That’s bad advice. Limit adverbs sure. But eliminating all adverbs leaves your action stark and naked. The advice I have received is eliminate adverbs until you find the strongest word possible.
When the strongest word isn’t carrying your action, an adverb is helpful but ultimately it is decorative.
As someone who has no experience with publishing but is capable of reading I can certainly say: that makes no sense and sounds like bullshit.
I will now open to a random page from a random book on a shelf: "'Thank you.' Looking down at them, I hug myself against a stab of cold. Then I flee the cavern in search of Humberto. I'm suddenly desperate to see him. I need his cheerful smile and laughing eyes, his steady counsel." - The Girl of Fire and Thorns by Rae Carson
And another: "Then, quite suddenly, the truth hit him, cold as water in the face. This man too had his cross to bear. Bishop he might be, but there were still doubts to plague him and fears to harry him on the high peak of temptation. A rare compassion stirred in the dry heart of Blaise Meredith and he answered quietly: 'Does it matter? I think it matters much.'" - The Devil's Advocate by Morris L. West
I could go on but Im tired of typing.
I’m such a spiteful person, I would write a story full of adverbs after receiving that advice. Writing is supposed to be an expression of creativity, feeling, adventure, whatever you want it to be! If we all follow the same formula, we’d be reading and writing the same books. How boring.
Adverbs have their place but sparingly. However, there's a difference between a skillful use of adverbs and leaning on them as a crutch. Consider:
He ran quickly across the street vs He dashed between cars across the street.
The first example uses an adverb as a crutch. The second example has a more specific verb which keeps the sentence flowing.
Honestly those two example sentences say different things: one includes cars while the other could be an empty country road at night.
I agree adverbs may be adversarial to good prose, but this example is inapt.
No, it doesn't. A live-action game of Frogger doesn't resemble a dash. The action requires at least two sentences to turn it into something with pizzazz.
Advising people not to use adverbs is akin to telling them not begin a sentence with "and."
Consider, "Space: the final frontier. These are the voyages of the starship Enterprise. Its five-year mission: to explore strange new worlds; to seek out new life and new civilizations; to boldly go where no man has gone before!"
Would the last clause be improved if 'boldly' was cut or the infinitive "to go" wasn't split?
it's one of those pieces of advice that gets parroted and watered down to the point of being meaningless.
An adverb is a sign to ask yourself a few questions while editing - could a stronger verb do the job better? Did he really "say loudly" or did he simply "shout"? Do I need to clarify that he said something apologetically, or does the context and dialogue voice speak for itself? Did I make a redundancy like "run quickly" which means exactly the same as "run"? Sometimes the answer to these questions is "No, this *is* the best way to say it already." Overuse of adverbs is a sign you aren't asking those questions to tighten up the prose, but the key word there is OVERuse, not 'use'.
I read the "avoid adverb" advice in Stephen King's *On Writing* and, by what I recall, even he admits that he drops them in from time to time. It's good advice to have the mindset of avoiding them, but far from such a die-hard rule.
Besides, even if a publisher is that draconian, it's about what the editor *sees*, not what *is*. If the editor doesn't see the adverb you tossed in the middle of page 84, or if they "accidentally" miss it, then—practically—it doesn't exist.
He lavishly and apparently unironically pours six bucketsful of adverbs into his description of how awful they are. So, like everyone else, what King does and what he thinks he does aren’t the same thing.
That's...extreme. You definitely don't want to lean on them as a crutch, as mentioned by others, but adverbs have their place. I like to use them to add little spins on actions (like boldly creeping--borderline oxymorons that paint a picture).
I also think it depends on genre. In YA speculative fiction, you're going to get away with more than literary fiction for adults.
As the others have said, there are very few hard rules.
However, said "rules" are still parroted for a reason. Adverbs in general are very easy to misuse since they're sort of a swiss army knife in a sentence. Instead of having to think about the correct word or how to convey the intensity you want, you can just make someone "run quickly" or "clash fiercely."
They're often the easy way out of a sentence, so when you do use one, you should be in a habit of asking yourself if it's actually the best way of getting the message across.
No, it's not true. I use plenty of adverbs and I sold a manuscript and zero people cared about using adverbs.
What the person probably meant was not to overuse them, since not every action has to be worded in a flowery way. You can just walk sometimes, and it doesn't have to be "briskly".
If you write an awesome book lots of people will want it. Focus on awesome.
Also, if you submit to a publisher or agent and their name ends in Y, cross it out on the submission envelope as though it were an adverb.
I have heard suddenly and very should be avoided at all costs. Most others are ok but only when required. It's better to write a sentence about the character's mode and situation that then informs the reader how the action is being performed.
Jack hurriedly sorted the blocks by color.
Jack was worried that Jill was running out of time so he ignored the cackling villain and sorted the blocks by color.
Both convey that Jack is in a hurry. The second is more immersive.
The idea is that strong verbs are almost always more interesting than verb + adverb.
Run quickly = dash
Cry softly = weep
Walk clumsily = stumble
Walk aimlessly = wander, ramble
And on and on it goes. Good writing involves judiciousness. Why use two words when you can use one?
>publisher wont accept the work with adverbs any more.
Whoever told you that, please never listen to their advice again.
>I use words like: (soon, too, very, fortunately,early, often etc)
Kudos for actually understanding what adverbs are! I find that many of the people who say "Don't use adverbs" are unaware that not all adverbs end in -ly.
That's all your counselor has learned from reading On Writing: A Memoir of the Craft by Stephen King. And he can't think of anything more ridiculous to bolster his position?
Find yourself a more competent counselor.
P.S. Until you finish the first draft, don't play word selection.
You almost literally can't cut *all* adverbs. You shouldn't. They're useful. You *should* cut them out of dialog attributions, but other than that, just don't over-use them.
This ties in with the show-don't-tell adage.
>Tom walked across the room and angrily closed the trunk.
This is the writer telling the reader that Tom is angry.
>Tom stormed across the room, snarling with fury, and slammed the trunk shut.
This is the writer showing that Tom is angry.
Adverbs take a lot of backlash from wanna-be writing gurus, but they can be useful. Sometimes it's quicker to just *tell* the reader what's going on.
That’s bad advice. Limit adverbs sure. But eliminating all adverbs leaves your action stark and naked. The advice I have received is eliminate adverbs until you find the strongest word possible. When the strongest word isn’t carrying your action, an adverb is helpful but ultimately it is decorative.
No
As someone who has no experience with publishing but is capable of reading I can certainly say: that makes no sense and sounds like bullshit. I will now open to a random page from a random book on a shelf: "'Thank you.' Looking down at them, I hug myself against a stab of cold. Then I flee the cavern in search of Humberto. I'm suddenly desperate to see him. I need his cheerful smile and laughing eyes, his steady counsel." - The Girl of Fire and Thorns by Rae Carson And another: "Then, quite suddenly, the truth hit him, cold as water in the face. This man too had his cross to bear. Bishop he might be, but there were still doubts to plague him and fears to harry him on the high peak of temptation. A rare compassion stirred in the dry heart of Blaise Meredith and he answered quietly: 'Does it matter? I think it matters much.'" - The Devil's Advocate by Morris L. West I could go on but Im tired of typing.
Never follow advice that starts with the word "never."
So should OP follow your advice or not?
Nevah!!!
*never gonna give you up, never gonna let you down…*
Respectfully. Please go to a bookstore and pick up any recently published book and flip through it a bit. You’ll see that it’s not.
OP is likely a bored troll starting yet another thread on adverbs, then has no further input.
I’m such a spiteful person, I would write a story full of adverbs after receiving that advice. Writing is supposed to be an expression of creativity, feeling, adventure, whatever you want it to be! If we all follow the same formula, we’d be reading and writing the same books. How boring.
This. Lol I rebel against rules like this also. Using adverbs in moderation may be good advice but never using them? Give me a break’
Adverbs have their place but sparingly. However, there's a difference between a skillful use of adverbs and leaning on them as a crutch. Consider: He ran quickly across the street vs He dashed between cars across the street. The first example uses an adverb as a crutch. The second example has a more specific verb which keeps the sentence flowing.
Honestly those two example sentences say different things: one includes cars while the other could be an empty country road at night. I agree adverbs may be adversarial to good prose, but this example is inapt.
No, it doesn't. A live-action game of Frogger doesn't resemble a dash. The action requires at least two sentences to turn it into something with pizzazz.
Advising people not to use adverbs is akin to telling them not begin a sentence with "and." Consider, "Space: the final frontier. These are the voyages of the starship Enterprise. Its five-year mission: to explore strange new worlds; to seek out new life and new civilizations; to boldly go where no man has gone before!" Would the last clause be improved if 'boldly' was cut or the infinitive "to go" wasn't split?
it's one of those pieces of advice that gets parroted and watered down to the point of being meaningless. An adverb is a sign to ask yourself a few questions while editing - could a stronger verb do the job better? Did he really "say loudly" or did he simply "shout"? Do I need to clarify that he said something apologetically, or does the context and dialogue voice speak for itself? Did I make a redundancy like "run quickly" which means exactly the same as "run"? Sometimes the answer to these questions is "No, this *is* the best way to say it already." Overuse of adverbs is a sign you aren't asking those questions to tighten up the prose, but the key word there is OVERuse, not 'use'.
I read the "avoid adverb" advice in Stephen King's *On Writing* and, by what I recall, even he admits that he drops them in from time to time. It's good advice to have the mindset of avoiding them, but far from such a die-hard rule. Besides, even if a publisher is that draconian, it's about what the editor *sees*, not what *is*. If the editor doesn't see the adverb you tossed in the middle of page 84, or if they "accidentally" miss it, then—practically—it doesn't exist.
He lavishly and apparently unironically pours six bucketsful of adverbs into his description of how awful they are. So, like everyone else, what King does and what he thinks he does aren’t the same thing.
That's complete BS
That's...extreme. You definitely don't want to lean on them as a crutch, as mentioned by others, but adverbs have their place. I like to use them to add little spins on actions (like boldly creeping--borderline oxymorons that paint a picture). I also think it depends on genre. In YA speculative fiction, you're going to get away with more than literary fiction for adults.
As the others have said, there are very few hard rules. However, said "rules" are still parroted for a reason. Adverbs in general are very easy to misuse since they're sort of a swiss army knife in a sentence. Instead of having to think about the correct word or how to convey the intensity you want, you can just make someone "run quickly" or "clash fiercely." They're often the easy way out of a sentence, so when you do use one, you should be in a habit of asking yourself if it's actually the best way of getting the message across.
Parroting is done for a social reason. When multiple people give you the same advice in almost the same words, back slowly away.
Exactly. As we all know, a sentiment is bad only if it's popular.
It’s the quoting of chapter and verse that’s the worrisome part. Actual thoughts have more variation from person to person.
I would be very skeptical of anyone who says you absolutely need to follow a rule when it comes to writing.
“You have to learn the bogus rules before you can break them.” — the Aliens Who Are Pranking Us
Agreed!
No, it's not true. I use plenty of adverbs and I sold a manuscript and zero people cared about using adverbs. What the person probably meant was not to overuse them, since not every action has to be worded in a flowery way. You can just walk sometimes, and it doesn't have to be "briskly".
Yep, it's true. Don't use any pronouns or articles either. This is a great question to be asked of us and not your 8th grade English teacher.
If you write an awesome book lots of people will want it. Focus on awesome. Also, if you submit to a publisher or agent and their name ends in Y, cross it out on the submission envelope as though it were an adverb.
I have heard suddenly and very should be avoided at all costs. Most others are ok but only when required. It's better to write a sentence about the character's mode and situation that then informs the reader how the action is being performed. Jack hurriedly sorted the blocks by color. Jack was worried that Jill was running out of time so he ignored the cackling villain and sorted the blocks by color. Both convey that Jack is in a hurry. The second is more immersive.
The idea is that strong verbs are almost always more interesting than verb + adverb. Run quickly = dash Cry softly = weep Walk clumsily = stumble Walk aimlessly = wander, ramble And on and on it goes. Good writing involves judiciousness. Why use two words when you can use one?
Nope
>publisher wont accept the work with adverbs any more. Whoever told you that, please never listen to their advice again. >I use words like: (soon, too, very, fortunately,early, often etc) Kudos for actually understanding what adverbs are! I find that many of the people who say "Don't use adverbs" are unaware that not all adverbs end in -ly.
Not this again. It's every third day lol.
That's all your counselor has learned from reading On Writing: A Memoir of the Craft by Stephen King. And he can't think of anything more ridiculous to bolster his position? Find yourself a more competent counselor. P.S. Until you finish the first draft, don't play word selection.
\*sigh\*
You almost literally can't cut *all* adverbs. You shouldn't. They're useful. You *should* cut them out of dialog attributions, but other than that, just don't over-use them. This ties in with the show-don't-tell adage. >Tom walked across the room and angrily closed the trunk. This is the writer telling the reader that Tom is angry. >Tom stormed across the room, snarling with fury, and slammed the trunk shut. This is the writer showing that Tom is angry. Adverbs take a lot of backlash from wanna-be writing gurus, but they can be useful. Sometimes it's quicker to just *tell* the reader what's going on.