Category: Editing Rant

Editing Rant: Too Much Tell

Erin Penn

Photo by Jason Rosewell on Unsplash

Doing a book review for “Soothe the Savage Beast” anthology back in 2018, I broke down each of the stories about what I liked or didn’t like about them. Just one or two short sentences. On one of the short stories within the anthology, I made an editing comment:

In the Quest of the Beast by Jean Rabe – (Hey, the SCA showed up!) I didn’t like the ending because I know women SCAdians are a little more kickin’ than portrayed. Still, the Main Character was a young college student and not a fighter. Good, “safe” monster story. (For editors out there, this story has too much “tell” and that creates an emotional distance in the story.)

A reader contacted me on goodreads through the messaging available on the site: “What does too much “tell” mean?”

My response: 

Tell is when the author writes stuff like – “He said with anger.” instead of “He said, his hand in a fist with the knuckles turning white.” or “All his friends loved him.” instead of “When he arrived, Julie and Adams jumped up to greet him.” – Show is action, let the reader draw their own interpretation from items presented. Tell is a direct narrative, telling the reader things – including how to react. While both are needed, <they need to balance> – too much show can slow down a story, while too much tell keeps the reader from getting involved because they are not being drawn in mentally. 

The fellow reader got back to me:

Okay. I admit that the story with too much tell in it and it wasn’t super great either, but since Jean Rabe is the most famous writer in the book, well, it wouldn’t bother an editor at all. Between it and <another short story in the anthology> caused me to give it four stars instead of five. 

Take-aways. (1) Even more causal readers notice when someone breaks the “show, don’t tell” rule even if they can’t articulate it. (2) Doesn’t matter how famous you are or how great you have been in the past, poor writing habits are poor writing habits. They are easy to develop, especially when looming deadlines tidal wave across the desk one after another. Make sure to surround yourself with people who will keep you honest.

Editing Rant: White Box

Erin Penn

Photo by Muhammadtaha Ibrahim Ma’aji on Unsplash

Break the White Box (cut and paste from an editing letter)

Fantasy genre is rich in texture, color, scents, and tastes. As mentioned, the dialog lacks the fantasy texture when Ping-Pong (see 1/10/2023 post) is happening. In addition, often a scene opens with a passive “real-estate” description of the situation using only copula.

Pretend example

The ping-pong table was a lawn green, but the paddles were red rubber. The cement floor was softened by the rubber pad. The rubber pad saved the players’ knees when jumping around and was broad enough so they didn’t have to worry about running off of it. Flickering neon lights were headache inducing.

Instead

A lawn green ping-pong table made the red rubber paddles vibrate under the neon lights, a color combination the eyes revolted against seeing side-by-side. A very large rubber mat sat under the table to save the players’ knees from hopping around on the unforgiving cement floor.

Actual Editing Rant

Don’t do the real-estate description. It happens so often.

The house looks like this. Has this number of rooms. Good Gardens.

Immerse the reader in the situation, full sensory overload. Don’t just provide the grocery list of features.

Editing Rant: Ping Pong

Erin Penn

Photo by Wan San Yip on Unsplash

Ping-Pong Dialog (cut and paste from an editing cover letter)

In many places of dialog, a “ping-pong” is happening where one person speaks then another, and each time the person’s name appears at the beginning with no variation of sentence structure. Often the concentration on the two speakers creates a “white box” effect, where nothing else is known about the room or body language or the speakers.

Pretend example

Ping snorted. “I really wish the ball would stay on your side of the table.”

Pong raised an eyebrow. “In your dreams.”

Ping slapped the ball back across the table. “I’m better than you, admit it,” he said.

Pong sighed and tapped a return. “Why would I do that?” she asked.

Ping dived but missed the return. “Because I’m right.” Shaking his head, he went to pick up the ball.

Better would be

Ping snorted, before saying. “I really wish the ball would stay on your side of the table.”

Pong raised an eyebrow, a smug smile crossing her visage. “In your dreams.”

“I’m better than you, admit it.” Ping slapped the ball back across the table.

“Why would I do that?”

“Because, I’m,” Pong’s gentle return had a backspin, making Ping dive too late. “…right.” He sighed, ending his failed trash-talk while watching the ball roll into the corner. Shaking his head, he went to pick up the ball.

More Editing Rant

If we can’t tell who is saying every line without the author telling us, something is wrong. We don’t need to know Ping then Pong spoke. Second, more variation of dialog is needed. Quoted speaking part can lead, or follow, or be split by the narrative. Having it all be Narrative then Speaking part is boring. Boring is death.

Don’t be boring. Or predictable. Or Ping-Pong.

Editing Rant: Romantic Diabetes

Erin Penn


ID 1399397 © Photoeuphoria | Dreamstime.com

“Isn’t s/he the sweetest thing?”

First off, show, don’t tell us the character is sweet. Two, vary the admiration beyond being candy kisses and Hershey hugs. We don’t need Romantic Diabetes.

While the book contained slow-paced well-developed romance between a-beauty-and-a-beast where both the main romantic characters mature during the story, my toleration of the romance dwindled as I was thrown out of the story several times from the Mary Sue / Gary Stu moments. (See my Mary Sue post if you don’t understand the term.)

I didn’t mind the female character, a princess, being an ALL POWERFUL wizard unsure of her abilities because of her youth, or having battle-worthy skills, or perfect beauty. It is a romance after all. Romantic leads tend toward perfection in all things. Some amount of Mary Sue/Gary Stu is expected. (Not too much – “tend toward perfection”, but not BE perfection. Come on, now, tone this back.)

It is the stuff where she (and he) does something that I expect of royalty – and the romantic partner stops the story – just in case I missed reading what happened in the last sentence and go “they are the sweetest thing.” M.u.l.t.i.p.l.e times.

Most of the powerful things done weren’t “sweet” but noble. Very different.

Each time full-stop of the story the author was calling out to the reader “See, this is why you MUST love my characters – because they are cute/spunky/sweet”. Sorry author, you don’t get to tell me I have to love characters. You got to work for it.

And showing them doing something then telling immediately following the action is NOT TRUSTING your reader. Trust your reader.