Dear James,
I totally disagree that it's a technical term like enjambment, which is just
a matter of how you present a poem on the page or screen.
I think it's a more a matter of an author's whole attitude to writing. Like
all 'rules', it is not set in concrete, but I think it is an excellent
statement for a poet to consider. Of course, there are some things, like
certain facts in a narrative that the reader has to be told, but when it
comes to investing the same narrative with emotional overlay, the author
should not tell the reader how to feel about it. By choice of words,
imagery, etc , a poet should convey any emtions- without needing to STATE
the emotions. In simplest terms, don't describe anything as scary or
heart-wrenching for instance, your writing should convey that.
 Why I think it's such a helpful adage is that it encourages a poet to think
about what he/she is writing about,the concrete and immediate details,
rather than to become lost in a lot of abstract woffle about what the poet
thinks and feels.That leaves little room for a reader's personal response.
It's true most poems are about 'I', but at least, let's make a stab at
submerging the poetic ego a little.
Kind regards,
 grasshopper
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Bell" <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 9:21 AM
Subject: Re: "show not tell"


> Hackneyed but a valuable statement, a technical term rather like
enjambment
> I'd say. I find it tends to come into play when a poet has probably said
too
> much. We can show what we mean through the flow of the poem. I take as
> example my poem "Leaf" that you liked in WORM (which I thank you for and
> found your comments wonderfully accurate). Show not tell.  We need it as a
> necessary short hand. Hope this helps.
> bw
> James
>
>