"Show, don’t tell" is one of the most repeated pieces of writing advice, and one of the most commonly misapplied. Taken too literally, it turns every cup of tea into three paragraphs of description; ignored entirely, it produces prose that summarises everything and immerses the reader in nothing.
This guide explains what each technique actually does, when each one is the better tool, and how to judge a specific sentence rather than following a blanket rule.
What does showing mean?
Showing presents a moment through action, dialogue, sensory detail or specific behaviour, and trusts the reader to infer what it means, rather than stating the meaning outright. It slows the pace slightly but gives the reader the experience of discovering something, rather than being told about it.
Example
Showing: "For example, she folded the letter twice, then a third time, until it was small enough to fit inside her closed fist, and did not look up when he came in." The reader infers tension, avoidance and control without being told those words directly.
What does telling mean?
Telling states information or meaning directly, without dramatising it in a scene. It compresses time and detail, which makes it efficient for information the reader does not need to experience closely.
Example
Telling: "For example, she was furious with him, though she tried not to show it." This gets the same basic fact across in a fraction of the space, at the cost of the reader’s direct experience of the moment.
Why do both matter?
A manuscript written entirely in showing mode becomes exhausting, since every detail demands the same attention regardless of its importance. A manuscript written entirely in telling mode keeps the reader at a distance from everything, since nothing is dramatised closely enough to feel immediate. The skill is matching the technique to what a given moment needs.
How should I handle emotion?
Significant emotional beats usually reward showing, since naming an emotion directly ("she felt sad") tends to land more weakly than a specific detail that lets the reader arrive at the feeling themselves. Less important emotional moments, background feelings that do not need to land hard, can often be told in a phrase without losing anything.
How should I handle character?
A character’s defining traits are usually better shown through specific choices and behaviour over the course of a story than stated as a list of qualities. Minor characters, or minor traits of major characters, can often be told briefly, since not every detail needs a scene built around it.
How should I handle setting?
Setting benefits from showing when it is doing narrative work, revealing character or mood through specific detail, and from telling when it is simply establishing location efficiently so the story can move on to what matters more.
How should I handle backstory?
Backstory is usually better told in compact summary than dramatised at length, especially when it is context rather than the story’s main event. Dramatising a piece of backstory in full scene detail can pull attention away from the present story unless that backstory is itself central to what the book is about.
How should I handle time jumps?
Time jumps are almost always better told than shown; summarising "three years passed, and in that time she finished her training and moved twice" is more useful to the reader than dramatising every intervening event. Showing is reserved for the moments that matter once the story resumes.
How should I handle routine information?
Practical or routine information, how a character travels somewhere, what a normal day involves, tends to slow a story down if it is shown in full scene detail. Telling this kind of information briefly keeps the pace moving towards the parts of the story that need close attention.
How does the balance of showing and telling affect pacing?
Showing slows pace and increases immersion; telling speeds pace and increases distance. A manuscript that shows everything tends to feel slow throughout, while one that tells everything tends to feel rushed and emotionally flat. Varying the balance according to what each section of the story needs is what produces natural pacing.
When is telling actually the better choice?
Telling is often the better choice for information the reader needs but does not need to feel: logistics, minor transitions, background facts, and anything the story has already established emotionally and does not need to re-earn. Choosing to tell in these places is not a shortcut around craft; it is often the more skilled choice.
What does overwriting a scene look like?
Overwriting happens when minor details are dramatised with the same weight as major ones, so a character making tea gets the same scene-level treatment as a pivotal confrontation. If a passage is slowing the story down without adding meaning to a moment that matters, it is a candidate for telling instead.
Do
- Show moments that carry real emotional or plot weight
- Tell routine information, time jumps and minor transitions briefly
- Vary the balance deliberately across a chapter rather than by habit
Avoid
- Dramatise every action in full scene detail regardless of importance
- State an emotion directly at a story’s most important moment
- Assume more description always means better writing
How do I avoid body-language clichés when showing?
A common default when trying to "show" emotion is reaching for stock physical tics: a clenched jaw, a racing heart, a sharp intake of breath. Used occasionally these are fine, but relied on repeatedly across a manuscript they become their own kind of telling, a shorthand code the reader learns to skim rather than a genuine specific detail.
Example
Instead of a repeated clenched jaw, for example: "He answered her question twice before she noticed neither answer had actually addressed it." The behaviour is specific to that character and that exchange, rather than a stock physical cue borrowed from anywhere.
How do I decide, sentence by sentence, whether to show or tell?
Ask what information the sentence is actually carrying, whether it deserves a full scene, and whether summary might genuinely be faster without losing anything the reader needs. Not every piece of information deserves a scene, and not every scene deserves to be summarised; the decision should be made moment by moment rather than as a blanket policy.
Show or tell?
- What information matters here: a fact, or an experience?
- Does this moment carry enough emotional or plot weight to deserve a scene?
- Would summary get the reader the same understanding faster, without losing anything important?
- Have I shown a version of this same beat already elsewhere in the book?
- Am I reaching for a stock physical cue instead of a detail specific to this character?
If you would like feedback on where your own opening pages lean too heavily one way or the other, a Manuscript Health Check looks at exactly this kind of balance in your first 5,000 words.
Common mistakes
- Treating "show, don’t tell" as an absolute rule. Telling is a legitimate, necessary technique; the goal is balance, not the total elimination of telling.
- Showing routine information at scene length. Dramatising logistics or minor transitions in full detail slows pacing without adding meaning.
- Telling the moments that matter most. Stating an important emotional beat directly, rather than dramatising it, often weakens the moment the story most needs to land.
- Relying on stock body-language cues as a substitute for showing. Repeated clenched jaws and racing hearts become their own kind of telling once the reader learns to skim past them.
- Assuming more description always means better writing. Length is not the same as effectiveness; the right amount of detail depends on what a moment needs, not on maximising word count.
Frequently asked questions
Is it ever acceptable to tell an important emotional moment?
Occasionally, particularly if the moment has already been earned through prior showing and a brief, direct statement lands the beat without needing another full scene.
How much showing is too much?
When minor, low-stakes details are dramatised at the same length as major moments, slowing the story without adding meaning.
Do body-language cues always count as telling in disguise?
Not always, but when the same few cues repeat throughout a manuscript, they stop functioning as specific detail and start reading as shorthand.
Should backstory always be told rather than shown?
Usually briefer summary works better for backstory, unless that particular piece of backstory is central enough to the story to deserve full scene treatment.