Adverbs?

[JordanSC5]

I'm reading Stephen King's "On Writing" and he detests adverbs. He says the context of the story should provide the necessary details to show what an adverb tells. What do you all think?

 

[Victoria Silverwolf]

It is true that adverbs are often used too often by amateurs like me. Same goes for adjectives. I would not say that these words should never be used, but if you can convey the same information using verbs your story can be stronger. "Mary ran quickly" is weaker than "Mary hurtled down the road."

 

[AnyaKimlin]

Honestly I think adverbs add colour and warmth to some author's voices. I know they are viewed as old fashioned but I don't like the new fashion for bare writing.

My favourite author Robert Neill wrote his first book in the 1950s. He happily used many adverbs, adjectives and speech descriptors. In 2012 a new edition came out with them edited and it is OK but doesn't sparkle like the original. It's drab.

He wrote some stories in the 1970s just using said, less adverbs, adjectives etc. The stories are still good but they again lack the strength of voice of the earlier works.

For me it depends what I'm working on. My cosy mystery and new story set in 1704 I use more with than my fantasy stories which are more modern in feel.

 

[ZombieWife]

Adverbs are seasoning. Use in moderation. I don't see any reason to completely nix them all, but I don't bog my writing down with too many.

 

[Glisterspeck]

It's not just that they are often used to prop up weak verbs, but given how almost all of them end in -ly, they can play havoc with the rhythm of your prose.

 

[Glen]

I was going to write a smart-arse reply like "I quite like adverbs, and unfortunately they are not used enough.' But then decided I wasn't entirely sure if I could tell an adverb from my elbow and consulted my research dept.

This site (http://examples.yourdictionary.com/examples-of-a.html) suggests that adverbs include words like 'tomorrow' and 'also' which I think would be fine to use. But also (oops) 'very' which I wouldn't like at all. And if 'very' was combined with 'nice' to make 'very nice' it would make Mrs Brown my old English teacher spin in her home/nursing home/grave (thanks Mrs Brown, and sorry for the paranethetic statement).

Then I did more independent research looking for 'ly' in my last ms. The results are glaringly obvious. I can scarely belive it. I could have avoided this so easily. But must confess immediately. I am an adverb addict.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I did a check through some 300 stories a couple of months ago and the ones that had caught my eye were the ones with very few adverbs. The one that won that month - I won't say when - had barely any. I use them, but as sparingly (hee) as I can, and less than I used to. It's just that we use them so much all the time that in replacing them you can get a different, more memorable, turn of phrase. But sometimes, they go in, and if you read King, he uses them, too. He isn't saying don't use, he's saying to use with caution.

 

[Hex]

I've been over-using recently but, like everything in writing, I think it comes down to style and rhythm. If you can make it work then do so.

I sometimes prefer one to a verb that's clearly been crushed in to replace an adverb or adjective. It depends.

Many of my favourite authors (Patricia McKillip, for example, since I have a copy of Alphabet of Thorn open in front of me) use adverbs -- the page I opened at random (p.79) had four words ending in -ly ('he explained, erratically, as he translated...', 'He blew on his hastily scrawled translation...', 'the captain said, fervently.' and 'it was intricately carved with long-jawed, lozenge-backed lizards'). They all work, the language flows and she's a craftswoman -- someone who writes beautiful, intricate books.

No insult to King, who is a master of what he does, but my impression is that he writes to be clear and tell a story. Nothing wrong with that, but maybe it lends itself to fewer adverbs?

I wonder, too, if horror and science fiction tend to be sparer in general than fantasy.

 

[HareBrain]

Georges Simenon said something similar; he advised the removal of "adjectives, adverbs, and every word which is there just to make an effect". But all this kind of advice is, to my mind, overly uncompromising. There seems to be a certain cachet in appearing to be ruthless -- "Murder your darlings"; "That's a beautiful sentence. Cut it". This seems to be writers wanting to come across as rugged man-heroes because they don't admit to using any word that's "aesthetic", as though they live in the literary equivalent of unheated log cabins and eat pine cones which they take delight in passing through their digestive systems whole. Adverbs are easy to overuse, and writers should be encouraged not to overuse them, not exhorted to ban them altogether as though they'll never be skilled enough to be trusted with them. And not everyone wants to write like Stephen King, for which I as a reader am thankful.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Actually, to stick up for Mister King, his advice is often taken out of context. He advises using them sparingly:

"They're like dandelions. If you have one on your lawn, it looks pretty and unique. If you fail to root it out, however, you'll find five the next day... fifty the day after that.. and then, my brothers and sisters, your lawn is totally, completely, and profligately covered with dandelions." (And I think this is a sentiment we can all agree with -- adverbs, like any other word, need to be thought about, not sprinkled in, willy-nilly.)

So I don't think he's saying anything different from anyone else. He is equally down on passive sentences. The reason why he's known for being totally anti-adverb is, I think, the next bit:


"I can be a good sport about adverbs, though. Yes I can. With one exception: dialogue attribution. I insist you use the adverb in dialogue attribution only in the rarest and most special of occasions... and even then , if you can avoid it." (This one, I agree with, and I think the move from dialogue attribution to action tags is an extension of this.)

But, this is an excerpt from King, and I didn't have to look long to find it (I lifted a random King book and opened it and got this from the first page, I mostly do when this comes up):

"I wrote her a letter as soon as I hung up, hating the stilted, artificially chatty tone but not knowing how to get past it."

So, King uses adverbs, he accepts the odd one looks good, but doesn't want his grass sprinkled with them. It's very different from what is so often quoted that he doesn't want to use them at all. He detests them only in dialogue attribution. I pretty much agree (but I quite like King.)

 

[HareBrain]

Oh, don't spoil my rant with facts!

I quite like King too, but I also like variety.

 

[Mouse]

Well everybody's said everything and I'm too late to the party again. But I concur with everyone who says use sparingly.

Just checked my 300 worder what won and I hadn't used any. Can't say that was a conscious decision though.

In a short story that Teresa looked at for me, she actually told me to use more adverbs. But that's cos the story was set in the 20s when everything was absolutely, terribly, wonderfully marvellous. Did quite well in the comp I sent it to, too.

 

[Kissmequick]

Adverbs are seasoning. Use in moderation. I don't see any reason to completely nix them all, but I don't bog my writing down with too many.

Exactly*

Think about why they might be frowned on - as said upthread you can often make something more vivid by using a stronger verb. Think about hwo you use them, and if the sentence could be done better without (depending on pacing of the scene, surrounding text and the presence of adverbs there etc). If you can make it better without the adverb, then do so.

But sometimes an adverb is exactly* the right word.


*Do you see what I did there?

 

[Phyrebrat]

I agree with the general consensus.

I use adverbs when the tone of a narrative - esp in dialogue - changes completely and the reader may not immediately understand. I think used judiciously they can obviate the need for a clunky sentence of exposition.

pH

 

[Ursa major]

I'm reading Stephen King's "On Writing" and he detests adverbs. He says the context of the story should provide the necessary details to show what an adverb tells. What do you all think?

My memory may be playing tricks (or simply failing), but I'm sure that King admits, in On Writing, that he only manages to get rid of about 50% of the ones he includes in his first drafts. (Or something like that.)

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

This seems to be writers wanting to come across as rugged man-heroes because they don't admit to using any word that's "aesthetic", as though they live in the literary equivalent of unheated log cabins and eat pine cones which they take delight in passing through their digestive systems whole.

Oh, don't spoil my rant with facts!

It was a lovely rant. I'm going to print it up, frame it, and put it on my wall.*


*But only if I can find a way to make it go with my decor.

But that's cos the story was set in the 20s when everything was absolutely, terribly, wonderfully marvellous.

Exactly.

 

[Glisterspeck]

...as though they live in the literary equivalent of unheated log cabins and eat pine cones which they take delight in passing through their digestive systems whole.

Wow. That's rough roughage.