The Adverb Problem and Why Authors Should Care

problem-860227_640

 

by Gary Smailes

In this article I will set out to explain why so many famous authors (Stephen King being perhaps the most vocal) warn other authors against the use of adverbs. In fact, King’s hatred of adverbs is so intense that he’s been quoted as saying, “Adverbs are evil.” You will discover the role of adverbs in fiction writing, and I’ll demonstrate why removing adverbs from your writing will make your book more enjoyable to read. In short, I’ll explain just why adverbs are evil.

 

What Is an Adverb?

The Wikipedia definition of an adverb (whether ending in LY or not) is paraphrased below:

An adverb is a word that modifies a verb, adjective, other adverb—or a noun phrase, clause, or sentence—and can also be used as a determiner (which are otherwise articles, quantifiers, and/or quantities that precede a noun). In general, adverbs express manner, place, time, frequency, degree, level of certainty, etc., answering questions such as: How? In what way? When? Where? To what extent?

See the Wikipedia entry for the exact quote: [Source].

That could be a little confusing, so let’s look what the great Stephen King has to say about adverbs. This is taken from his masterpiece On Writing:

Adverbs … are words that modify verbs, adjectives, or other adverbs. They’re the ones that … end in -ly. [Source].

So an adverb is a word that modifies a verb (an action word, e.g., jump, kick, drink). Common adverbs end in the suffix -ly (like “quickly”), and, as such, they’re pretty easy to spot in a block of text.

 

Why Are Adverbs Evil?

Stephen King wrote in On Writing that the “road to hell is paved with adverbs.” Why so much vitriol for such a simple way of writing?

Let’s take the following sentence:

He closed the door firmly.

The adverb in this sentence is “firmly,” and it describes the manner in which the door is being closed. Its job is to guide the reader toward an interpretation of the sentence controlled by the author, who is attempting to control the image in the reader’s mind. The result is that there’s no room for misunderstanding … right? The door was firmly shut. Isn’t that what an author is seeking? Good clean sentences with no room for misunderstanding?

Well, this innocent-sounding sentence is hiding a crippling problem that plagues many authors with great potential.

But, before we get to the problem, a little background …

 

Show, Don’t Tell

Show, don’t tell, is perhaps one of the most overused and misunderstood writing mantras. In fact I’ve written a whole book (it is free, by the way) that aims to help authors better understand the philosophy of show, don’t tell. However, I’ll outline the key points before moving on as to why adverbs are evil. It all links, I promise.

The principle of show, don’t tell, is that your job as an author is to paint a picture in the mind of your reader. You have a story in your mind, and you are using words to get it into the mind of the reader. There are two ways to do this:

  1. You can SHOW the reader your vision.
  2. You can TELL the reader your vision.

For example, imagine you were writing a scene in which a man had just learned of the death of his wife in a car crash. If you were TELLING, you might write:

John sat on the seat and cried loudly. He was clearly distraught at the news of the crash and honestly felt as though he would not be able to go on.

In the sentence above, the author is telling the reader that John is crying loudly, that he is clearly distraught, and that he can’t go on. The problem is that, by telling, the reader is removed from the equation. The author is leaving very little narrative space. The reader is being force-fed the story. In addition, this sentence fails to stimulate any level of emotion in the reader. As the reader, you are not being asked to “feel” the emotion; instead you are being asked to observe the action from a passive stance. You are not part of the story; you are an observer. The natural progression from this is that you will not care about the character and what is happening to John.

The second option is to show. If you were SHOWING, you might write:

John slumped back in the chair, his shoulders dipping as his hands came to his face. A muffled sob escaped. He leaned back, dropping his arms to his knees. He looked at the ceiling of the small room. Tears ran down his cheeks as another sob emerged from his lips.

In this sentence I have taken a very different approach. Rather than telling my readers that John is sad, I have described sadness. I have tried to write out the actions of a man who is “distraught.” The aim is to stimulate an emotion in the readers, to paint a picture that their brain will recognize as sadness. In turn, this forces them to become an active part of the process. The better the description, the better the results—and, by “better,” I mean, closer to the way a person would act in real life in this situation.

It is an established fact that every emotion carries an action. If you are able to describe the action, then your brain will be able to match this to an emotion which it has experienced. This is what Hemingway is referring to when he talks about “truthful” writing. He is not talking about writing down your darkest secrets but about writing in a way that reflects true human emotions and actions.

If done well, showing allows the author to suck the reader into the book and to become part of the story. If you have ever felt a genuine emotion when reading a book, it was because the author was showing.

 

Adverbs Are Dangerous Shortcuts

We can now turn our attention back to adverbs. In the sections above, we’ve talked about emotion (and we will come back to this, in terms of adverbs, in a little more detail), but adverbs also have another dark side.

Adverbs tend to do more harm than good, and here’s the reason why: they rob the readers of the opportunity to provide their own context to the story. You, as the author, are not showing the readers how something is done; you’re telling them about how it was done, and that is never the more compelling of the two choices for the reader.

This is still the principle of show, don’t tell, but below I’ve applied it to actions rather than emotions.

Here’s a simple example, just to further illustrate this point:

He turned on the light quickly.

That doesn’t seem like a big deal, right? He’s just turning on a light. Now let’s look at the sentence without the adverb:

He turned on the light.

Now that we’ve removed the description, you may be saying to yourself, “Well, that’s a lot worse, isn’t it? Now we know less than we knew before about how he turned on the light.”

Here’s the trick—you don’t need to tell the reader everything. The readers can work things out for themselves. In fact the more “narrative space” you leave, the better it is for the reader. Adverbs are just a crutch.

What matters, in terms of verbs, is what comes before and after them—the context. If someone is walking around a spooky dark mansion and looking for a light switch, the way they would go about that is different from someone who’s looking for a light switch after a night out at the bar. By describing your scene in sufficient detail before and after you apply your verbs, the reader will be able to fill in the gaps themselves via context. Don’t rob them of the opportunity to set their own version of your scene in their head—that’s where all the fun in reading lies!

This approach forces the reader to be an active part of the reading process. They are not just following along with the text. They are being forced to “lean into” the story and be an active part of the process. The story is happening in their head, not on the page.

You might think this is all a bit wishy-washy, but here’s a little experiment. Think of a time you saw a film adaptation of a book you loved. For me it was The Hobbit. If you read the book first, then saw the movie, did you feel just a little disappointed in the film version? Did the main character not look the way you imagined, or was the main location just wrong? That’s because you had created the image in your mind. I am even betting that, if you went back to the original text, you’ll find the descriptions of the character or location are just not as crisp and precise as you remember. That’s you, as a reader, filling the narrative space. The overuse of adverbs can deny the reader of this pleasure.

By allowing them the opportunity to do some world-building in their own heads, you allow your audience (your readership) to build an emotional connection to your work—you force them to care.

 

Adverbs and Emotions

When looking at the role of adverbs in context, it is clear how they can limit the impact of an author’s words. However, when dealing with emotions, those adverbs play a little different role.

First, we have the obvious application in which telling robs the reader of the context and leaves the reader as a passive observer. Take this sentence:

John sighed sadly.

What does that even mean? How do you “sigh sadly”? If you were to remove the adverb, it would improve this sentence in an instant. The reason being that the reader is forced to engage with the writing. The context of the surrounding paragraphs would direct the reader as to how and why the character was sighing. If the context is sad, then the reader will add in the type of sigh required.

As we have seen, the best way to stimulate emotion in readers is not to tell them the emotion the character is feeling but to show the reader with words and actions. However, this is not always an author’s first instinct and can, even with the best of intentions, slip into bad habits. This is where the second role of adverbs comes into play, and that’s adverbs as flags.

The principle here is not complex. If you are telling, not showing, then you can be almost 100 percent sure that you are using adverbs. That means, if you search your book for adverbs (just use Word’s Find feature, looking for LY), each time you find one, it’s an example of tell for the most part. This gives you a chance to rewrite and turn the tell into show.

Below is a link to a free online tool for finding adverbs in your projects. You just paste in your text, and it highlights those pesky adverbs in red—very useful. See:

The Adverb Detector

 

Adverbs in Dialogue

Perhaps the most reviled example of adverbs (as far as Stephen King is concerned) is their use in dialogue.

One of the fastest ways to signal to a publisher or reader that you are a writing rookie (and maybe that the reader should spend time on another book) is to fill up your dialogue with adverbs. Let’s look at this example:

“Where is the briefcase?” she asked angrily.

“I’m sorry. He took it from me, boss,” he said sheepishly.

“Get out there and find it right now,” she said hastily.

Those adverbs above are superfluous to our needs. Let’s look at that same scene, now without all the adverbs:

“Where is the briefcase?” she asked.

“I’m sorry. He took it from me, boss,” he said.

“Get out there and find it right now,” she said.

There’s no difference here in terms of the information being conveyed. The one concern an author might consider is that the adverbs give the reader extra information about the state of the speaker. However, this goes back to telling. The context of the surrounding paragraphs will give the reader everything needed to work out how the words were said. More important, by removing the adverbs, you force the reader to lean into the story and become more engaged. The first example (with adverbs) produces a passive reader; the second (without adverbs) produces an active reader.

Adverbs are a writing crutch—ensure that your writing is strong enough to stand on its own two feet.

 

Use Beats to Add Context

Context is a key term when it comes to writing and the removal of adverbs. This is the environment you set and the story that unfolds. Within this framework, the reader is allowed to fill in the blanks that the lack of adverbs leave.

One way to add more context is through the use of beats. Beats are the sections between dialogue that describe action.

Look at this example. It is Denise’s birthday, and she’s just been presented with a surprise birthday cake:

“I love cake,” Denise said happily. “Would you like some?”

If we remove the pesky adverb, we get:

“I love cake,” Denise said. “Would you like some?”

The context of the surrounding paragraphs will supply the reader with enough information to show them that Denise is happy. However, we can go one step further and use a beat between dialogue. Here’s the example with a beat:

“I love cake,” Denise said. A smile formed on her face. “Would you like some?”

Here, “a smile formed on her face” is the beat, and it provides the reader with a little more context. Don’t be fooled by the simplicity of this example. All we have done is add a smile. However, you recognize a smile as the action of someone who is happy. You are, therefore, filling in the emotion.

 

Study Screenplays

For examples on the best way to use beats, you can steal a trick from screenwriters. I would recommend finding the script to your favorite action movie (there are tons of script databases on the Internet) and looking it over to see how the screenwriter worked action beats into the dialogue. One little note here, you will find lots of adverbs in screenplays. Don’t forget they are screenplays, not novels, so different rules apply.

Here’s a short section of the amazing film Chinatown (this link will give you a copy of the full screenplay):

GITTES: I don’t want your last dime.

He throws an arm around Curly and flashes a dazzling smile.

GITTES: What kind of guy do you think I am?

CURLY: Thanks, Mr. Gittes.

GITTES: Call me Jake. Careful driving home, Curly.

He shuts the door on him, and the smile disappears. He shakes his head, starting to swear under his breath.

In this example, we see Gittes flashing and dropping a smile. The beats add context to the words. Even though screenplays are not like novels, reading just one screenplay will give you an insight into the best way to use beats in your novel.

 

A Little Goes a Long Way

In the long run, if you are reliant on adverbs, it will hold back your writing from being seen by the largest possible audience. Think of adverbs as sprinkles of rosemary on a great dish of lamb—a little bit goes a very long way. You should be looking to use, at most, a handful of adverbs.

If you take care to consider each time you use an adverb, the ones you leave in will have added power. Some authors, Stephen King included, are religious about killing adverbs and will rake through their manuscript in search of adverbs to squash. If you look over your writing and see too many adverbs in a chunk of text, go back and remove them. Remember: show, don’t tell, always.

 

 

 

Guest post contributed by Gary Smailes. Gary has a wide experience of the publishing industry and, over the years, has worked as a freelance writer, historian and researcher. He has more than twenty books in print and is represented by agent Andrew Lownie. He’s also the founder of BubbleCow.


226373498_dacf4f263f_bNeed help with your book or novel? Check out the Writer’s Toolbox, a list of free, discounted, and overall helpful links to tools and benefits to help you with what you do best: writing.


 

 

 

Advertisements

28 thoughts on “The Adverb Problem and Why Authors Should Care”

  1. Amazing, Gary! Although I always try to weed out as many adverbs as I can, I have to admit I still leave too many in just because I’ve not understood the full reason why I should be taking them out. This post has cleared the fog for me.

    Like

  2. Reblogged this on Tim's Sceap Tome and commented:
    I was asked about things like this recently and lo, this appeared in my inbox. An interesting post by Ryan Lanz about why adverbs (-ly words) can be an indication of a sign of weakness in writing – force-feeding (telling) the reader rather than guiding (showing) them.

    Thanks, Ryan.

    Like

  3. I don’t use adverbs. I feel as if I’ve failed if I have to use one. On occasion, the dialogue can flow better with one adverb, but that’s only one percent or less.
    The action should be described through the verb.

    Like

  4. Amazing and informative post. I know that I use too many,and am often aware of it, but have always fretted over how to get rid of them, or even if I should. This article has helped me a great deal. Now I am informed on how to get around it . Time to go kill blocks of adverbs! Thanks 🙂

    Like

  5. Do you know how many adverbs are in Stephen King’s famous essay in which he states, “The road to hell is paved with adverbs”? NOT counting the ones he uses to illustrate why adverbs should be avoided, there are still at least a dozen in that short essay. Even an author famous for telling other authors to avoid adverbs at all costs uses adverbs. Is it possible he knew, even as he was writing that essay, that the occasional adverb isn’t a bad thing… and that some of them may be unavoidable?

    I agree that there’s such a thing as overuse of adverbs; it’s most obvious when every dialogue tag contains an -ly word. However (another adverb, BTW), I don’t believe it’s POSSIBLE to write a story (or an essay, or whatever) without using any adverbs at all.

    I also think “Don’t use adverbs!” is an example of lazy teaching. It’s easier just to tell everyone to avoid adverbs (or anything else) altogether than it is to teach them HOW to use adverbs (or anything else) to good effect. It leads to bad grammar, too. “Don’t use adverbs!” is why we now have characters running fast instead of running quickly, even though “run fast” is wrong. (“Fast” is an adjective, appropriate only for modifying NOUNS, not verbs.)

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I agree, Thomas. There is a reason that adverbs exist and to completely eliminate them isn’t exactly the solution to good writing. It’s analogous to believing a that consuming diary will make you fat or eggs will give you high cholesterol. It is about understanding the uses and moderation.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. I agree with Thomas Weaver above. In the sentence “After I had breakfast, I went to the store’ (okay, it’s not literature), the first dependent clause, “After I had breakfast,” is an adverbial clause. Anything that fleshes out where, when, why, or how may well be adverbial. To ban adverbs completely would be to impoverish a piece of writing beyond recognition. Does “completely” in that sentence add anything? It does add emphasis. Whether it should be cut is a judgment call.
    I do agree that it’s better to find the precise verb that does the work rather than to tack an adverb onto a weak verb. Sometimes that can be tricky, though. “He closed the door firmly” conveys an intentionality that ‘He closed the door” does not. “He slammed the door” won’t work. “He jerked the door shut” might work to replace “firmly.” It can take a long time for the word that works best to float up (and “best” is an adverb in that sentence). Finding the word that Mark Twain compared to lightning rather than the lightning bug should always be the goal, IMHO.

    Like

  7. Reblogged this on Just Can't Help Writing and commented:
    Here’s an article about an old controversy: to adverb or not to adverb. My thoughts on this issue:

    I agree with one of the comments above that a blanket ban on adverbs is unworkable. In the sentence “After I had breakfast, I went to the store’ (okay, it’s not literature), the first dependent clause, “After I had breakfast,” is an adverbial clause. Anything that fleshes out where, when, why, or how may well be adverbial. To ban adverbs completely would be to impoverish a piece of writing beyond recognition. Does “completely” in that sentence add anything? It does add emphasis. Whether it should be cut is a judgment call.
    I do agree that it’s better to find the precise verb that does the work rather than to tack an adverb onto a weak verb. Sometimes that can be tricky, though. “He closed the door firmly” conveys an intentionality that ‘He closed the door” does not. “He slammed the door” won’t work. “He jerked the door shut” might work to replace “firmly.” It can take a long time for the word that works best to float up (and “best” is an adverb in that sentence). Finding the word that Mark Twain compared to lightning rather than the lightning bug should always be the goal, IMHO.

    Like

  8. When I teach college writing students the show-don’t-tell art of description, I explain that writing is a gift. In showing, you respect readers can understand the emotion projected and don’t need to be told, especially if the writing is clear.
    This post is a gift to writers.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s