That's really interesting, and, yes very reassuring, thanks, Naomi.

If you are writing in the first person you will always be telling

- wasn't sure about this, though. Wonder what other people think???

Wonder what other people think???

I think it's nonsense. It's true that first person gives you the possibility of a sense of a narrator looking back and recounting past events, but it needn't - you just need to understand the various possibilities and learn do choose between them properly.

Emma

<Added>

Where I would agree is with what perhaps she's implying, which is that you can't assume - as many beginner writers do - that by using first person you're automatically more in the narrator's head, and that events are more immediate, than they would be told in 3rd. You can have very tell-y 1st person narratives, and very show-y 3rd. It's all in how you do it...

Thanks, Naomi,
Susan Hill also said

Most crime writers show

As this is what I aspire to be I guess I need to keep working at it.
Take care
Tracy

[quote]Susan Hill also said
Most crime writers show

As this is what I aspire to be I guess I need to keep working at it.[quote]

Yes, I noticed that, Tracy. I guess it's because the crime writer is attempting to 'tell' the reader as little as possible - you could very easily give the whole plot away by a couple of lines of tell.
Show involves dropping in the clues by slight of hand and then distracting the reader from realizing they are there, The reader is only told what is going on on a strictly 'need to know' basis only.

Yes, that makes a lot of sense: you show the reader lots of things, some of which may, or may not, be clues. Whereas 'tell' often implies more clearly 'this is the important stuff', which rather gives the game away.

Emma