Finchbearer
Istar
That’s really interesting, what programme do you use again? Is there a free resource to check such things?
Arguably the most famous and well known opening line! And it has an adverb in!
-
Welcome to the Fantasy Writing Forums. Register Now to join us!
Thoughts on Adverbs
- Thread starter AliceBaine
- Start date
Arguably the most famous and well known opening line! And it has an adverb in!
Finchbearer
Istar
Nothing wrong with erotica or romance as genres at all, but they are not all created equally and it comes down to taste or voice as you say.
Demesnedenoir
Myth Weaver
There isn't one simple reason, but if forced to a single answer, at least for me, it's because they are vague.
I once looked at my high school writing expecting to cringe, and yeah, I did, but not because of adverbs. I have always been an adverb minimalist by nature. BUT I also defended -ly adverbs for many years. And to a degree, I still do, they can be just fine. However, somewhere along the line when writing and rewriting Eve of Snows I had a Come to Jesus! moment and it hit like a bat upside the head... only I recovered, unlike some poor bastard in a gangster movie. After years, I got it. And honestly, I think people tend to have to discover it themselves, although I've helped a couple writers see the light when working one on one with them.
And it isn't as simple as removing adverbs. No, adverbs are often a person's writing instinct saying "you need something here" and the first thing that came to mind was an adverb. It also isn't as simple as "finding the right verb!" like so many will claim.
I once looked at my high school writing expecting to cringe, and yeah, I did, but not because of adverbs. I have always been an adverb minimalist by nature. BUT I also defended -ly adverbs for many years. And to a degree, I still do, they can be just fine. However, somewhere along the line when writing and rewriting Eve of Snows I had a Come to Jesus! moment and it hit like a bat upside the head... only I recovered, unlike some poor bastard in a gangster movie. After years, I got it. And honestly, I think people tend to have to discover it themselves, although I've helped a couple writers see the light when working one on one with them.
And it isn't as simple as removing adverbs. No, adverbs are often a person's writing instinct saying "you need something here" and the first thing that came to mind was an adverb. It also isn't as simple as "finding the right verb!" like so many will claim.
Demesnedenoir
Myth Weaver
This comes from the book Nabukov's Favorite Word is Mauve, it's a fascinating read worth the money if you're into such things. It goes into a lot of weird little things in writing, not just adverbs.
The point, however, is not that there's an adverb; it's an adverb that defies the "vague" tendency of adverbs. It carries weight. I was going to have a little fun by opening up a 50 Shades preview, but uh, the writing slaps me in the face so hard that adverbs aren't even the first thing I would close the book for, LMAO.
The point, however, is not that there's an adverb; it's an adverb that defies the "vague" tendency of adverbs. It carries weight. I was going to have a little fun by opening up a 50 Shades preview, but uh, the writing slaps me in the face so hard that adverbs aren't even the first thing I would close the book for, LMAO.
Last edited:
I suppose one difference with English is that certain -lijk words we use simply don't have a clearer or more appropriate alternative. The word for honest is "eerlijk", why arbitrarily replace it for an "oprecht"? And yet, I've used two -ly's in the previous sentence and I still haven't received a call from above, so personally (Aha I did it again!) I believe these adverbs have a perfectly fine place in English writing just as much as they do in Dutch. You may use them sparingly if you wish, but often the -ly's can convey things more succinctly (in a succinct manner... you see?) than an alternative ordering of words could. To me, a lot of it just seems to be an appeal to authority and tradition. The great sages of the past said -ly's are wrong and therefore they are wrong, oh praise their hallowed words!
Can't say I know a lick about Swedish either
Demesnedenoir
Myth Weaver
No, it's more than tradition. The classics, see Bronte, Melville, Austen, Dickens (although Dickens is in line with King) often use more -ly adverbs. Sparingly and succinctly are the only useful -ly you used, heh heh. And even then, I would rewrite sparingly. Yuck. The other ones are redundant or otherwise pointless. Arbitrarily would be incorrect, there's nothing arbitrary about replacing adverbs if you know what you're doing and why.
Another knock on -ly is that it creates an echo in the brain when reading it, some people don't mind it, while others do. But, my issue goes beyond that.
But my admonition is to use them well, and that will mean using fewer than most folks use.
Another knock on -ly is that it creates an echo in the brain when reading it, some people don't mind it, while others do. But, my issue goes beyond that.
But my admonition is to use them well, and that will mean using fewer than most folks use.
I suppose one difference with English is that certain -lijk words we usesimplydon't have a clearer or more appropriate alternative. The word for honest is "eerlijk", whyarbitrarilyreplace it for an "oprecht"? And yet, I've used two -ly's in the previous sentence and I still haven't received a call from above, sopersonally(Aha I did it again!) I believe these adverbs have aperfectlyfine place in English writing just as much as they do in Dutch. You may use them sparingly if you wish, but often the -ly's can convey things more succinctly (in a succinct manner... you see?) than an alternative ordering of words could. To me, a lot of it just seems to be an appeal to authority and tradition. The great sages of the past said -ly's are wrong and therefore they are wrong, oh praise their hallowed words!
Last edited:
Demesnedenoir
Myth Weaver
I used to be pretty good at Swedish Chef from The Muppets, but I don't think that counts.
Can't say I know a lick about Swedish either
You have no one but yourself to blame for this one Demesnedoir muahahaha
But on a less sassy note, I think the literary world can be a bit too harsh on adverbs and supposed redundancies in general. There seems to be an undercurrent in English-language writing at least (though I've been a tad Anglicised, it could extend beyond the language) that streamlined prose is ideal, but I'd wager that an admittedly (!) unnecessary adverb here and there can add a flowery flair that I imagine a lot of readers would enjoy all the same. While I don't have to use adverbs if I wanted to suggest that the "prince of paupers was principally proper," I sure as hell would use it if I happened to write a character that fit the bill.
With silent lips. “Give me your flowery, your poetic,
Your neglected adverbs yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse which waxes eddaic.
Send these, the redundant and scorned to me,
I lift my pen beside my opened Kriek Lambic!”
(Yes, yes Lambic does not rhyme with poetic or Eddaic but the free and me make up for it if you just squash them together a tad. Adapt and improvise lads)
With silent lips. “Give me your flowery, your poetic,
Your neglected adverbs yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse which waxes eddaic.
Send these, the redundant and scorned to me,
I lift my pen beside my opened Kriek Lambic!”
(Yes, yes Lambic does not rhyme with poetic or Eddaic but the free and me make up for it if you just squash them together a tad. Adapt and improvise lads)
Demesnedenoir
Myth Weaver
I'll agree that there is too much focus on "streamlining" but I suspect this is more people's misunderstandings of what people mean, and then others run with it. Plus, people often say things with more hyperbole than necessary.
But on the other hand, sometimes it takes hyperbole to get people to listen at all, heh heh.
A great example is Hemingway and short sentences. Here's a heads up: Hemingway wrote some sentences longer than I ever imagined writing! And he did it well.
But on the other hand, sometimes it takes hyperbole to get people to listen at all, heh heh.
A great example is Hemingway and short sentences. Here's a heads up: Hemingway wrote some sentences longer than I ever imagined writing! And he did it well.
That's a fair point. Hyperbole is far more fun than nuance can ever hope to be and so she's appealing.
FifthView
Vala
I have never made it to chapter 2. But I think this case is more a reflection of me than the novel.
Not only could I not figure out why adults liked the Potter books, I couldn't figure out why any teen liked them either. I couldn't get through the first book; thought the writing so clumsy I was embarrassed in equal measure for both author and reader.
>I would argue the reader is always right.
As to that: nope. The customer is not always right, and number of books (or tickets) sold is a measure only of popularity, not of quality. Readers know what they like, and they will like (and dislike) most anything.
FTR, the author is always right, the editor is mostly right, the publisher is right mainly by avarice, and the reader is right by accident.
Harrumph, he harrumphed adverbially.
>I would argue the reader is always right.
As to that: nope. The customer is not always right, and number of books (or tickets) sold is a measure only of popularity, not of quality. Readers know what they like, and they will like (and dislike) most anything.
FTR, the author is always right, the editor is mostly right, the publisher is right mainly by avarice, and the reader is right by accident.
Harrumph, he harrumphed adverbially.
Adverbs aren't the sin, but they can be indicators of the sin; namely, as Demesnedenoir indicated, it can be a sign of laziness. Note how a number of people on this thread don't say adverbs are bad without adding the qualifier that they are bad when used too often.
Well, what does "too often" mean? It means an adverb is bad when it's poorly used, when the verb itself would be perfectly capable of carrying the weight. Where the adverb is needed, then use it.
It's of a kin with passive constructions--an aspect of the language that is so often abused, it gets written up in writerly guides. Or, to pull from another genre altogether, it's a bit like the coffee stain on your resume (back when we did such things on paper). Does the coffee stain make the resume poor? Not of itself. But to the review committee dealing with far too many applications, it becomes a handy way to toss one in the reject pile. The resume then has to be astonishingly arresting and good throughout to overcome that failing.
Well, what does "too often" mean? It means an adverb is bad when it's poorly used, when the verb itself would be perfectly capable of carrying the weight. Where the adverb is needed, then use it.
It's of a kin with passive constructions--an aspect of the language that is so often abused, it gets written up in writerly guides. Or, to pull from another genre altogether, it's a bit like the coffee stain on your resume (back when we did such things on paper). Does the coffee stain make the resume poor? Not of itself. But to the review committee dealing with far too many applications, it becomes a handy way to toss one in the reject pile. The resume then has to be astonishingly arresting and good throughout to overcome that failing.
Prince of Spires
Istar
I think this is selling Rowling short. Books 6 and 7 in the serries are still the fastest selling books of all time. Now, of course, there was a lot of hype involved in their releases. But selling that many copies of books that far into the serries means that way more people continued reading that there are people who picked up a copy and didn't finish it.
To put it in perspective, according to Wikipedia, "the majority of New York Times bestselling books sell from 10,000 to 100,000 copies in their first year". The last HP novel sold 8.3 million copies in 24 hours (in the US alone, it sold 15 million worldwide in 24 hours). That's not some number you reach if people keep putting your novel down. And while the genre might be YA, there were plenty of adults reading them.
I do agree that adverbs can be a sign of weakness in your writing. It's a symptom. But I see it like running your novel through a program like grammarly. Doing so and blindly following the suggestions might give you a grammatically correct book. It will also give you a very middle of the road, stilted book with little personality. The same goes for just removing all adverbs. It will give you a grammatically correct book. But unless you pay attention to what your doing, you might also remove all personality from your writing.
Demesnedenoir
Myth Weaver
Sort of. The trouble is, they tend to be a crutch and lack personality themselves. They're easy, they're lazy, and they trend vague. People tend to use them out of habit. Rowling, from what little I read and recall, writes around them better than most people do. I'd also be curious to see her adverb usage broken down per book. Most writers tend to use them at different rates in different periods of their careers and from book to book.
The funny thing is that I've heard writers say they use a lot of adverbs, and they don't, and then I've heard a lot of writers claim they have no issue with adverbs and I find five pointless adverbs on their page one. Either one can work, but in general, you're more likely to find success by using fewer adverbs, in particular if seeking traditional publishers.
If diminished adverbs make your writing lose "all personality" then you've got problems, heh heh. In fact, that would mean to me that your writing skills need work. Now, for some characters, adverbs could be part of their personality as developed in dialogue. Then it becomes useful.
The funny thing is that I've heard writers say they use a lot of adverbs, and they don't, and then I've heard a lot of writers claim they have no issue with adverbs and I find five pointless adverbs on their page one. Either one can work, but in general, you're more likely to find success by using fewer adverbs, in particular if seeking traditional publishers.
If diminished adverbs make your writing lose "all personality" then you've got problems, heh heh. In fact, that would mean to me that your writing skills need work. Now, for some characters, adverbs could be part of their personality as developed in dialogue. Then it becomes useful.
I don't avoid adverbs when I'm drafting. They're just tools in the toolbox. The trick is knowing how to use them. Adverbs have a nasty tendency to weaken the narrative and become weasel words, such as 'almost,' and 'nearly,' especially in high-tension scenes like violence and sex. Notice how these adverbs give the reader distance from the action, and when we write action, we want to be in the reader's face. Adverbs can work well, but they must be chosen and used carefully.
