed!" I said to Marcia, as soon as I'd broken free. "If you ever see me talking with Charlie again, do me a favor and shoot me."

===========

Beware of showing that someone or something is boring by boring your readers.

[Jamesaritchie]

I also have some problems with show vs. tell, I'm afraid. I do get the general gist of it and completely rewrote something recently when I realised that it was almost almost all tell and no show.

What I'm not sure about is how dialogue (and also thoughts) fit in. For example:

My enjoyment of the party was marred by getting stuck talking to a really arrogant and self-centred guy. He seemed to think he knew everything and, when he did let other people talk, he immediately contradicted whatever they said. I'll certainly do my best to avoid him in the future.

'So, are you going to vote this year?'
'There is no point in voting. All the politicians are exactly the same. None of them is going to do anything for me.'
'What do you want them to do for you, then?'
'Lower taxes for one. Everyone wants lower taxes.'
'I don't want taxes lowered, actually. In fact, I think they should be higher.'
'Well, you're wrong.'
'Why?'
'I work hard to earn a living and I don't see why it should go to line some politician's pocket.'
'I work hard too. But I don't feel I have the right to keep everything to myself. I can't defend the country myself. I can't give my children the full education they need. I don't want anyone starving.'
'Uh huh. What you actually want is to feel good about yourself. You don't care about everyone, otherwise you'd care about my getting to keep my money instead of paying for people to sit on the butts all day when they should be out working.'
etc.
etc.

I think that the blue is telling and the red is showing. Is that right? In which case, how do you show "I'll certainly do my best to avoid him in the future."? Can POV thoughts count as showing? For example:

'People need to just get on with their lives and look after themselves. If everyone did that we wouldn't need taxes and politicians telling us what to do.' This guy is a real jerk. I hope he's not going to be a permanent fixture around here.

Specifically, what concerns me is getting across the kind of information that is not openly on view or said out loud. People's spoken or physical responses can often differ from their internal responses, which they may well bottle up and never externalise. (I know I do that myself a lot, anyway :).)

Anyway, if you can enlighten me, I'd be very grateful!

Well, the blue is definitely tell, but so is much of the red. This doesn't mean it's in any way wrong. But, jeeze, how to get into this. UJ's example is a good one.

You can use the same show techniques in dialogue that you use in narrative. which would be, for example, to let the speaker paint a picture of himself doing his taxes to show how he feels about taxes, but in my opinion, this kind of dialogue usually isn't about show/tell. It's about realism, and being true to character. The question, I think, is this: Is this dialogue what this charafcter would really say, and is it how he would say it?

What's the old line, "In dialogue, show is written the same way as it is in narrative, only filtered through the speaker's accent and personality."

Different characters wouod relate information in different ways.

One mights ay, "John, have you heard? There was a big explosion down at the fireworks factory. Several people killed, or so I heard."

Another might say, "Hey, Johnnie, man did you hear what happened? The whole damn fireworks factory exploded, and I saw it all. Man, fireworks going off everywhere, lighting up the sky like a thousand Independence Days. The ground shook so much we was all bouncing around like bowling pensand that big window in Fred's Bar burst right in on the customers. . .near cut one guy's ear off.

"They'll never find half the guys what worked at the factory. Or half is all they'll find of any of them, heh-heh. Some of the red shooting up into the sky was fireworks, but the rest was blood. Body parts all over. Some lady had a guy's head drop out of the sky and smack right into the windshield of her car. Man, oh man, what a sight."

In a sense, I suppose all dialoge is tell. Sometimes you leave it this way, sometimes you bring in the techniques of show to paint more of a picture, and on occasion, you leave out the tell phrases and treat it as all show.

The important thing is being true to the character. If you're doing this right, each character will have his own voice, be recognizable not only by what he says, but by how he says it. . .plain tell, tell and show, show, vibrant, calm, excitedly, matter of fact, etc.

Dialogue, I think, is about being realistic (In a fictional sense), and in saying things in an entertaining manner. Just as in narrative, you need both tell techniques and show techniques.

[maestrowork]

One think I've learned during the rewrites of my first novel: Go through every sentence and see:

1) if it can be shown instead of told
2) if more vivid details can be added or cut for pace

"Show" means action, dialogue, and using the five senses.

For example, when I saw a generic sentence such as "the food was delicious," I have to think about what I can do:

If pace allows it, I'll change it so that the characters are actually enjoying the food -- juices dripping on their chins, etc. Show the food, the colors, the smells, the tastes, etc.

Sometimes a sentence like "it is delicious" is good enough to move the story along. We have to weigh every sentence in context. Sometimes it's better to just "tell." But a lot of times, it's WAY better if we can show.

[TashaGoddard]

OK. What about this?

Barry and Sophie followed their colleague into the hallway and then turned left into the once-elegant sitting room. Sarah Healey had clearly lost interest in the house. Tins of paint and uncleaned paintbrushes sat in the middle of the room. Newspapers were piled on the sofa and on the piano. There were dirty mugs and plates sat on the floor and a thick sheen of dust coated everything except the television and one chair. Sarah was sitting smoking and uttering calm words to her daughter who, at the moment, looked more unstable than her mother. Ella was also smoking, while she kneeled at her mother’s feet. She rose when she saw Barry and Sophie come in.

I think it's mostly show, but I may be getting it wrong here, as well. (I think I'm going to have to go and investigate more thoroughly before I get to grips with this.)

[maestrowork]

OK, this is a good example...

OK. What about this?

Barry and Sophie followed their colleague into the hallway and then turned left into the once-elegant sitting room. Sarah Healey had clearly lost interest in the house. Tins of paint and uncleaned paintbrushes sat in the middle of the room. Newspapers were piled on the sofa and on the piano. There were dirty mugs and plates sat on the floor and a thick sheen of dust coated everything except the television and one chair. Sarah was sitting smoking and uttering calm words to her daughter who, at the moment, looked more unstable than her mother. Ella was also smoking, while she kneeled at her mother’s feet. She rose when she saw Barry and Sophie come in.

I think it's mostly show, but I may be getting it wrong here, as well. (I think I'm going to have to go and investigate more thoroughly before I get to grips with this.)

The "red" phrases could all use some more showing. Right now they're telling. How "once-elegant"? Show us. How did she "clearly lost interest"? Show us. What "calm words" were uttered? Show us. How did the daugther "look more unstable"? Show us.

See, you go through your sentences and mark up the ones that are vague and "telling." Then in your rewrites, you turn up the "showing" notch.

[Nateskate]

There's a variety of ways.

Twenty feet from the bank, Ted was curious to see how deep the water was, and tried touching bottom. "Wow, this is deeper than I thought," he said, obviously a bit uncomfortable being in over his head.

Grazing his foot against something sharp, he yelped like a scared pup, "Watch out, I think there's snappers out here."

Sue was amused at Ted's sudden nervousness, and baited him, "Come on Ted; don't tell me you're afraid of a little thing like a snapping turtle?"

"Don't laugh. The snappers out here are large enough to take off half your foot with a single chomp. I've seen em myself. I got an uncle that lost a toe..."

"Shut up Ted," Steve nervously whined. Being a city boy, he didn't like this talk of man-eating turtles. "It's getting dark, and the last thing I need is to worry about turtles biting my foot off, so keep your fears to yourself.

Seeing a ripple ahead, Ted said, "Forget snapping turtles. Sue didn't bother telling you there are alligators, water moccasins, and worse here in Canyon lake, did she?"

"Thanks again, Ted. You're a big help!" Steve said sarcastically. Suddenly, every passing twig, leaf, and waterbug caused his skin to jump. He looked up, and suddenly the other shore looked five miles away. "If I swim faster, I'll be there faster, but maybe that'll attract the alligators?" He worried.

Sue just shook her head in bewilderment, "City boys!"

[TashaGoddard]

Thanks, Ray. I think I'm going to stop worrying about it again for the moment and get stuck into de-telling at rewrite stage. In the meantime I shall keep a look out in the books I am reading for good showing techniques.

[firehorse]

Sarah Healey had clearly lost interest in the house This sentence could be deleted entirely, as the following sentence implies that she'd lost interest in the upkeep.

Sarah was sitting smoking and uttering calm words to her daughter who, at the moment, looked more unstable than her mother. I'd make this a line of dialogue Sarah says between puffs (or whatever) of her cigarette. Is there any very brief action you can write that indicates the daughter's instability?

Just my two cents (or 1.62 Canadian)

skc

[reph]

OK, this is a good example...

The "red" phrases could all use some more showing. Right now they're telling. How "once-elegant"? Show us....
Mightn't those phrases come from Barry's and Sophie's perceptions of the scene? That'd be more plausible if there were only one POV character, but it does raise the question of how to handle showing when something is presented to the reader by way of a character's experience of it.

[Jaws]

Just to confuse things further, remember that the same passage can be both showing and telling.
Brad turned to Janet. "It's probably just more folk dancing."
On one level, this is "telling": it's Brad telling the reader that the Time Warp was just "folk dancing." On another level, this is "showing:" we're being shown that Brad is a dweeb who condescends to his fiance.

Of course, that's a ridiculous example. For a very, very subtle example, take a look at Orwell's "documentation" in 1984—Goldstein's Principles of Collective Oligarchy. It's much more than just the "telling" of some political theory; think about what it shows the reader concerning what has to be spoon-fed to Party members.

[maestrowork]

If you can do some expo using dialogue while showing the characters... more power to you. Love it when you can use the same words to do multiple things at once.

[zornhau]

OK. What about this?

Barry and Sophie followed their colleague into the hallway and then turned left into the once-elegant sitting room. Sarah Healey had clearly lost interest in the house. Tins of paint and uncleaned paintbrushes sat in the middle of the room. Newspapers were piled on the sofa and on the piano. There were dirty mugs and plates sat on the floor and a thick sheen of dust coated everything except the television and one chair. Sarah was sitting smoking and uttering calm words to her daughter who, at the moment, looked more unstable than her mother. Ella was also smoking, while she kneeled at her mother’s feet. She rose when she saw Barry and Sophie come in.

I think it's mostly show, but I may be getting it wrong here, as well. (I think I'm going to have to go and investigate more thoroughly before I get to grips with this.)

It's mostly show, but you're still making interrpetive statements about the characters without giving us the evidence, e.g. " looked more unstable than her mother", while giving us too much detail in one big lump.

Also, IMHO, the characters need to interact with the scenery to give it significance.


Barry and Sophie followed their colleague into the once-elegant sitting room. A smog of dust and cigarrette smoke clawed at Barrie's lungs. He blinked the water from his eyes and took in the scene.

Sarah sat in the midst of a rats nest of old newspapers and rotting TV-dinner trays. Her broken fingernails pinched the tip of some god-awful foreign roll-up. Between puffs she mumbled soothing words to Ella who knelt at her feet, whimpering between shuddering gasps at her own cigarette.

Sophie made to step forward, but Barrie held up his hand. The floor was an obstacle course of mold-filled coffee mugs, old paint pots and discarded brushes. Heart in mouth, Barry edged into the room. He planted his foot on a discarded newspaper. Something crunched underneath.

With a gasp, Ella lept to her feet. Her hand dipped into her waist band and drew out a small revolver.

Barrie dived for cover. Sophie's Desert Eagle boomed. Ella's head exploded. A mist of blood...


OK. Got a bit carried away there, and Uncle Jim will wade in and simplify things further. The usual caveats apply.

[TashaGoddard]

Aaah, zornhau, you put guns in my book! And you killed Ella! What do I do now? :)

I think I get the gist, though. I'm still internalising too much and need to add more actual action. It's certainly going to be fun when I get to start the proper rewrite. In fact, I suspect it might turn out to be more fun than actually writing the first draft. I know there are lots of places where it will need serious fixing. Just off the top of my head, there's one scene where Sophie is relaxing at the end of the day and going over some of the events of the day in her head. Clearly this needs to be changed to actually showing the events! But I'm not going to touch it yet. That way I have more of an impetus to finish the first draft - the quicker I write, the sooner I'll get to rewrite!

Thanks everyone for sorting out my confusion over showing and telling. I think I finally understand it now.

[zornhau]

Aaah, zornhau, you put guns in my book! And you killed Ella! What do I do now? :)


It's obvious....
Screaming, Sarah launched herself to her feet, a distinctive metal tube cradled in her arms.

Barry had time to think Single shot flamethrower. Then coruscating flame spewed across the room, bathing Sophie in liquid fire. Her shot went wild. Plaster rained on Barry's back.

He rolled, and in a single fluid motion drew his Uzi 9mm...

:roll:
Seriously though, you're right. Fix the broken stuff later. Get the story finished.

[TashaGoddard]

It's obvious....


Quote:
Screaming, Sarah launched herself to her feet, a distinctive metal tube cradled in her arms.

Barry had time to think Single shot flamethrower. Then coruscating flame spewed across the room, bathing Sophie in liquid fire. Her shot went wild. Plaster rained on Barry's back.

He rolled, and in a single fluid motion drew his Uzi 9mm...

:Clap: :roll:

[zornhau]

:Clap: :roll:

Ah, the hypnotic power of the Motivation-Reaction unit! Good luck
Z