I understand the argument that is being made-I don't agree with it.

It's not an argument. It's a commonly accepted standard for fictional works. Arguing it is somewhat like attempting to argue that the Pope is actually an atheist.

I feel like you're being purposefully obtuse about this subject for reasons that baffle me.

What's wrong with "I love you and I've always loved you and when X happened I felt Y"?

It tends to create emotional distance rather than drawing the audience in.

"Katy, you shouldn't be carrying something so heavy." invites the audience to participate. "Katy, I want to protect you" doesn't have any depth -- everything is there in the narration, nothing is implied.

Or is your (plural) complaint that such statements are out of character or violate (your take on) canon/continuity or atypical for the house style of ME writing?

My own complaint is that it is bad writing for any house style. I write fiction, as do Dana, Deb, and Consuela, to name three. Scrappy writes screenplays. Any of us will flinch and say "Yipes, you're right" when an editor says "Show, don't tell." "Show, don't tell" means you've been lazy as a writer.

Oh, and Shakespeare is full of asides, which were deliberately intended to Tell us how the character feels, or how other characters feel. The fact that people forget that, or forget the one-dimensional characters, in favor of the good bits is no different from people who forget the [insert thing you hate here] in Buffy in favor of the [insert thing you like here].

This thread is very much beginning to resemble it's title in tone. And that's not necessarily a good thing.

What's wrong with "I love you and I've always loved you and when X happened I felt Y"?

It tends to create emotional distance rather than drawing the audience in.

In a written work, I can see that. In a staged work, I think it's all about the acting.

ETA: Note that the speaker doesn't have to be a Reliable Narrator. A character saying they feel X when we haven't seen it previously may mean that they're lying to the other character, or to themselves.

I think I've had about all the condescension I care for.

Quite frankly, that goes in the reverse, too, Ted. You've been a little condescending yourself.

I will concede that this argument is cyclical and crazy-making, but I will not concede that my point is invalid.

If there were now quantifiable descriptors of "showing" versus "telling," it would be pointless to ever encourage beginning writers to show instead of tell.

What do you guys think of this?

And actually...also this.

Micole, I agree that we can assume those things, but the fact that we have to assume anything here is the problem I see with the writing this season. I thought Anya stayed in Sunnydale because she was afraid of D'Hoffryn's revenge and wanted/needed Buffy's protection. I thought she went to the hospital because she was bored, tipsy, and Andrew mentioned that they could go to the hospital for medical supplies.

And Ted, learning what we did about Xander in the above referenced scene does us very little good if we are supposed to get information about Buffy and Riley. Can you use the above referenced scene to explain why Buffy ran after Riley? I can’t. I am still baffled by it.

This thread is very much beginning to resemble it's title in tone. And that's not necessarily a good thing.

Wolfram, I understand that conflict can make one uncomfortable, but I'm fascinated by this argument and am interested in watching it come to its natural conclusion. Either folks will agree to disagree, or they will come to an understanding, or they will stomp off in anger to doblerize or never return. The last choice is so very rare.

Note that the speaker doesn't have to be a Reliable Narrator. A character saying they feel X when we haven't seen it previously may mean that they're lying to the other character, or to themselves.

At which point, you're showing. The fact of the character's lying or being mistaken demonstrates something important about the character. That is action demonstrating character. (Speech can be action, too. It's narration we object to, not speech.)

When you see Clea pat her hair in a mirror while saying "I've never been vain", that is a character moment. When you have Stacia say "Clea's always been vain", that is a far less powerful character moment.