Well, I ignored your misplaced thread.
This time I answer on behalf of causal readers of LN. My short answer... LN fans like telling, not because they like telling, they might not know that there is a better storytelling through showing.
You know, right? Telling and showing are not just about storytelling... it's about reader immersion, about how to involve the reader in interpreting the narrative, about how to make the reader feel as if they can experience the fictional world. Take the following narrative for example:
Telling version:
A blonde-haired girl wearing a rose dress, named Errie, stood in a wheat field. She felt touched, seeing golden grains as far as the eye could see. The afternoon breeze greeted her. The fragrant aroma reminded her of her grandmother's homemade bread.
Showing version:
A girl in a rose dress stands in a wheat field. Her blonde hair flutters as the wind blows. A sweet aroma fills her nose. Golden grains shine in the orange light. Her lips curled upwards as her eyes closed slowly, "Is it delicious, honey?" "Hmm... Errie likes bread." Her gaze is moist. Her left palm is clutching her shirt collar, "Grandma..."
Notice how the two narratives provide different immersions. In the telling version, the readers feel narratively distanced. They only see a 'report' about a girl standing in a wheat field. They just discover that the girl named Errie feels moved and nostalgic when she sees the grains of wheat. But they don't feel how the girl feels. The readers are just neutral observers. Why?
Because the narrator provides an interpretation of what happened to Errie. This makes the reader's mind passive and stops thinking. They just nod and say, "Oh... there's a girl in the wheat field."
On the other hand, the showing version provides a more immersive reading experience. The readers don't just know what happened to Errie, the readers are invited to feel what she experienced. Through cinematic camera and sensory stimulation, readers experience what is happening to Errie. They can almost smell the aroma of wheat, bringing back nostalgic memories of their grandmother.
The sensory narrative and cinematic narrative camera keep the reader's mind actively interpreting the scene. Even without the narrative explicitly mentioning a touching feeling, readers can draw their own conclusions through her memory, body language, dialogue, and atmosphere.
Honestly, as a former LN reader, after I learned how immersive the experience of reading through a showing narrative is... I've become less fond of a telling narrative where the author continues to dictate to the reader through the narrator.
I've tried opening my LN collection, but when I see a telling narrative, I feel uncomfortable. I can't get into the story. I can't feel what the protagonist is experiencing. Instead, I just see a narrator trying to dictate what happens in the story. As a result, I realize I'm 'reading a story'.
A good narrative should ideally be able to
hypnotize the readers that forget they're reading fiction. And a telling narrative creates a narrative distance that makes the readers realize they're reading a story, not living in it.
Well, this maybe it's just my subjective opinion as a causal reader... but LN readers might like to tell narratives not because they hate showing... instead, they don't know that there is a narrative that is so beautiful, so immersive, that it makes them forget that they are reading a story, called showing narrative.
It's like a cat keeps eating raw fish because it doesn't know there is a premium food called cat snacks. But if the cat once enjoyed cat snacks, the cat might not be able to enjoy raw fish anymore... and wants to keep eating cat snacks.
