NO. HOW DOES AN AUTHOR GET THE VERY BASICS OF "SHOW, DON'T TELL" SO HORRIFYINGLY WRONG. BECAUSE SHE'S STILL TELLING. A WHOLE GIANT SLAB OF TELLING. Yet at the same time this explains so much of what's happened in the last dozen or so books. She thinks this is what showing is about, that this will make people feel what she feels and 'see' these characters as the beautiful, deep, and passionate imaginary people that she knows. And she utterly fails at conveying the most simple aspects of any of it because she's drowning the reader in "telling them what they should believe."

I feel a bit cruel for hoping that the people who find this as profound and inspiring advice get eviscerated by beta readers/editors/agents and hopefully learn that showing actions/reactions/consequences will inform a reader so much more about a character than giant slabs of descriptive text ever will.