Thread: When you catch an adjective, kill it.

When you catch an adjective, kill it. Mark Twain said...

...then it seems Stephen King has a problem with adverbs. And another writer has a problem with nouns. I forgot her name though. What do they all mean?

I want to improve my writing so I'm really curious about the stuff. While browsing through a bookstore today I found the book by Ben Yagoda, I don't have any money, so I couldn't buy it, but it won't let me sleep! I have to know. Help!

Someone should have killed Mark Twain instead.

Stephen King is a hypocrite. He advocates a no-adverb policy, and then he goes and litters his books with them.

Whoever has a problem with nouns should be kicked in the lower extremities.

All this bullshit boils down to one thing: Someone trying to sound like they know what they're talking about. To those people, I say: "Make me a list of the words I'm not allowed to use". Then, watch as I take a lighter to it.

You improve your writing by reading -- and writing, of course. Read any book and you'll find all of the above. They're words. Saying they can't be used is like telling an artist that yellow is garish and shouldn't be used.

It's all baloney.

You think so? I'm new to the aesthetics of writing. But I'm still curious as to why they said that?

Overkill is what I think they meant....new writers seem to over do the adjectives....

Originally Posted by darknite_johanne

You think so? I'm new to the aesthetics of writing. But I'm still curious as to why they said that?

As Terri said, new writers tend to overdo it. They stack their prose up with multitudes of adverbs -- including dialogue tags -- because they don't know how to convey meaning without them. However, there are times when adverbs are needed, so that's why I say that you should take this advice with a grain of salt. As long as you don't overdo it, using adverbs and adjectives is fine. Now, as far as nouns go, I don't know why anyone would say you can't use them. That's just ludicrous.

Sam, I think a problem with nouns might have been pronouns. Another common problem with novice writers is using a character's name once and then using nothing but pronouns for the next 100 pages.

I'm speedily thinking that lowly darknite curiously wonders what is glaringly obviously astetically unpleasing in this incredibly delightful sentance.

Get the picture?

Originally Posted by BoredMormon

I'm speedily thinking that lowly darknite curiously wonders what is glaringly obviously astetically unpleasing in this incredibly delightful sentance.

You made my brain hurt.

I have a thing about the word just, I can offer a logical justification by saying it has so many different meanings and all of them have more precise alternatives, but I think what it really does is make me stop, think about what I am saying and make it more precise. Maybe they are doing something similar.

Originally Posted by Sam W

Someone should have killed Mark Twain instead.

Stephen King is a hypocrite. He advocates a no-adverb policy, and then he goes and litters his books with them.

Whoever has a problem with nouns should be kicked in the lower extremities.

All this bullshit boils down to one thing: Someone trying to sound like they know what they're talking about. To those people, I say: "Make me a list of the words I'm not allowed to use". Then, watch as I take a lighter to it.

You improve your writing by reading -- and writing, of course. Read any book and you'll find all of the above. They're words. Saying they can't be used is like telling an artist that yellow is garish and shouldn't be used.

It's all baloney.

Sam, you're taking things meant to be guidelines and responding to them as if they were rules.

All rules are guidelines when it comes to art. That's what makes it art and not truth at all. Thre are no rules to govern beauty--that's why the definition of beauty changes so much from one era, culture and person to another.

Yes, guidelines state that one should avoid adverbs in favor of more precise, active verbs; that one should avoid the overuse of... any literary device/part of speech. It's like making a pizza with nothing but sauce or with pepperoni inches deep and all over the floor. Overuse makes for unhappy meal. No big deal, just tweak the recipe and see if its edible.

Off Topic:

Originally Posted by Olly Buckle

I have a thing about the word just, I can offer a logical justification by saying it has so many different meanings and all of them have more precise alternatives, but I think what it really does is make me stop, think about what I am saying and make it more precise. Maybe they are doing something similar.

A huge proportion of words in English have multiple meanings. That doesn’t stop us using them and in fact can at times be a source of amusement.

As to precision, I think that while being more precise is all very well, there’s much to be said for using the imprecise word. It teaches others.

“A just law.”

Depending of course on the context, isn’t that more colourful/writerly than saying “A right and proper law?”

Originally Posted by BoredMormon

I'm speedily thinking that lowly darknite curiously wonders what is glaringly obviously astetically unpleasing in this incredibly delightful sentance.

Get the picture?

Haha! Big Laughs! Yeah, I get the picture. Nice.

Depending of course on the context, isn’t that more colourful/writerly than saying “A right and proper law?”

But not as good as an equitable law, that's the point, not that there is really anything wrong with just, but that there is always something better than anything used casually and having a marker causes one to stop, remember that and try to think of it from time to time.

Originally Posted by Olly Buckle

having a marker causes one to stop, remember that and try to think of it from time to time.

You should of been a teacher. I've noticed when I'm writing that I now stop and think about its use. I'll prolly be more selective in future.

But I'm not going back to edit all my posts. That'd be just too much.