Hi all
I read that you should never you state of being verbs Like am, is, are, was, were, be, bring, been not sure if there are any others? Is this only for dialogue you shouldn't use state of being verbs or should you not use then in Narrative ethter I'm finding that hard not to do!
Thanks everyone
Robert
I wouldn't say NEVER use them; rather, use them sparingly. It's difficult/impossible to NEVER use them, but to use them every once in a while is far more feasable.
Also, like any other "rule" when writing, it really is up to you whether you follow it or not. There are plenty of writers who use the "being" verbs abundantly and are successful.
The problem with 'be' verbs and the reason writers are told to avoid them is because they create repetitive sentence structures that can become tedious. That doesn't mean never use them. Just try not to use them in a row of sentences unless you're doing it on purpose - to create a lull or a rhythm or something like that.
'be' verbs are necessary. They are the cornerstones of the language. But they are also cheating, sometimes. If you can find any other verb that works better, use it.
I am five foot six. I stand five foot six.
We are on a bridge. We cross the bridge.
There is also the threat of passive sentences. Again, this is a tool to used, but also a trap.
Here's the first link google pulled up for me: The verb "to be".
So, think of 'be' verb avoidance as a guideline (not a rule) for rewriting, and apply it as you see fit.
Remember, though, a lot of publishers, especially in smaller markets, also write. If they have heard for years that adverbs and to-be verbs are evil, they may or may not forgive them in your submission.
I think that is the risk when breaking any "rule" of writing. If you do it well, by all means. But, I worry that they may see it as a lack of polish and judge the piece without giving it a legitimate chance.
I'm not saying a good market would do that, but it's possible.
I'm like Gordon. I use them sparsely in narrative, constantly in dialogue.
I find it's easy to paint characters as morons, slobs, or borderline IQ-cases with the simple addition of clichés and adverbs to their speech. That being said, it wouldn't behoove me to even sprinkle them into the narrative, as that would confused the delineation between the author's voice and the characters'.
Then again, I am a bad writer, so you should be skeptical of any advice or opinion I offer.
If they have heard for years that adverbs and to-be verbs are evil, they may or may not forgive them in your submission. -- J.C.jr
Yep. I once entered a contest featuring 600-word stories. The final word of my story was a preposition. While 99% of me was pretty sure I wouldn't win out of thousands of entries, once I learned that the finalists were selected by creative writing students, that little 1% of me who thought it was the best goddam story any of those schlubs ever read had its object of blame: people who think the rules are absolute simply because they've heard them over and over again.
As a rule of thumb, it's best to avoid them, especially in early writing. 'Being' verbs confuse the reader. Using active voice helps keep the reader on track.
If your character's a scientist, writing his dialogue with a lot of ares and bes'll do well. If you want to slow down action, or be vague about who's performing the action, a 'be' works great.
This 'writing rule', like all 'writing rules' is generally good to follow. Like all 'rules', though, it was meant to be bent.
As long as you can clearly, intelligently, entertainingly tell me what's going on, I don't mind passive voice, especially if 'passive voice' is an identifier for a character's dialogue.
General rule: Use every word consciously.
I'm thinging about Self publishing so may be it won't matter. as much accept to the reader..
If it matters to the reader, it should matter to you.