Can we talk about adverbs?

[piperofyork]

Ponder wisely.

Assuredly!

 

[Puck]

Well Hemmingway said to distrust adverbs - that's not the same as never using them (he did use them, just a lot less than most writers).

As a general rule I'd say don't use them if they add nothing or if they simply state the obvious. Only use them if they add something meaningful that would be absent if you didn't have them there.

Saki was a master of adverb use. But then again he was probably the most talented technical writer in the English language of the C20th. Here is one of his classics, using the adverb "enormously":

He is one of those people who would be enormously improved by death

 

[Demesnedenoir]

The element of humor gives the adverb an assist; for me, enormously adds a levity that would otherwise be missing (at least without further context). And it gives the narrative voice character. My brain is morning-dead and struggling to name the Hemingwaybook I read a few pages of a while back, but Hemingway’s adverbs often lended a certain effect, humorous or otherwise. One can’t simply point and scream like Invasion of the Body Snatchers: ADVERB! and delete it. They can be effective. The trouble is that writers experience more nuance with their writing than exists for readers and tend to believe that adverbs add a special something that they don’t.

All of that said, if you removed enormously, I wouldn’t miss it.

Well Hemmingway said to distrust adverbs - that's not the same as never using them (he did use them, just a lot less than most writers).

As a general rule I'd say don't use them if they add nothing or if they simply state the obvious. Only use them if they add something meaningful that would be absent if you didn't have them there.

Saki was a master of adverb use. But then again he was probably the most talented technical writer in the English language of the C20th. Here is one of his classics, using the adverb "enormously":

He is one of those people who would be enormously improved by death

 

[Puck]

Now that I've got started on Saki, here's another good example of his use of adverbs. It is from his short story - Tobermory (Tobermory being a cat who learns to speak - everyone is amazed by this and thinks it's great ... until it turns out that the cat has some rather uncomfortable opinions of his own that he is not shy about sharing with humans).

“What do you think of human intelligence?" asked Mavis Pellington lamely.

"Of whose intelligence in particular?" asked Tobermory coldly.

"Oh, well, mine for instance," said Mavis with a feeble laugh.

"You put me in an embarrassing position," said Tobermory, whose tone and attitude certainly did not suggest a shred of embarrassment. "When your inclusion in this house-party was suggested Sir Wilfrid protested that you were the most brainless woman of his acquaintance, and that there was a wide distinction between hospitality and the care of the feeble-minded. Lady Blemley replied that your lack of brain-power was the precise quality which had earned you your invitation, as you were the only person she could think of who might be idiotic enough to buy their old car. You know, the one they call 'The Envy of Sisyphus,' because it goes quite nicely up-hill if you push it.”

 

[Demesnedenoir]

If you like those adverbs, we’ll have to agree to disagree, unless you want to label this as for YA of MG readers. Good story as I recall, but I have to turn off the inner editor to get past the adverbs, heh heh.

Now that I've got started on Saki, here's another good example of his use of adverbs. It is from his short story - Tobermory (Tobermory being a cat who learns to speak - everyone is amazed by this and thinks it's great ... until it turns out that the cat has some rather uncomfortable opinions of his own that he is not shy about sharing with humans).

“What do you think of human intelligence?" asked Mavis Pellington lamely.

"Of whose intelligence in particular?" asked Tobermory coldly.

"Oh, well, mine for instance," said Mavis with a feeble laugh.

"You put me in an embarrassing position," said Tobermory, whose tone and attitude certainly did not suggest a shred of embarrassment. "When your inclusion in this house-party was suggested Sir Wilfrid protested that you were the most brainless woman of his acquaintance, and that there was a wide distinction between hospitality and the care of the feeble-minded. Lady Blemley replied that your lack of brain-power was the precise quality which had earned you your invitation, as you were the only person she could think of who might be idiotic enough to buy their old car. You know, the one they call 'The Envy of Sisyphus,' because it goes quite nicely up-hill if you push it.”

 

[piperofyork]

Another great bit of adverb use (IMHO) from the film The Witch...beautifully spoken...

"Wouldst thou like to live deliciously?"

 

[FifthView]

I'd note that the Saki quotes are from third person omniscient narratives.

I suppose the The Witch example is in cinematic third, which I'll call an objective-omniscient third POV. (It is objective in part because viewers can determine what characters are thinking only through observation of their behaviors, audible speech, etc. It is third person because it is not first person or second person, heh. It is omniscient insofar as the camera may show the viewer anything, anywhere, like an omniscient narrator, and this view isn't within the scope of any character's POV—typically, even despite some tricks of the camera.)

The Saki examples show how a third person omniscient narrator may flavor the telling of the tale with the narrator's peculiar personality. It is as if a real person is speaking to us.

“What do you think of human intelligence?" asked Mavis Pellington lamely.

"Of whose intelligence in particular?" asked Tobermory coldly.​

The omniscient narrator is making the value judgments, lamely and coldly. Or let's say the narrator is giving this interpretation of the speech of Pellington and Tobermory.

“What do you think of human intelligence?" asked Mavis Pellington cantankerously.

"Of whose intelligence in particular?" asked Tobermory timidly.​

—well this certainly puts a different spin on the conversation (assuming we take only this, out of context with the surrounding story.)

But...who is spinning it? The narrator.

Still, the reader is meant to take these interpretations at face value. The two sets immediately above are really two different scenes. Two different real occurrences. They cannot possibly be the same scene. (It is as if, perhaps, those are scenes from alternate universes, put here, now, side-by-side.) So the narrator can be felt, the narrator is spinning this tale, but the reader may almost forget the existence of the narrator while reading. The reader becomes a sort of co-conspirator but without knowing this is so, heh, and takes the narration at face value.

That's what makes the cinematic example so powerful:

"Wouldst thou like to live deliciously?" ​

First of all, this is dialogue from a character. So the character is spinning things, obviously. But unlike the lamely and coldly examples from earlier, the speaker's meaning isn't likely to be taken at face value. What, really, does the goat mean? What, really, is his spin? Still, the viewer might be drawn into this speech, become a co-conspirator, insofar as the mind is sent spinning after meaning. Perhaps the viewer finds it creepy. Deliciously is provocative, in a positive sense, but it comes from an evil goat who has a wicked agenda. (I'll admit to a bit of quick research, because I've not watched the movie. )

Either case still points to a being, whether narrator or character (in the case of dialogue), who is spinning meaning. This might work to grab hold of a reader or viewer, or it might distance the reader or viewer in unwanted ways, depending on the usage.

 

[Puck]

well this certainly puts a different spin on the conversation

I think that is the point & why Saki's use of adverbs works for me.

If someone asks a talking cat : “What do you think of human intelligence?" - the assumption is that they are asking this question out of genuine curiosity. To add the twist that it is said 'lamely' is, yes, a value judgement. But it is an unexpected one - it casts what was said in a totally different light from what we expect.

Something similar happens with Tobermory's reply - 'coldly'. The reply, in itself, is no more than a simple request for information "Of whose intelligence in particular?" - perhaps an obvious and genuine request. However the addition of 'coldy' adds an extra layer.

So the narrator can be felt, the narrator is spinning this tale, but the reader may almost forget the existence of the narrator while reading. The reader becomes a sort of co-conspirator but without knowing this is so, heh, and takes the narration at face value.

Yes, Saki's narrative voice can be clearly heard & the effect I believe he aims for is to make the reader his co-conspirator. Obviously it worked for him because his work has stood the test of time. Perhaps one of the things that is key to making it work is the fact that he is writing satire/comedy & his witty asides and observations play an important part in his work.

The academic, Peter Bilton, wrote of Saki "the wit works -- as wit does -- through the trick it plays on our conditioned expectations and responses, which were what Saki constantly tried to break down. ... conventional expectations are upset, and life is shown as Saki thought it ought to be seen, as a source of constant surprise, shock -- and interest"

Maybe this kind of thing would not work so well (and perhaps might even be annoying) in a 'serious' epic fantasy.

All that said, would I personally be brave enough to use two adverbs in dialogue in succession as Saki did there? Probably not. ... But I might be tempted to venture one.