Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/25725
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

For example the book Eragon by Paolini, and Magic Kingdom by Terry Brooks. These both have lots of description. To me that means lots of showing and less telling. Other books don't seem to have that much description. Some Sci-Fi has this as well, Jurassic Park, & Chrichton's other books.

I've downloaded lots of samples from Amazon and these (same genres) have more telling than showing or what I am calling description. These authors aren't as big, maybe they have 100 reviews. On the other hand, Old Man's War didn't have a lot of description in it either, compared to someone like Brooks, and it is very popular.

Are these just different styles?

Edit: This question is useful, but not the same, [How to develop a more vivid and descriptive writing style](https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/25554/how-to-develop-a-more-vivid-and-descriptive-writing-style)

Edit: Based on what's link, I had this thought:

If it requires a camera and an actor to communicate a scene and _feeling_ in a movie, then you _have_ to show it. We rely on the actors in film to show us how they feel to make it real, whether it is facial expressions, voice tone, or something else. Some actors are better at it than others. The amateur actor tells more than she shows and most times it doesn't make for a good story.

All of us have tried to explain a scene in a movie to a person who didn't it. It's difficult. They have to see it, even though you just told it. "You have to see it" sounds better than saying to someone, "They have to show it."

Original score: 3