: 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

@Karen856

Vote Up Vote Down

An author cannot demonstrate in action every trait of every character. It's all about separating the wheat from the chaff, so to speak. Jaime Lannister is probably not an example of telling instead of showing, and here's why:

The problem with "telling" is that it alienates readers from the
characters.
Another problem is that it creates characters that are shallow and
emotionally inauthentic, which inhibits their growth through the
story.
If a character has too many "virtues" piled on, readers will
resent it on principle.

I doubt Jaime Lannister fulfils any of these points. Near as I can tell, he is a pretty popular character, which many readers find compelling -- ergo, emotionally authentic.

Why is this? If Jaime as a character is defined by his swordsmanship, why don't readers feel cheated out of seeing him perform as a master swordsman? This is where the chaff metaphor comes in. What's important about Jaime is his redemption arc. What would have made readers feel cheated, is if the narrative insisted that Jaime is a reformed/redeeming antagonist, but failed to demonstrate either: 1) his terrible actions at first, or 2) his good actions consequently.

But, bottom line, without getting too mired in the details of one specific character, the lesson is this: when you show, focus on the traits that are most critical to the character's growth arc. Generally, it's more important to demonstrate personality traits or habit behaviors, as opposed to rank skill. This is usually also the difference between character flaws that are successful versus ones that feel tacked on.

(0)

Login to post a comment!