Jack Campbell Jr.
from Lawrence, KS is reading American Rust by Phillipp MeyerJune 8, 2012 - 9:29am
I think the big thing about adverbs is that so many of them do not add anything to the sentence. It is a lot less about adverbs and more about omitting needless word, which is very important. One way to do that, traditionally, has been to axe any adverbs that you can remove without changing what the sentence means.
bryanhowie
from FW, ID is reading East of Eden. Steinbeck is FUCKING AMAZING.June 8, 2012 - 9:32am
"The year I began to say vahz instead of vase, a man I barely knew nearly accidentally killed me."
Taking out any of the adverbs changes the information given in the sentence. I've been in love with this sentence for a long time, even though I too suffer from adverb aversion syndrome.
If you take out the 'barely' you lose the point that she's trying to make about taking risks with a stranger. If you take out 'nearly', then she is dead. If you take out 'accidentlally' then you make it an purposeful act.
If you rewrite the sentence, you'll lose the subtlety and beauty of it.
In "She Breaks Your Heart," an essay by Chuck Palanhniuk about Amy Hempel and minimalism, he says "Oh, and in minimalism, no abstracts. No silly adverbs like sleepily, irritably, sadly, please."
Which is accurate to me. If the adverb doesn't add to the sentence, then I try to get rid of it.
For me, an adverb is necessary when it contradicts or changes the meaning of the verb or adjective which it modifies. If the adverb changes what you thought you were seeing, then it's perfect.
Jack Campbell Jr.
from Lawrence, KS is reading American Rust by Phillipp MeyerJune 8, 2012 - 9:37am
Right on, and if I remember right, that is where King was going with his thoughts on adverbs. Not that they are always bad.
Liana
from Romania and Texas is reading Naked LunchJune 8, 2012 - 9:42am
Well, economy of language and using only necessary adverbs is very different from "adverbs are the devil."
I just made up my own example of when an "ly" adverb (since these types seem the most despised) can't be taken out.
Father is teaching son to drive...
"Go slowly, slowly, boy!"
Take out "slowly, slowly" and the poor father and son just hit the tree.
Alex Kane
from west-central Illinois is reading Dark OrbitJune 8, 2012 - 10:37am
I believe that anyone who says that sex is overrated just hasn't done it properly.
--Neil Gaiman, American Gods
Nick
from Toronto is reading Adjustment DayJune 17, 2012 - 7:09pm
Flannery O'Connor used lots of adverbs. They never look sloppy or out of place in her writing.
Bill Tucker
from Austin, Texas is reading Grimm's Fairy Tales (1st Edition)June 17, 2012 - 9:05pm
It's funny, I used to be in the anti adverb camp, and still am to a certain extent. When I'm writing, I see every adverb as an opportunity to use a stronger verb. But, thats just me. Sometime you need a way to maintain the flow and rhythm of a piece and that method could be an adverb. Since reviewing stories here, my stance has softened a bit as I've read some fine pieces that had a few of the devil words sprinkled in. My issue is when writers overuse them, but I dont find much of that here.
And if I killed you for using the spare adverb in the past, my apologies. Feel free to call me a douche wagon. Yes, a wagon full of douche.
Dwayne
from Cincinnati, Ohio (suburbs) is reading books that rotate to often to keep this updatedJune 18, 2012 - 10:21am
I'm not calling anyone out, but it seems many folks who are very anti-adverb (and we have to have a new word to describe them it's a vicious circle) put in the words 'just' and 'that' when those words are unneeded.
bryanhowie
from FW, ID is reading East of Eden. Steinbeck is FUCKING AMAZING.June 18, 2012 - 11:34am
Just what do you mean by that?
Bill Tucker
from Austin, Texas is reading Grimm's Fairy Tales (1st Edition)June 18, 2012 - 2:04pm
In thinking about this further, I'm with Dwayne on his point. Despite my hesitance to use adverbs, when I'm critiquing or reviewing, I use the crap out of them. Maybe it's because I'm trying to tell somebody about a film as opposed to showing them a scene, but I practice the exact opposite of what I preach.
In stories I try to avoid them, but I agree with the adverb moderates. If a story has the occasional adverb, so long as it doesn't stick out like a sore thumb and adds to the prose, I'm fine with it. Some writers tend to overuse them and, for me, that's when the story gets bogged down.
Good thread, if only for proving one shouldn't be pompous about a certain technique for sake of being pompous. If you can use adverbs effectively, go for it.
avery of the dead
from Kentucky is reading Cipher SistersJune 18, 2012 - 6:07pm
You know what - I'm a "that" nazi. Because I over-use the heck out of it. Since I noticed it in myself, I tend to notice it in others. And I despise it.
GaryP
from Denver is reading a bit of this and thatJune 18, 2012 - 6:08pm
I've heard that Jesus likes the occasional adverb.
JEFFREY GRANT BARR
from Central OR is reading Nothing but fucking Shakespeare, for the rest of my lifeJune 18, 2012 - 9:27pm
I'm a Herb Tarlick fan myself.
Devon Robbins
from Utah is reading The Least Of My Scars by Stephen Graham JonesAugust 5, 2012 - 8:19am
Tell Bret Easton Ellis that adverbs are the devil. Glamorama probably has like five thousand.
Michael J. Riser
from CA, TX, Japan, back to CA is reading The Tyrant - Michael Cisco, The Devil Takes You Home - Gabino IglesiasAugust 5, 2012 - 8:45am
I think adverbs aren't the devil, but they're often an excuse for weak sentences. If you're hanging too much on them and the rest of the writing suffers for it, that's a problem. If you use them when a situation truly calls for it, no flag on the play.
Overuse of anything is bad. Using anything as a crutch is bad. Anything that detracts from the overall quality or intensity of your writing is bad. Otherwise I don't see anything as off-limits so long as one learns when and how to use it.
I think the big thing about adverbs is that so many of them do not add anything to the sentence. It is a lot less about adverbs and more about omitting needless word, which is very important. One way to do that, traditionally, has been to axe any adverbs that you can remove without changing what the sentence means.
"The year I began to say vahz instead of vase, a man I barely knew nearly accidentally killed me."
Amy Hempel, The Harvest
Taking out any of the adverbs changes the information given in the sentence. I've been in love with this sentence for a long time, even though I too suffer from adverb aversion syndrome.
If you take out the 'barely' you lose the point that she's trying to make about taking risks with a stranger. If you take out 'nearly', then she is dead. If you take out 'accidentlally' then you make it an purposeful act.
If you rewrite the sentence, you'll lose the subtlety and beauty of it.
In "She Breaks Your Heart," an essay by Chuck Palanhniuk about Amy Hempel and minimalism, he says "Oh, and in minimalism, no abstracts. No silly adverbs like sleepily, irritably, sadly, please."
Which is accurate to me. If the adverb doesn't add to the sentence, then I try to get rid of it.
For me, an adverb is necessary when it contradicts or changes the meaning of the verb or adjective which it modifies. If the adverb changes what you thought you were seeing, then it's perfect.
Right on, and if I remember right, that is where King was going with his thoughts on adverbs. Not that they are always bad.
Well, economy of language and using only necessary adverbs is very different from "adverbs are the devil."
I just made up my own example of when an "ly" adverb (since these types seem the most despised) can't be taken out.
Father is teaching son to drive...
"Go slowly, slowly, boy!"
Take out "slowly, slowly" and the poor father and son just hit the tree.
Flannery O'Connor used lots of adverbs. They never look sloppy or out of place in her writing.
It's funny, I used to be in the anti adverb camp, and still am to a certain extent. When I'm writing, I see every adverb as an opportunity to use a stronger verb. But, thats just me. Sometime you need a way to maintain the flow and rhythm of a piece and that method could be an adverb. Since reviewing stories here, my stance has softened a bit as I've read some fine pieces that had a few of the devil words sprinkled in. My issue is when writers overuse them, but I dont find much of that here.
And if I killed you for using the spare adverb in the past, my apologies. Feel free to call me a douche wagon. Yes, a wagon full of douche.
I'm not calling anyone out, but it seems many folks who are very anti-adverb (and we have to have a new word to describe them it's a vicious circle) put in the words 'just' and 'that' when those words are unneeded.
Just what do you mean by that?
In thinking about this further, I'm with Dwayne on his point. Despite my hesitance to use adverbs, when I'm critiquing or reviewing, I use the crap out of them. Maybe it's because I'm trying to tell somebody about a film as opposed to showing them a scene, but I practice the exact opposite of what I preach.
In stories I try to avoid them, but I agree with the adverb moderates. If a story has the occasional adverb, so long as it doesn't stick out like a sore thumb and adds to the prose, I'm fine with it. Some writers tend to overuse them and, for me, that's when the story gets bogged down.
Good thread, if only for proving one shouldn't be pompous about a certain technique for sake of being pompous. If you can use adverbs effectively, go for it.
You know what - I'm a "that" nazi. Because I over-use the heck out of it. Since I noticed it in myself, I tend to notice it in others. And I despise it.
I've heard that Jesus likes the occasional adverb.
I'm a Herb Tarlick fan myself.
Tell Bret Easton Ellis that adverbs are the devil. Glamorama probably has like five thousand.
I think adverbs aren't the devil, but they're often an excuse for weak sentences. If you're hanging too much on them and the rest of the writing suffers for it, that's a problem. If you use them when a situation truly calls for it, no flag on the play.
Overuse of anything is bad. Using anything as a crutch is bad. Anything that detracts from the overall quality or intensity of your writing is bad. Otherwise I don't see anything as off-limits so long as one learns when and how to use it.