Simile+Lesson

==Similes, as we all know, are comparisons using “like” or “as.” To say they are comparisons is of course to say they are a type of analogy. When used (as they generally are) for elucidating purposes, analogies work by comparing something less known or understood to something better known or understood. Remember that what comes immediately after the “like” or “as” is offered as the better-known part. (E.g., “Like sands through the hourglass, so are the days of our lives.”)==

==When using similes, which work very well for descriptive writing, it does help to have—as many seasoned writers do—a few ready-made, prefabricated sentence structures. (To use a clichéd, metaphorical comparison, they’re some of the tools of the trade.) Those barebones structures can be readily adapted to meet the needs of many writing situations.==

== You can of course riff on these structures in any number of ways. You could add adverbs to modify adjectives and/or verbs, for example. Or you can use entire clauses, not just phrases, following the “like” or “as.” ==

== Wodehouse’s examples are interesting—even arresting—because they bring together two very dissimilar objects. In the first example, a person is compared to a snail (and a salted snail at that!). In the third, a person’s face is compared to a bus driver’s trousers. Those should be pretty memorable comparisons! ==

== If the two things compared are pretty similar, however, the comparison will likely be less interesting. For example, had we compared the Rec climber to, say, a ninja, it’s probably not going to nab as much attention as comparing a person to a squirrel. (A ninja has one very important similarity to the climber, and that is they are both human. [Besides, the “ninja” comparison is pretty hackneyed these days.] If the ninja is described with enough detail, however, it could be more interesting than the squirrel comparison.) Generally, then, the more novel (while still justifiable) the comparison, the more interesting. ==

== And, the more detail crammed into relatively little space—it’s entirely possible to belabor the comparison—the better. “Climbed like a squirrel” is not as interesting as “climbed like a frightened squirrel.” Probably better not to go for “climbed like a frightened squirrel chased by thirty dogs that haven’t eaten in days.” ==

== Because good similes compare objects and situations to other objects and situations in relatively vivid detail, they are ways of “showing,” as opposed to “telling.” The distinction between showing and telling—and between facts and definitions—isn’t without problems or critics, but let the categories suffice for the moment as some useful guidelines. ==

== When writers show, they give facts about the object or situation being described. (With similes, these facts are figurative rather than literal.) When writers tell, on the other hand, they define or even evaluate the object or situation. It’s one thing to define a situation as “chaotic” or “violent” or to evaluate it as “atrocious.” It’s quite another to relate the facts about the situation. ==

== Descriptive writing can have a justifiable blend of showing and telling, though many writing teachers recommend more showing than telling. Let’s take a couple examples dealing with an object familiar to most of us, the statue of William L. Mayo in front of the Heritage House. The first example will have telling and showing, the second more showing. ==

== Mayo, very dignified, stands facing the campus like a tireless general. (telling, showing) Mayo, his lapel clutched by his left hand and his College Orations cradled in his right, stands facing the campus like a tireless general ready to address his troops. (showing, showing). ==

== In the second example, notice that facts (showing) in the first part have replaced the definition (telling) of the first example. The simile also has been given more specificity. (Admittedly, “clutched” and “cradled” define the kind of holding, and “tireless” and “ready” are definitions that could conceivably be replaced by “raw facts.”) ==

== Most importantly, the second example, by showing, allows the reader to make the inference that Mayo is “very dignified” from the details about the way he is standing. Sometimes allowing readers to come to these conclusions is a way of respecting their ability to “put the pieces together,” as when we simply tell a joke without our attempting to explain it—something a sufficiently witty listener will often resent. ==

~ Brandon Barnes, Spring 2011