# badverbs



## deilaitha (Nov 22, 2014)

It seems that anytime a writing advice article crosses my radar, it inevitably includes something along the lines of "eliminate most occurrences of adverbs." 

So, what I want to know is this: when did adverbs become so universally loathed by writers and/or readers? It kind of makes me think about 'rules' for composing music.  In music composition, parallel octaves and thirds are considered "okay," whereas parallel fifths are not.  The reason for this is that Bach and many other classical composers did not use parallel fifths. 

To me, this seems a bit backwards. We are told that "strong writing has very few adverbs," and when we ask why, we are told, "Because this writing with very few adverbs is stronger, see?"  

While I understand that adverbs are often redundant, and that a weak verb-adverb pair is not as good as one solid verb, I guess I'm still mystified by the vitriol directed at adverbs in writing. It seems like it's the kind of advice that one person propagates and suddenly everyone is repeating it. 

Really, who determines what good style is, anyway? 

(Guess who just came across another statement condemning adverbs?)


----------



## Svrtnsse (Nov 22, 2014)

I get the feeling it's the kind of advice that's easy to give, because it's fairly simple. I too have seen it a lot and even as fairly new to writing I've come to understand the advice quite well - or so I'd like to believe. I guess it's a bit similar to the "show, don't tell" advice, which is something you also see bounced around quite a bit.

It's a good advice that can be picked up on and understood easily, and which can be passed on to others without too much effort.

What would be interesting is seeing advice for when it's okay to use adverbs and when it's better to tell than to show - other than just "go with your gut feeling". I'm not sure that's nearly as easy though.


EDIT: It should be noted that I don't necessarily think these are bad pieces of advice. They may not always be the gospel truth though.


----------



## Trick (Nov 22, 2014)

I think adverbs have fallen from favor, not just because they are sometimes redundant, but because they often say nothing at all. 'Smiled happily' is redundant but 'A black-cloaked form darted into the the alley and Casey frowned conspiratorially.' tells me nothing more than 'A black-cloaked form darted into the the alley and Casey frowned.' 

How does one frown conspiratorially? What does it look like? That adverb means nothing and is just an example of telling, and a bad one at that. I think that knowing when to cut adverbs and when to keep them is a matter of practice and style. So, no one's usage will be exactly the same as someone else's, nor should it be. It just seems to be a good rule of thumb to keep an eye on over using adverbs while writing, though. There are no hard and fast rules.


----------



## Guy (Nov 22, 2014)

I always thought this was one of the sillier rules. When writing in English you should never use a standard part of speech. Okey dokey, then. Also high on the list of silly rules are:

rules that say avoid description. I actually saw someone say "so-and-so's long, dark hair" was too excessive a description. Really? Length and color of hair is too much? We have to sacrifice creating an accurate picture of a character in the name of making writing lean?

When writing dialogue you should only use "(insert character's name here) said." Not "replied," "asked," "retorted," "answered," "quipped" or anything else, just "said." The English language is one of the richest, most versatile languages in the world and we're not supposed to use it.

I think most of these rules are geared towards making writing lean and fast paced, but they get a little nuts with it. Any day now I'm going to see an article saying we can't use "the." It's _so_ overdone. Keep making that writing so lean we're left with a blank page.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Nov 22, 2014)

I try to write with limited adverbs, but it's important to understand not all adverbs are "bad". Adverbs are a part of language and they have their uses.

Adverbs get frowned upon when:
1) The writer relies upon them too heavily
2) The writer misses important opportunities to show, and instead tells too much with adverbs
3) The adverb is a useless word which adds little or nothing to the sentence
4) The writer modifies the word "said"
5) The writer is using modified nouns and verbs instead of precise nouns and verbs

Sometimes though, adverbs do add meaning. They also feel and sound natural in dialogue. Listen to how people talk. We use adverbs all the time because we prefer to speak with brevity. Often I find that using a modifier simplifies the expression. In those cases the adverb not only adds meaning, but it offers a concise description.

So, in short, if the adverb falls in number 1-5 in the first list, I cut it without remorse. But, if it meets the conditions where I find them appropriate, they stay. I've found this offers a nice balance in my style. That, however, is only my style choice. It's not a rule for anyone to follow.


----------



## Trick (Nov 22, 2014)

Guy said:


> I always thought this was one of the sillier rules. When writing in English you should never use a standard part of speech.



I've never heard or read anyone one saying, "never use adverbs." Use them sparingly, use them when appropriate, use them only when they add something to the sentence... these all seem like good advice. 



Guy said:


> Okey dokey, then. Also high on the list of silly rules are:
> 
> rules that say avoid description. I actually saw someone say "so-and-so's long, dark hair" was too excessive a description. Really? Length and color of hair is too much? We have to sacrifice creating an accurate picture of a character in the name of making writing lean?



If someone said that, they're wrong. Unless of course it followed or preceded an entire paragraph of description.



Guy said:


> When writing dialogue you should only use "(insert character's name here) said." Not "replied," "asked," "retorted," "answered," "quipped" or anything else, just "said." The English language is one of the richest, most versatile languages in the world and we're not supposed to use it.



In my opinion, writers should go through their favorite books for examples of this. If you find many uses of varying dialogue tags like the ones you mentioned then feel free to use them. Publishers frown on them. That's a good enough reason for me to avoid them. The dialogue should stand on it's own IMHO. I think 'said' is the only transparent dialogue tag except perhaps for 'asked.' I like transparent writing, thus, I try to follow this rule. 



Guy said:


> I think most of these rules are geared towards making writing lean and fast paced, but they get a little nuts with it. Any day now I'm going to see an article saying we can't use "the." It's _so_ overdone. Keep making that writing so lean we're left with a blank page.



I agree people can get a little nuts with it but it's about selling your work in the current market. If you don't care about that as much as others, these "rules" have no meaning. I edit my writing to reflect these rules because they are proven to improve getting published and selling. It's just marketing, you don't have to agree with it even if it's effective.


----------



## Legendary Sidekick (Nov 22, 2014)

The important thing is to tell your story clearly. (My use of an adverb is natural, not there to make a point.)

I use "said" often because it's "invisible," but if "muttered" works, I'll use it. Same with adverbs. I don't panic over word choice. If I read my story and find myself stumbling over the words, then I worry about word choice. If a beta reader can't tell what's going on, word choice might be the issue. If my reader doesn't enjoy the story, maybe it's word choice or my story just sucks.


----------



## wordwalker (Nov 23, 2014)

It's a good question, how often the anti-adverb advice actually says "never" and how often they say things like "Adverbs here and there are okay, but watch them like you would a dog on your lawn: with suspicion." (That one's Nat Russo.)

Yes, adverbs are on everyone's short list of Things to Advise Against these days--which means it's easy to hear that warning again and again. But it's only the sloppier blogs and guides that really say they're things to flat-out avoid. More often we get the impression that they're simply "badverbs" from hearing that they're mostly bad from everyone, or some juicy single line against them that gets remembered out of context.


----------



## Xitra_Blud (Nov 23, 2014)

To me, adverbs are not always a bad thing, however, they can be overused. Also, a lot of people use adverbs when some well detailed description would be better used. Often times, beginning writers tend to overuse adverbs as they are not that developed in writing imagery or description so too many adverbs can make a story look immature and not very well developed. I am guilty of telling people whose work I critique to delete some of their adverbs typically because I feel like there are places in the story where the author could really paint a scene but it's lacking that imagery because of the use of adverbs. Adverbs are okay every now and then and sometimes you can't avoid using them, but my advice is always, if you don't have to use them don't.


----------



## Sheilawisz (Nov 23, 2014)

Yeah, the writing rules can say this, and say that... However, we should never forget that We are Storytellers in First place and Writers in Second =)


----------



## ThinkerX (Nov 23, 2014)

Flipped through a book at the library yesterday.  Interesting tale, but after the time spent reading here, I have this stunted editor fellow perched on my shoulder who reads along with me, pointing out this and that.  One of the things he pointed out was a short sentence - maybe ten words total - with three adverbs...and it wasn't dialogue.


----------



## Noma Galway (Nov 23, 2014)

Sheilawisz said:


> Yeah, the writing rules can say this, and say that... However, we should never forget that We are Storytellers in First place and Writers in Second



^THIS. So much this. Maybe sometimes style is problematic, but the telling of the story is the important part. If I have to break every rule in the book to get my point across, I will. Because it is part of the story. That is why they call it _Creative_ Writing. Sure, you have to be creative to even sit down and write, but writing in itself should be a creative act. I don't want my writing time cluttered up with so-called rules for being a good creative writer. 

Just my two cents.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Nov 23, 2014)

Noma Galway said:


> ^THIS. So much this. Maybe sometimes style is problematic, but the telling of the story is the important part. If I have to break every rule in the book to get my point across, I will. Because it is part of the story. That is why they call it Creative Writing. Sure, you have to be creative to even sit down and write, but writing in itself should be a creative act. I don't want my writing time cluttered up with so-called rules for being a good creative writer.  Just my two cents.


I don't know... I get what you're trying to say & I'd agree that storytelling trumps all. However, I think it's also important to understand how writing style, and the choices we make as writers, affect storytelling. 

An acceptance of storytelling as the most important aspect doesn't diminish the influence of quality writing. What constitutes quality writing is largely subjective. Still, I'd rather be armed with knowledge and practice, telling my stories in a way that enhances the reader's experience. Going into such a laborious exercise, like writing a novel, without a firm grasp of style seems willy-nilly and likely to produce a substandard tale...or at least, not my best effort.


----------



## Guy (Nov 24, 2014)

"How Not to be a Writer:  15 Signs You're Doing it Wrong."
I thought items 3,4 and 5 were particularly pertinent to this thread.
BookDaily.com - How Not to Be a Writer: 15 Signs YouÃ¢â‚¬â„¢re Doing It Wrong


----------



## Feo Takahari (Nov 25, 2014)

If there's one thing I've learned from editing for non-native speakers, it's that adverbs beat no adverbs. Often a convoluted, difficult to understand description of how exactly an action was performed can be reduced to one word, or at least introduce a convenient comma, through use of an adverb. (In other words, adverbs solve things neatly.)


----------



## Fyle (Nov 27, 2014)

I ignore that rule. If an adverb helps express what you wanna say and doesn't sound funny, fine. Use it. 

I do not know Steven Kings total theory on writing, but I heard him say something to the extent that if you like the way it reads and sounds, dont worry if its sn adverb. 

And, who is reading the story with a red pen looking to stamp out adverbs？Well, as far as readers go i mean.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Nov 27, 2014)

I've read a lot of King's theory on writing and I've never heard him speak well of adverb use, not that this matters for anyone other than King.  

The quote I'm familiar with is.... 

"The road to hell is paved with adverbs." - Stephen King


----------



## Fyle (Nov 27, 2014)

T.Allen.Smith said:


> I've read a lot of King's theory on writing and I've never heard him speak well of adverb use, not that this matters for anyone other than King.
> 
> The quote I'm familiar with is....
> 
> "The road to hell is paved with adverbs." - Stephen King



It was a  lecture I saw on Youtube. Fairly recent too.


----------



## wordwalker (Nov 27, 2014)

Balance.

Writing is balance. It's knowing how a given decision changes the balance of the writing-- and how to compensate for that, or accept that the "tipping" it did isn't going to hurt much this time. An adverb in one place might be a good part of a stronger description; in another it might be a quick&dirty touch that's worth keeping, and in many more they're a distraction.

I think of writing "rules" as principles about that balancing. The theory behind any of those rules is sound, A will cause some "B-imbalance;" the real question is what would that bit of B actually mean interacting with the rest of the story.

And since a part of that balance is that often a thing weakens the story in a _small_ way, another part of writing is a balance between making the rules work for you and knowing when to stop worrying about them.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Nov 27, 2014)

Fyle said:


> It was a  lecture I saw on Youtube. Fairly recent too.


I think the quote I posted is in jest.


----------



## spectre (Nov 27, 2014)

I agree with Trick and great post T. Allen Smith and Scribal Lord. I have a tendency to write, and not research writing. Some people might say that's a bad practice, but I feel like if I go through the trouble to research every aspect of my novel from the ground up and forget the colorful language I learned in school, I'd be writing backwards and so my viewpoint is that adverbs are just another part of the language, but I also agree Xitra_Blud, make sure you're telling the story events and not describing them in single words too. 

I fell like adverbs are ok to use though, because in my writings, action is not all the time. I tend to use adverbs I noticed looking back for this article, in describing things parallel to the story like backdrop.

Feo perfectly describes my viewpoint on adverbs in this post.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Nov 27, 2014)

Part of developing an authorial voice and style, is learning what works to achieve your vision as a writer. In my opinion, that's best accomplished by exposing yourself to a lot of techniques and methods, even rules which are particular to specific writers. Somewhere along the path of experimentation, we discover techniques which get us closer to our goal, and even that will grow and continue to develop the more we write.

What Elmore Leonard, Stephen King, or any other successful author does, may not work for you through and through, but there are likely kernels in those personal rule sets that will apply to your art, making you better. 

In the words of Bruce Lee, "Absorb what is useful."


----------

