Recently I've been looking over my work and thinking, "Boy, I sure do use 'was' and 'had' a lot." I chalk it up to first draft blues and think about how I'm going to cut all these instances out later. I'm thinking of adverbs to cut (curiously, seriously, slowly) and making sure I don't use 'then' too often.
I read parts of four different books last night. I flipped to random pages and found multiple instances of using adverbs, was, had, and other common "don't do this" advice I read.
These writers amongst them have sold millions of books, have won multiple awards, and have been lauded for their stories throughout the world.
I found out why this advice doesn't matter anymore. These writers are good storytellers, have engaging characters, and inventive worlds. That's why they can do this and no one cries foul.
I get that using "was" over and over again is usually what people suggest not to do. Find a more active verb when you can. But, yeah, 'was' is all over the place in a lot of books that I greatly admire. And to me, it hasn't changed my enjoyment of any of these stories whatsoever.
So my question is, does it really matter if you have these so-called "no no"s in your writing if you are telling a compelling story?
I'll go ahead and answer my own question for myself: no. Does this mean I'm going to leave every single was and had in my work from here on out? No, again. However, I do think some people belabor these points too much when the real goal is to create an immersive story.
I read parts of four different books last night. I flipped to random pages and found multiple instances of using adverbs, was, had, and other common "don't do this" advice I read.
These writers amongst them have sold millions of books, have won multiple awards, and have been lauded for their stories throughout the world.
I found out why this advice doesn't matter anymore. These writers are good storytellers, have engaging characters, and inventive worlds. That's why they can do this and no one cries foul.
I get that using "was" over and over again is usually what people suggest not to do. Find a more active verb when you can. But, yeah, 'was' is all over the place in a lot of books that I greatly admire. And to me, it hasn't changed my enjoyment of any of these stories whatsoever.
So my question is, does it really matter if you have these so-called "no no"s in your writing if you are telling a compelling story?
I'll go ahead and answer my own question for myself: no. Does this mean I'm going to leave every single was and had in my work from here on out? No, again. However, I do think some people belabor these points too much when the real goal is to create an immersive story.
Last edited: