"Let's talk about adverbs in dialogue tags," she said suggestively

I agree with Firebrain on this one. It's simple. They sometimes work and sometimes don't.

RobJ said:

Thank you.


Those books by Rowling, Brown and vast numbers of other commercially successful novels went through the same agent/editor process.

Click to expand...

yes, they did....I'm not sure that's a compelling reason to say adverbs are ok, Rowling essentially "handicapped" herself. she over-used them but had a story so good they took it anyway. Had it been a bit less compelling, it may well have been one more slushpile 'script. Ideally one tries to polish a work to the best it can be, and culling adverbs is a fairly easy part--why you'd keep them because a few successful outliers exist who've "survived" overusing them is beyond me, but poor risk mitigation.

Lee Wulff was a famous flyfisherman, he could throw a flyline farther with his own hand than most casters could with a rod because his rhythm overcame the poor rod. Likewise, Tiger Woods could likely out-drive me with a plastic golf club. I wouldn't advise a beginning flycaster that Lee indicates an arm is a perfectly suitable flyrod, or that Tiger proves there is nothing wrong with plastic clubs, any more than I'd say Rowling proves adverbs are fine....

anydayshirley said:

I agree with Firebrain on this one. It's simple. They sometimes work and sometimes don't.

Click to expand...

When they appear to "work", it's commonly because something else about the story/writing carries the reader past them. Dan Brown and J.K. Rowling had fabulously intriguing stories for a lot of readers, and those carry a lot of reading inertia, allowing the writer to get away with things many other writers can't, excessive use of adverbs among them.

Rowling admits she was rejected many times before "Philosopher's Stone" found a publisher - would she have been picked up sooner if her prose had been tighter? I guess we'll never know.

I try to cull adverbs in dialogue tags, but as has been said, sometimes English doesn't have a verb that can replace a given adverb. People who tell me "said softly" can be replaced with "whispered" just deserve a slap

I think this is the hardest thing to master. It boils down to showing, not telling which is so insanely, inconceivably difficult to do

Anne Lyle said:

Rowling admits she was rejected many times before "Philosopher's Stone" found a publisher - would she have been picked up sooner if her prose had been tighter? I guess we'll never know.

Click to expand...

My initial reaction after reading Sorcerer's Stone: Great story, great characters, great concepts, great imagination, but I couldn't help but feel the writing was a bit juvenile, and given that it was a MG fantasy, I was okay with that, but I didn't pick up Chamber of Secrets until a few years later (after my friends told me the later books were much better), because of the writing and the feeling that it was written for kids.

Look, we're not saying Rowling is a bad writer, and she has $$$$ to say "nyey nyey nyey" to all of us, but I think it's silly to say "because she sells millions of books, she must be the best writers in the world." That's like saying "rich people are better people than we are." I think Rowling herself would object to that sentiment. If you have a fantastic story and characters like she did, maybe you could get away with a lot of things, too -- but even Rowling got plenty of rejections. She openly acknowledged that she'd improved as a writer with her later books in the series -- and that's a good thing. That's what we should learn from her: despite her success, she still found a way to improve her writing, instead of sitting on her laurels and saying, "I am great." I admire her humbleness and humility, and the capacity to recognize her shortcomings and push her writing to a higher level.

I think that if a book sells, it's because its good points overcome its flaws - a great story with indifferent writing will sell, because the majority of readers are there for entertainment, not for Pulitzer-prize-winning prose. IMHO Rowling's writing is no more than adequate, but her imagination is unsurpassed - and that's why her books were so widely read. For me the attraction was also that the main grownup characters (e.g. Snape) were as complex as in any adult book, rather than being the shadowy two-dimensional figures of most children's fiction - but I digress...

None of this is any excuse for the "I can get away with indifferent prose because Writer X can" attitude. Yes you might - but why take the chance? Why shoot yourself in the foot, when the competition for publishing slots is already insanely competitive? Are you really that certain that your premise/story is so utterly compelling? Really? Because it sure as hell better be!

It's not that adverbs are bad--no one's saying we should have only seven parts of speech--but that, like McDonald's places, they are easy to overuse and can substitute for better choices.

When you're looking for ways to tighten your belt or your budget, one thing you check is whether you're overusing McDonald's. When you're looking for ways to tighten your prose, you check your adverbs.

My .02 here as a newbie to the board but have been writing for a while and took courses and blah, blah, blah...

The best way to put this argument to bed is read some powerful poetry. Adverbs anyone??? Adverbs are the hallmark of weak writing. Now can a weak writer tell a good yarn and get published... HELLS YEAH. Can a powerful writer write forgettable stories...HELLS YEAH. Are there a lot of writers that excel at just one side of this coin? Too many in my opinion.

Hence the conundrum. Show don't tell is the guide for me. In my prose first drafts the adverbs amass in legion. For me, first draft is about the elements of story and revision is where the writing happens (most of the time too much). This is where the spices are added to the stock.

I think that anytime trench warfare erupts over some golden rule, the middle ground is usually correct. It's also the most dangerous place to be. Sparingly is best although I have found that I hardly use them at all by final draft. Remember Hemingway and the iceberg comment? It's all about what's under the water and powerful writing will provide plenty of sonar. Also refer to Elmore Leonard's 10 rules for writing. Now there's a guy that has had plenty published, his bank account is probably looking good, and he shoots it straight.

As far as the side discussion about famous/wealthy writers, bank account balances being the final determination of a work's worth -- I feel for those that find validity in this. The power of marketing is strong young Jedi.

Personally I have bigger problems with the argument of strictly using "said" as the only carrier of dialogue. This is what causes many of the adverb issues. That blasted Hemingway and his ice flow theories! (just couldn't help myself with that exclamation point either)

I read "she said suggestively" as sexily, sluttishly, etc. but i'm 70% sure that's not what the OP meant, more like wink wink nudge nudge awkwardly eager kind of suggestively.

I suppose that is one of the problems with adverbs as dialogue tags. I could spend a chapter thinking this woman was coming on the her boss for the suggestive way she said something only to realize she was only making an innocent timid suggestion...

PercyBlok said:

As far as the side discussion about famous/wealthy writers, bank account balances being the final determination of a work's worth -- I feel for those that find validity in this.

Click to expand...

For many people involved in the publishing business the worth of a piece of work is judged in terms of the money it makes. People in writing forums are free, of course, to judge based on the number of adverbs the work contains, or anything else at all.

KidCassandra said:

Why the massive hate for adverbs in dialogue tags? Can it ever be done "right?"

I'm not talking Tom Swifties ("They had to amputate them both at the ankles," said Tom defeatedly), or about qualifiers that could be turned into stronger verbs ("Said suggestively" from the thread title should be "suggested") but about cases where the adverb actually adds something to the sentence.

For example,

"You know I love you," he said coldly.

is miles away from

"You know I love you," he said softly.

And while I think "softly" could be omitted from the second one, I feel "coldly" adds something to the first example that would be hard to replicate with a different verb or by changing the dialogue.

But anything, anything other than "You know I love you," he said lovingly.



So. Adverbs in dialogue tags. All bad? Or can they work in certain cases?

Click to expand...

No, not ALL bad, but more times than not, the adverb can be avoided if the action and scene is clear. In other words, depending on how the scene is written and what has proceeded the character's dialogue (either an action right before or the other character's dialogue), the adverb could be avoided and the reader will know/feel how the character said it. Does that make sense?

I think it's coming down to a clear demarcation between being a writer or being a storyteller. The two aren't mutually exclusive, I'll offer Albert Camus as an example. But, personally, I'm more pulp fiction than highbrow literati.

I use adverbs when I speak. So I see no reason to omit them when I write. And if my reader was offended by them, a tinge of colour may creep across their cheeks with some of the other words I use.

And those salty terms are the ones I remove when editing!

Regards

Whacko

whacko said:

a tinge of colour may creep across their cheeks with some of the other words I use.

And those salty terms are the ones I remove when editing!

Click to expand...

"Oh my!" he ejaculated.

I think JK Rowling is a great example to use if you want to show the pitfalls of over-reliance on adverbs.

First: You get to see the progression, how she used fewer adverbs as her skill increased.
Second: Because she's a bestselling author, it's reasonable to expect that most people have access to her works. Would you rather I used an obscure thirties SF writer like Harl Vincent?

Dave.C.Robinson said:

I think JK Rowling is a great example to use if you want to show the pitfalls of over-reliance on adverbs.

First: You get to see the progression, how she used fewer adverbs as her skill increased.
Second: Because she's a bestselling author, it's reasonable to expect that most people have access to her works. Would you rather I used an obscure thirties SF writer like Harl Vincent?

Click to expand...

And what would the pitfall be?

RobJ said:

And what would the pitfall be?

Click to expand...

it weakened her writing, by even her OWN admission......


other than that, and the very valid point Rowling herself had considerable difficulty finding an agent despite her tremendous creativity and storytelling ability, and the fact, as noted, she herself consciously chose to self-edit (did you think her first book was better than the progressive ones where she learned to trim her own adverb tags??), and the fact a fair number of agents and editors do talk about adverb over-use in their blogs, I see no pitfalls at all.....


from a bit of googling:
http://www.fictionmarketing.com/news/let-tom-swift-inform-your-writing/

http://www.alivenotdead.com/maxwell...dverbs-Adverbs-Everywhere-profile-894010.html

http://floggingthequill.typepad.com/

http://blog.nathanbransford.com/2008/02/your-similes-are-like-giant-flood.html

http://jayeckert.blogspot.com/2010/02/analysis-of-adverbs.html

http://www.writing-world.com/fiction/said.shtml

----
http://blog.nathanbransford.com/2008/02/your-similes-are-like-giant-flood.html
http://cba-ramblings.blogspot.com/2009/08/tighten-up-your-manuscript.html

http://motherwrite.blogspot.com/2010/06/de-vilifying-adverb.html

http://kidlit.com/2009/06/02/how-to-write-dialogue-tags/

http://www.palidormedia.com/james/editor/lesson1.html

http://janekennedysutton.blogspot.com/2010/05/dialogue-tags.html



the first group are writers and other folks, the second group is more interesting because it is agents and editors; the gatekeepers.

Rowling got through because of her story, but her adverb over-usage did not facilitate this in any way; it put up a hurdle for her brilliant story to overcome. No reason to build up your own hurdles, counting on the story to work its way around them....

Wow, it looks like I missed a great discussion in this thread, but I'm going to have to stick to what Steven King and Elmore Leonard said about adverbs...which has already been brought up in this thread. I think King said in his book On Writing that what has happened just before, or during the dialog should tell the reader what they need to know, or the tone if you will.

My 2 Cents

We all know the rich and famous can do no wrong. Money talks, man!

True +1

quicklime said:

it weakened her writing, by even her OWN admission......

Click to expand...

And she went on to earn staggering amounts of money from it. Readers loved it. What's the pitfall?

quicklime said:

other than that, and the very valid point Rowling herself had considerable difficulty finding an agent despite her tremendous creativity and storytelling ability

Click to expand...

Rowling and how many others. Did you know she went on to earn staggering amounts of money? What's the pitfall?

quicklime said:

and the fact, as noted, she herself consciously chose to self-edit (did you think her first book was better than the progressive ones where she learned to trim her own adverb tags??)

Click to expand...

While she continued to earn staggering amounts of money from it. Readers loved it. What's the pitfall?

quicklime said:

and the fact a fair number of agents and editors do talk about adverb over-use in their blogs

Click to expand...

Are any of them as wealthy as Rowling? Close even?

quicklime said:

I see no pitfalls at all.....

Click to expand...

Here's one of my favourite quotes on adverbs for you. See if you get it. Someone posted it in another thread a few days ago:

quicklime said:

Rowling made a great book DESPITE using adverbs like they were meth

Click to expand...

Get it?

randywrite said:

Wow, it looks like I missed a great discussion in this thread, but I'm going to have to stick to what Steven King and Elmore Leonard said about adverbs...which has already been brought up in this thread. I think King said in his book On Writing that what has happened just before, or during the dialog should tell the reader what they need to know, or the tone if you will.

Click to expand...

Ever read Carrie?

Let me break this down for you simply.

Rowling is the EXCEPTION, not the rule.

If you send a manuscript overstocked with adverbs to agents and editors, ninety nine point ninety nine percent of the time, THEY WILL REJECT YOU.

THAT is the pitfall.

Get it?

Don't believe me? Give it a whirl and see how well you get on. I know how manuscripts with adverbitis fare in my slush pile, and I'm notoriously lenient in comparison to the big doggies with big teeth. Trust me.

mscelina said:

Let me break this down for you simply.

Rowling is the EXCEPTION, not the rule.

Click to expand...

Sure she is.

So is Dan Brown.

Get it? Or you want it broken down more simply?

Ever read Carrie?