>>6 You can indicate which post you're replying to by using ">>" and the post's number. It will automatically link to it. Or you use Toastywafflz' solution
2. If you worry about having contrasting chunks of dialogue and description, try to incorporate the description in the conversation and vice versa.
Here's my own albeit clumsy example (the same problem was addressed in the other thread).
1. & 3. I've
partially covered this topic in the other thread, but let me explain it a little more. Regarding your difficulty to adopt a scenic, i.e. concrete, visual writing style, I think keen observation is the first step towards success. One can only convey what one has consciously perceived.
Do you happen to play an instrument, to paint, to make (slam) poetry, to act on stage or to practice mindfulness? If you do, you can use your experiences to hone your observational skills and by observation, I mean perceiving something with all of your senses. Nonetheless, it's easier to start with one sense and then include another.
If you're a musician or a (slam) performer, you may want to try some onomatopoetic exercises. Listen to your surroundings and try to convert each sound to a suitable (string of) syllables. The first time will feel awkward but after a while this exercise becomes fun and potentially addicting.
If you feel comfortable with your onomatopoetry, you can try to match it with actual words. That way you can determine which word is the most suitable to describe the sound.
You may raise your eyebrows at this suggestion, but believe me, as ridiculous as it seems, it will sharpen your mind for the phonetic quality of your writing. Poets and playwrights are very well aware of the sound of their every word and the flow of their sentences. Other people may forget that interesting fiction should be just as good when read aloud and most likely even better. Let an unaffliated person read your story out loud and check your writing for stylistic flaws.
If you're more of a painter, actor or a visually-oriented person, work on that part of your perception first. Examine objects, people and your surroundings closely, you want to make use of your senses of smell, taste and touch, too. How do things change depending on the situation? What kind of tone and body language do people use with each other? How do emotional outbursts manifest?
If you can get access to a drama troupe/club, local theatre or something comparable, don't hesitate to pay them a visit. If they allow it, attend their rehearsals. They are the best opportunity to study human emotions and body language. Emotional expressions are an actor's working tools after all, and they consciously use them. Plus, stage actors tend to amplify their gestures and facial expressions, so it's easier to observe them.
If you don't have any actors around use the people around you as study objects, though it may be a lot more difficult to figure out their thoughts as you can seldom ask them directly.
Well, here's an example for how to transform a "telling" style into a "showing" one:
He drank some water.A classic example of generalised narration. Let's make it a little more visual:
He opened a bottle, poured himself a glass of water and gulped it down it.Less roundabout, but still not as detailed as we need it to be in order to become an immediate experience:
His fingers reached for the bottle's top, pulled on its cap giving it a spin, fumbled, then set it down on the counter. Tilting the flask, a stream gurgled forth, splashing a few spots on his other hand that kept the glass in its place. When he raised it to his lips, droplets ran down its walls and trickled from its bottom. His adams apple slid up and down as the water ran past.This amount of detail should do for the reader to be able to watch it before their inner eye. However, a concrete description on its own isn't appealing enough to keep the reader engaged. It can only serve as a literary motif or more often as the backdrop for a more interesting event such as the characters' dialogues or inner monologues.
Which brings me to the next point: the momentum. It isn't necessarily bad to keep your storyline simple, but employ a sufficient degree of conflict (e.g. external circumstances or inner turmoil). Conflict is the spice that keeps a story literarily tasty. Make your characters troubled, you can even torment them, just make them change and possibly grow. A sympathetic character's development draws out a reader's emotional response like nothing else.
And if you cannot make your character sympathetic, at least make them intriguing and
believable in particular to keep your reader's attention.
As you can see, creating captivating characters is a tough job, but an essential one for any story. The only method I know to guarantee their credibility is to study them inside out. Develop them beforehand. Write down or at least think about their life's story, anything that happened to them or may happen, their background, childhood, relationships, current circumstances, mannerisms, appearance, personality, aims, dreams and failures, even the first time they peed their pants. Anything.
It may seem too much work at first glance, but you'll only know that your characters have truly come to life when you can imagine them outside your story's setting. For example, do you know how they would behave if you saw them shop for groceries? Congratulations, you've successfully created a real character.
Sorry, this was quite long-winded. Just use what you consider manageable. Good luck with your story!