Show Me: Don't Tell Me

Good theatrical writing invariably conforms to the show don't tell principle: character journeys, conflicts and events are acted out on stage rather than being reported.

Reported incidents are the norm in novels and short stories, in which the weight of the story is usually borne by descriptive text: it makes little difference to the reader whether the text describes an incident in present or past tense.

In theatre, on the other hand, the characters are always in the present tense, even though they may journey on stage from youth to old age in the space of an hour. The excitement for the theatre audience lies largely in participating in the characters' journeys: when a theatrical character revisits her/his past, we expect to travel there with them and witness the moment for ourselves.

The Need for Action

In fact, the show don't tell principle is governed by a broader imperative, which is the need for action.

Theatre offers opportunities for engaging sight, hearing and intellect. The movement of characters about the stage and the physical interplay between them are essential to maintain the interest and emotional involvement of the audience.

By contrast, when characters on stage talk to one another at length without any (relevant) action, the audience is likely to become restless. There are very few exceptions to this rule. One such is intimate theatre, where the narrative carries emotional weight and the actors' facial expressions and body language are visible to every member of the audience: though arguably this effect might be better achieved through the telephoto lens of film or television.

Broadly speaking, the theatre audience is likely to feel cheated by a play with little or no action, and the playwright ignores this fact at her/his peril.

Metaphysical Journeys into Action

Character journeys are not necessarily dependent on physical action, of course. A character's journey may measure the distance between two mutually exclusive states of mind, such as from zealous piety to outright rejection of religious faith.

When considering whether such journeys are suitable for theatrical treatment. the key question is the extent to which they can be communicated through action on stage.

Many metaphysical journeys are in fact shaped by events that are truly theatrical. The journey from belief to atheism cited above, for example, might be motivated by the untimely death of a loved one and the feelings of loss and divine betrayal that follow. Simply add the dimensions of the main character's respective relationships with the loved one and with God, the death and the circumstances surrounding the death, and this ostensibly untheatrical character journey begins to sound like a seriously interesting play.

The challenge of translating metaphysical journeys into action becomes considerably greater as the degree of detachment from the physical world increases. For example, an exploration of the mind of a comatose character may make interesting prose, but it doesn't sound like great theatre. Similarly, journeys of understanding in terms of introspective fields such as mathematics and philosophy are unlikely to wow theatre audiences.

All is not lost in terms of such journeys even so, as long as they are placed in an action-based context that is meaningful for theatre audiences. The inscrutable mind of the comatose accident victim might be revealed by revisiting past action and moving forward in time to an unexpected outcome. The inner journey of the philosopher might be explored by playing out his/her relationships with others: fellow professionals, family and friends.

Ideas into Action

When devising a theatrical plot, or outlining the scenes of a play, the writer should be ever conscious of the need for action.

• Static scenes are not wrong, but they must be kept to a minimum. If the play begins to emerge as too static, new, intrinsically theatrical ideas must be added to the mix. It may be useful to think in terms of a wider view: drawing back from the hospital bed to look at the whole life, as it were.
• A relatively static scene may be enlivened by giving physical expression to the conflict that drives the scene.
• Metaphysical ideas may be given physical expression through metaphorical action. This is primarily a matter for the director, but the writer may assist greatly by sowing the seeds for the metaphor within the dialogue. (I plan to consider this suggestion in detail later in the course, when we come to think about subtext.)