http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incluing

This is the alternative to infodumping. It’s probably up for debate, but I’d say incluing is closer to showing and infodumping is telling.

I’d look at it in terms of the quality of the storytelling - does showing in this particular scene help you tell the story more effectively, or will it only slow things down?

In historical or fantasy series, there often needs to be significant ‘telling’ to fill in the background for later books in the series. When writers overdo this in the early pages, it’s sometimes described as ‘infodump.’ I’m not quite sure how one avoids this, other than by writing prologues. ‘Previously in the WolfBane Trilogy …’

http://www.floggingthequill.com/flogging_the_quill/2006/week6/index.html

Ray

I also watched Pan’s Labyrinth the other day, and it’s a great study on when to show and tell. Show how evil the Captain is. Tell in shorthand about Franco’s fascism and WWII.

And I agree with you, PWStrain, about allowing words to overflow sometimes. If it works, it works. Not every novel can or should be stripped ala Hemingway.

“Undeserved Misfortune is when something bad happens to the hero or heroes so that the audience will feel sympathy for them.

It is imperative that the audience see the Undeserved Misfortune take place before its eyes and not happen offscreen.”

Showing is perfect if you have enough room (available scenes) to show off a character doing something that epitomizes their personality or demeanor. If you don’t have time, tell it.

I find more often than not though, I’ve got too few scenes than too many, so it’s not a big deal to make room for ’showing.’

I recently watched Pan’s Labyrinth and they do some great character-showing scenes for the villain. Some of it isn’t related to the plot at all, they just want to show you how evil he can really be. It works well. They do a great job of making you hate the villain, and most of it is through showing.

I’d say telling is the ’shortcut’ - for use when you don’t have time or space to accommodate showing.

Oh, these are also sometimes defined as direct and indirect narrative. Direct narrative are the events actually unfolding, indirect is a summary or description of them.

Their use gives a hint as to showing vs. telling. Indirect (telling) narrative is often used for things that happen in between the meat of the story, like a character traveling from one place to another when the traveling itself is insignificant. “He got on the train and went home.” - No elaborate train ride scenes necessary.

So the use is dictated entirely by the needs of the story.

Where I don’t like telling is it’s often used by default because the writer is rambling, lazy, or didn’t realize that making it a scene of its own could have made the story stronger. In other words, it’s often more unconsciously used than consciously.

It’s not a deal-breaker for me, by far.