: Re: Is Jaime Lannister a "telling not showing" example? Warning: spoilers of A Song of Ice and Fire. I was reading through this site that you should avoid telling what a character is by using

@Caterina108

Vote Up Vote Down

I would disagree on this. I believe that the showing and not telling rule is followed mostly on the facts that are directly relevant to the story. Indirect relevance of facts are given by the back story. Jamie's swordsmanship is important to A Song of Fire and Ice. But it's not directly relevant to A Game of Thrones. However, it is directly relevant to A Clash of Kings (where Jaime is shown taking active part in The War of The Five Kings which forms an important chunk of the novel), thus, it is shown and not told in that novel.

I believe, to build a character, certain necessities are required. The showing and telling rule can be relaxed for back stories which have a vast range to cover (The total span of years for A Song of Fire and Ice is 1000 years). The thumb rule is not to be followed blindly. No rule in writing is to be followed blindly. Again, no rule is to be discarded blindly. Understanding the underlying principles of why a set of rules are followed is always necessary.

(0)

Login to post a comment!