Telling and Showing - what we all thought writers were supposed to do without really knowing what it means. Booth gets into the grime of the process, and changes the way I look at books. So many books I've read immediately delve into the characters and plot, giving the reader an instant gratification of who, where,when, and how of the story. Some books torture you with little to no information until you're already 3-5 chapters in, leaving so many questions open about who the characters are, what the plot is, and - most important - who's the bad guy and how much can I hate him? Once I get over the total control the author has over the input and accept my role as an observer, I start to enjoy the story (or not and put the book down).
Booth explains this phenomena (to the inexperienced English major) in ways that both make sense, and perturb me. I'm perturbed because, in essence, I'm being told what to do by some authors. The making sense is putting into words how the process works. His examples of Job and Jesus being written about is telling, as in how did anyone in the garden know what Jesus did when they were all asleep? We were told of Job's faith, and we took it as gospel (budum-tiss). If we're shown what the pro- and antagonists do through observation and make our own inferences, do we get more out of the story?
I will never read a book the same way again; I will be analyzing the tactics the author uses to get his or her point across. I won't have issues with enjoying the reading, but have an enhanced sense of what the story is supposed to invoke from the style of story telling the author uses. I can almost guarantee I won't be picking up a Steven King novel for awhile - he likes to let the observers make their own choices in his writing. This means the deep, dark evil emotions of his characters or plots aren't from his writing, but from my own abyss of darkness.
Which type of writing do you think is more effective? Reading your entry makes me think that the author telling us what to think may be the better choice. For myself, I hate open ended stories because I never get a concrete answer for what happens to the characters in the end. I can always pick the ending that I want to happen but there is always the question in the back of my mind of what did the author see happening. It was their creation after all, what did they want to happen and is it better than what I had in mind? That question is never answered.
ReplyDeleteThe showing, and the ability for the reader to infer information, can be a useful tactic for a surprise twist at the end of the story - the character you loved is evil, and the hated one is the hero...
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree Jim from now on I know i will be analyzing the author's tactics used. It is pretty interesting to think about and does give a better insight into the story and most importantly the author. I found myself thinking about the tactics used in some of the Tv shows I was watching as well.
ReplyDelete