Hi all. Does anyone else out there begin reading a novel only to realize that you're noticing all the 'flaws' (for want of a better word) in the writing? I began one last night and after two pages I noticed that nearly all the story was 'tell not show.' I found it a bit difficult to carry on because of what I've learned about putting a story together. I kept thinking 'this isn't what I've been taught.' Once this has been seen does anyone else read on but still find themselves picking up the 'flaws?'
Hi, Elsie.
In order to comment on your question in detail, I would have to have read the flawed piece of writing you mentioned.
However, 'Tell' through an omniscient narrator, or a character can be effective when skilfully written.
Ellen "Nelly" Dean is the main narrator in Emily Brontë's novel Wuthering Heights. She
gives key eyewitness accounts as to what happens between the characters.
Nelly Dean, 'Tells' and 'Shows' at length.
'Tell'. however, is a lazy way to convey information which could be revealed in dialogue and by the actions of characters.
Streams-of-thought are also a good way to 'Show' not 'Tell'. Convey information that cannot be revealed in any other way..For example if a character is devious / insane, they are unlikely to openly broadcast the fact.
Too much 'Tell' slows the action and kills the pace of a story. 'Tell' should be used sparingly.
My wife moans at me all the time for telling her what's wrong with my current RIP (Read In Progress).
It can get a bit frustrating, though - I'd much rather read a book without such interruptions. My excuse is that for a couple of years I critiqued for a competition and found even in that situation, when you're concentrating mainly on characterisation and story, 'errors' tend to jump off the page. Except, of course, they're often not errors at all in the author's mind, simply an alternative interpretation of the very loose 'rules' we tend to accept as being correct or desirable.
In the RIP I'm just about to finish, the author switched, in the last chapter but one, from past tense to present. Why? So we would know that the MC's story was taking place now, in his own timeframe, rather than in the past? I've no idea. In my view there was no need at all. But after the initial jar (perhaps it was designed to jolt the reader awake, but I didn't need that) I carried on as before, utter absorption in the characters' story seeing to that.
Maybe nothing's 'wrong' any more. Maybe it never was - like art it's in the eye (and mind) of the beholder. Or perhaps it's just a way our brain helps us discover 'voice', a manner of expression unique to each of us. Who knows?