The Writing Manual: Engaging Your Reader

In this chapter, we turn our attention to the just the simple technique we are going to use to keep readers enthralled in your book.

The first step is to delve a little more deeply into what a reader actually means when they say a book is ‘boring’.

The answer is, actually, pretty simple.

A boring book is one that a reader fails to find interesting. See, not really brain surgery. But let’s put that differently, a boring book is one in which the reader fails to engage.

The idea of engagement is essential, so I want to reinforce its meaning in this context. Engagement is when a reading is emotionally invested in a book. Remember that feeling when you can’t wait to get back to a novel you are reading? Yeah? Well, that’s engagement. What about the feeling of shock when a character you love is killed off? We are all looking at you J.K. Well, you’ve guessed it, that’s also engagement.

Sorry, we are on the verge of jargon here, so let’s delve a little deeper before it all gets out of hand.

A reader that is engaged in your book is active.

A reader that is not engaged in your book (thinks it boring) is passive.

The best way to explain the concept of ‘active reading’ is with an example.

Let’s say you are writing a novel about a petty criminal, let’s call him John. As the main character of your book, John will have a detailed back-story. One of the key elements of this back-story is that John is scared of dogs. The fear of dogs will play an important part in the climax of the story and is, therefore, an important plot point.

The reader needs to know about John’s dog fear. The question is – how do you show the reader that John is scared of dogs?

You have two choices.

One will leave the reader actively engaged; the other will produce a passive, bored reader.

The first option (the easiest) is to ‘dump’ the back-story via the narrator. This is the process of using the narrator to TELL the reader about the back-story.

You could write this into the first chapter of your book:

‘John had always been scared of dogs. Just the sound of a distant bark would bring him out in a cold sweat. His mother had always insisted this fear had sprung from an incident when he was just a baby. Apparently, a large black Labrador had jumped into John’s pram, nipping his hand whilst snatching a melting ice cream. John wasn’t one for psychology. He just knew he hated dogs.’

Seems OK, right?

Here, the narrator is TELLING the reader about John’s fear of dogs. You have now ticked the box entitled ‘tell reader John is scared of dogs’ and you are now free to write the more exciting scenes. The problem is that this approach leaves the reader in a passive stance. They simply have to ‘sit back’ as the narrator spoon-feeds the key elements of the plot. The reader is not required to do any work. They are just given the information. They don’t have to piece together any clues, or interpret any actions, or even read between the lines to see what a section of dialogue us really about. It is all there, no confusion.

Not convinced?

Well it may seem fine for this one example, but imagine a whole book of this back-story ‘dumping’. Each time the writer needs to TELL the reader about an important plot point, they just dump it into the narrative and tick off the box. This way each plot point, and back-story element, is spoon fed to the reader, who sit back and lets it happen. It quickly becomes, well… boring.


So, if we can’t ‘dump’ the back-story, what’s the option? The second choice is to actively engage the reader. This requires more work, more skill, more thought, but the rewards are astounding. With this approach, the writer doesn’t TELL the reader that John is scared of dogs, instead the writer SHOWS the reader by leaving clues. You must force the reader to work for the plot, sifting the story to find the plot elements that are important.

So what do you do?

Let’s go back to our mate John. If you remember John’s fear of dogs is a major plot point and we need to let the reader know. At first, there’s no need to write a new scene. Just begin by taking a scene from the start of the book and adding in a description of a passing dog. Nothing spectacular, just a dog on the street, blink and you’ll miss it.

John, of course, sees the dog and acts. You don’t write in any new dialogue, just a few lines of description where John sees the animal and crosses the street to avoid the dog. It is essential that the narrator describes the action but offers no explanation. The narrator must not TELL the reader why John is acting in the way that is described.

Now, let’s jump forward. Imagine there’s a scene, at a key point in the book, in which John, having just committed a crime, is running from the police. John knows a short cut down an alley. He turns into the alley and sees a dog. John stops in his tracks, turns around, and chooses to take a different route. He is nearly caught in the process.

Again, this is action only. The narrator must not TELL the reader why John is acting, just a description of his actions. Nothing is said about the dog, beyond a description of John’s actions. John sees the dog and reacts. It is up to the reader to draw his or her own conclusions.

Finally, you write a new scene. In this, John and his partner in crime are in a car. John sees a dog in the nearby park. He looks at the dog and shakes his head, muttering under his breath. His partner asks, “What is it with you and dogs?” And you are off… Now you can write a conversation (it must be via dialogue), in which John talks about his hatred of dogs. Perhaps he relates the ‘ice-cream-in-the-pram’ story, it is up to you. You already have the back-story in your head (the writer), how much of this you give to the reader it your choice. What is essential is that the reader learns of John’s fear via conversation, NOT the narrator.

What you are doing here is writing a scene in which you can present dialogue that passes the back-story in a convincing manner. John’s friend has seen John reaction to dogs, it would only be natural for it to pop in conversation. This conversation then becomes a vehicle for you to present back-story.

I would like to go one step further.

It would be perfectly acceptable for you, the writer, to never explain John’s fear of dogs to the reader. You could remove completely the conversation and just have John reacting to dogs. The important aspect is that you, the writer, understands John’s fear and how he will react in any given situation.

Have you ever seen the Indiana Jones series of films? In these, Indy often encounters snakes. In RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK there is even this exchange:

Indiana: There’s a big snake in the plane, Jock!

Jock: Oh, that’s just my pet snake Reggie.

Indiana: I hate snakes, Jock! I hate ’em!

Jock: Come on! Show a little backbone, will ya!

The viewer is never given a reason for the Indy’s fear of snakes. Does the writer, George Lucas, know the reason? Perhaps. Does it matter that the reader is never told? Absolutely not, Indy’s fear, is just a tool to humanize the character and help the viewer to engage. As part of Indy’s back-story it helps the writer to predict how Indy will react in a situation that involves snakes.

The only thing you must NOT do is to have the narrator explain the back-story via narrative summary.

Wow… than that’s an import little statement.

For all of this to work, you are relying on one trick of the brain. In day-to-day life we see people acting and hear people speaking, but we have no explanation for their reasons or motivations. Our brain has become very good at seeing meaning in words and actions. At the most basic level, if a man looks angry, is carrying a big stick and running towards us shouting, ‘Die’, then our brain must work out what is going on pretty fast.

This means that whenever your brain sees an event or hears words of conversation it will automatically try to work out the meaning behind the words and actions. This is where the magic happens. It is this action of the brain that you, as a writer, are trying to harness.

If you can write event in which people act convincing but don’t explain why, your brain will do the rest and add in a meaning. The same goes for conversation. You brain will naturally look for a meaning between the lines. So if you write truthfully (as in true to the nature of people), you brain will see deeper meaning. That’s why when John runs from the dog, your brain is trying to work out why.

Another way to think of this is that you are trying to create a distance between the reader and the character.

By not explaining why John is scared of the dog, the reader is forced to fill in the blanks. Perhaps the reader is also scared of dogs and overlays their own fear. Even if they are not scared of dogs, we are all scared of something. Your brain recognizes fear when it sees it! There is something in all of our lives that will, metaphorically, make us cross the street. After all, fear is the deepest of human emotions.

So… here’s the next level. By forcing the reader to recognize fear and look for that emotion in their own memory banks, we are triggering a deeper truth then we can ever express in words. The reader sees John’s fear and actually, at some level, experiences fear.

The key point here is that by altering the way you write, by moving away from narrative summary and towards words and actions, you are forcing the reader from a passive stance into an active stance. When you write in a way the creates a narrative space between the reader and the characters, the reader will ‘lean in’ and engage with your book.

In the most simplistic terms:

Narrative summary (dumping back-story) = TELL.

Passing back-story via dialogue and actions = SHOW.

A word of warning here… You are going to learn to use Show, Don’t Tell in a way that moves far beyond anything taught in a creative writing class. Writing in this manner is more than a simple technique, it as writing methodology. In fact, Show, Don’t Tell will become your mantra. The application of this one simple phrase is the

key to unlocking your novel and creating active prose that sucks the reader into your story. You will find repeatedly that by simply asking, ‘Am I SHOWING or TELLING?’ you will lift your novel to the highest possible level.

The trick is now to forget the theory and to learn the simple techniques that will allow you to build the Show Don’t Tell Methodology into the very fabric of your writing. It’s this task that we will be addressing in the coming chapter.

To apply the Show, Don’t Tell Methodology to a wider novel you will need to focus on four key aspects:

  • Characterization.
  • Dialogue.
  • Description.
  • Narrative Summary.

Characterization will see you learning how to use back-story to determine how characters will react in any given situation. Dialogue will show you how to write speech that creates a narrative space between the reader and your characters. Description will demonstrate the best way to description events, and Narrative Summary will give you guidelines at to what you can and can’t have the narrator saying to the reader.

Chapter 4: Dialogue >>