Adjectives

[lauraannwilliams]

I'm doing some beta reading, and I've noticed a huge stylistic difference between her style and mine.

The author I'm reading uses a lot of adjectives. I use nearly none. I'm wondering if my writing is going to end up too sparse, or too hard to picture.

Here's a semi-random sampling from my first draft WIP:

We avoided the main house and took a back road into the fields. Milo grew increasingly jumpy and restless, hunching down as if seeking cover under the window. Alan pulled the truck up to a small copse. A path lead into the trees. I stared at in silence. The trees and bushes were planted in a rough rectangle. The path was well worn, and I could see patches of mud where other vehicles had been parked.

I'd really appreciate some input on this issue. I can see some other issues, but I can't tell if I need more adjectives. Does it work?

Also, are there any good resources on using adjectives well?

[Exir]

We avoided the main house and took a back road into the fields. Milo grew increasingly jumpy and restless, hunching down as if seeking cover under the window. Alan pulled the truck up to a small copse. A path lead into the trees. I stared at in silence. The trees and bushes were planted in a rough rectangle. The path was well worn, and I could see patches of mud where other vehicles had been parked.

It's not the amount of adjectives you use, but the fact that you use words that are more "plain".

There's nothing wrong with being "plain", though. Ernest Hemingway wrote that way after all ;).

Also, are there any good resources on using adjectives well?

Read ANY novel by Vladimir Nabokov. (Warning: his style is very different from yours.)

[Matera the Mad]

Led is the past tense of to lead. ;)

[lauraannwilliams]

Exir: This helps. I wasn't thinking of "main", "back" or "worn" as adjectives. I'm not sure why not.

Matera: Yep.

[Libbie]

Read ANY novel by Vladimir Nabokov. (Warning: his style is very different from yours.)

Seconded five hundred thousand times. Nabokov was an absolute wizard with language (not just English, either.) You probably won't want to go all Nabokov. I don't think too many people can make that work well. But it might inspire more creative use of words (not just adjectives.)

I personally don't find your style off-putting in any way. It is what it is. I respect a drier, more straightforward style of storytelling, and I respect a more wordy, more descriptive style, too. As long as the story is compelling and the writer has put thought into the voice. Sometimes a drier, less complex narrative is what works best with your characters and setting. Don't feel that you have to make your voice wordier if that's not what feels right to you.

On the other hand, if you really admire your friend's style and would like to learn how to do that a bit yourself, Vladimir Nabokov is a great place to start.

I recommend either Lolita or Pale Fire first.

[Mumut]

I'd rather say 'the number of adjectives' rather than 'the amount of adjectives'.

Also I'd like to think you use plain words where there is a need to show the 'plainness' of the scene and the action but pack power into them where that is needed. I use longer sentences and plainer words where I want to calm the action down, possibly to create the calm before the storm. But I'd not like to think of you using 'quiet' adjectives in action scenes.

[Exir]

I recommend either Lolita or Pale Fire first.

Lolita before Pale Fire is the best order. Lolita is in prose and a little bit easier to understand. Pale Fire is poetry surrounded by paratext.

[Exir]

I'd rather say 'the number of adjectives' rather than 'the amount of adjectives'.

:P I stand corrected.

[Danthia]

There's nothing wrong with plain, as long as the story is still compelling. That's what matters, not the words themselves. What strikes me most about your sample is the structure and rhythm of it. You're telling more than showing, and almost every sentence is the same format. It has a list-like sound to it that flattens out the prose, which is why I suspect you feel it's plain.

You can easily fix this if you vary your sentence lengths and structures, toss in a little internalization from your POVs to give it a stronger voice, and get some personality into it. You're focusing on the what, but not the who or why (at least in this sample). The who and why is what makes a book compelling. The what is just window dressing.

Look at the sentences on their own. There's no sense of a story unfolding here. You could probably rearrange these and not lose anything.

We avoided the main house and took a back road into the fields.
Milo grew increasingly jumpy and restless, hunching down as if seeking cover under the window.
Alan pulled the truck up to a small copse.
A path lead into the trees.
I stared at in silence.
The trees and bushes were planted in a rough rectangle.
The path was well worn, and I could see patches of mud where other vehicles had been parked.

Now that you have the what down, slip in some who and why and I bet you'll see a big difference and be much happier. And it won't feel plain at all. :)

[NeuroFizz]

laura, please don't just go throwing adjectives in anywhere. Take a close look at each scene and see if it needs to be so "enhanced." For example, the passage you presented seems to be part of a tense scene. If so, that's exactly the type of scene you may not want to dress up. If you want the reader to be on edge as much as the characters, you want the quick, choppy prose to help create that edge.

Description and use of descriptive words are not going to be evenly played throughout a story if the author really pays attention to the tone and reader impact of each individual scene. Maintaining more flowery language throughout a book that has a variety of scenes will come across just as "toneless" as a book in which all scenes are written in "sparseltongue."

[Fallen]

Exir: This helps. I wasn't thinking of "main", "back" or "worn" as adjectives. I'm not sure why not.

Matera: Yep.


Hey Lauraann,

simple tip for recognising adjectives:

First, Look for either 'a' or 'the' (articles):

a cat
the car

They usually work with 'head nouns' in a noun phrase:

a cat ('a' is the article 'cat' the head noun)
the car (same again: 'the' article; 'car' is the head noun)

Anything you insert between 'a' and the 'head noun' (i.e. 'cat' and 'car') descibes that noun (so they are called the adjectives (describers and classifiers to some):


eg insert: 'slow, fat, black' in between 'a' and 'cat' you have:

a slow, fat, black cat

So look for your 'a' and 'the'; locate your head noun, and everything in between are your adjectives.

That's just a simple way of noticing adjectives. You, of course, have noun-phrases that don't start with articles, but that's for another day...

[Exir]

Maintaining more flowery language throughout a book that has a variety of scenes will come across just as "toneless" as a book in which all scenes are written in "sparseltongue."

YES! It's the variation that people notice. Take Nabokov. His sentences have a rhythm like poetry -- short, long, short, long, very long, short again... you can hear all the beats. His prose is adjective-laden, but not flowery.

[lauraannwilliams]

I really appreciate all the comments here. I purposely picked a snippet that was descriptive instead of plot-focused. At least the tension is getting across!

I'll try to mix it up a bit too. I feel easier about going back to my writing and figuring out when to properly fill in more descriptive bits. And try to vary my sentence lengths and rhythms.

Fallen, looking for the 'a' and 'the' bits really helps me see what I was missing before, thanks especially for the tip!

[maestrowork]

You used enough adjectives. They're like salt... a little goes a long way.

And don't compare your style with others.

And I worry about you "filling in more descriptive bits." Adjectives, by nature, is telling. I'd rather suggest you fill in more details by "showing."

For example:

We avoided the main house and took a back road into the fields. Milo grew increasingly jumpy and restless (show us how Milo is jumpy and restless), hunching down as if seeking cover under the window. Alan pulled the truck up to a small copse ("copse" is already a small group of trees... instead, tell us what kind of trees they are.). A path lead into the trees (seems redundant). I stared at ? in silence. The trees and bushes were planted in a rough rectangle (what rectangle? How big? Maybe a simile here to give us a better visual?). The path was well worn (describe the path instead of telling us it is well worn?), and I could see patches of mud where other vehicles had been parked.


Someone mentioned Hemingway. While some people loathe his style, but I like it. He painted vivid visuals with nouns and verbs and similes and metaphors without going purple with adjectives. His adjectives are very simple.

[redlegdvldg]

Thanks for this post I have a hard time with adjectives also. I never know when too much is too much. Anyway thanks for the info.

[BootChaser]

We avoided the main house and took a back road into the fields. Milo grew increasingly jumpy and restless, hunching down as if seeking cover under the window. Alan pulled the truck up to a small copse. A path lead into the trees. I stared at in silence. The trees and bushes were planted in a rough rectangle. The path was well worn, and I could see patches of mud where other vehicles had been parked. I hate to be the off one here, and will readily admit I don't consider myself a fantastic writer. However, I am an avid reader, and like to think that I know what does and doesn't come across so well on the page while reading. I must say that I do not like this paragraph at all. It feels incoherent and choppy and while reading I'm thrown out of the story constantly by that. I don't feel any flow whatsoever, and neither do I feel any tension from the short sentences. If I picked up a book, and this were the only thing on the back to entice me to read it, I'd put it down. Quickly.

I'm seriously not trying to be harsh, just honest. I read to escape. If I keep getting tossed back into reality, for whatever reason, I (the reader) won't bother, and I'll find something that does allow me that escape.

Here's a quick toss-out of how this could be written to get (and keep!) my attention:

We avoided the main house and took a back road through the fields. Milo seemed to grow jumpy and restless the closer we got to the trees, hunching down as if seeking cover under the window. As Alan pulled the truck to a stop, we stared in silence at the odd way the vegetation had been planted into a large rectangular shape. There was a well-worn path leading into it, fading from view where the shadows deepened. I could see patches of mud around us where other vehicles had been parked. That's just a quick jot, without knowing the context of the quote.

As a random side-note, as someone who grew up around farms, and fields, I can only assume 'Milo' is a dog, but the first time I read it, I had to go back, because Milo is also a crop you can plant, and at first I questioned how a crop could be jumpy and restless. Although I am sure that this isn't an issue if one has read the whole story up to that point.

Just my two cents worth... and you can keep the change! ;)

[lauraannwilliams]

Milo's actually a werewolf. So the dog is close. I haven't heard of a crop called Milo, I'll go Wikipedia that.

This entire scene has been rewritten - Milo's not in the latest version of the truck drive. It still needs work, but I think it's improved from when I posted this.

Thank you for posting the alternative version - I really enjoy seeing others peoples take on the same scene (mine or someone elses). I'm trying to avoid 'seemed' ( isn't that filtering? ), and I find myself having to take out 'I wondered' every sixth sentence, but I do like the fading into the shadows bit. I may have to snatch that for another spot. :)

Still, I'm making progress.

Thanks for the reply!

Edit: Looked up Milo (aka Sorgum, which I have heard of ), and found out there's also a town by that name south and west of where my story is set!

[BootChaser]

*smiles* We learn something new every day! ;)

As an aside, I put in 'seemed' because it really seemed (haha) like I was just being pelted with information, instead of being privy to observations by the MC.

As for filtering or no, I have no idea. I'm not the best of writers, so I'm sure there were many technical errors in there! Also, feel free to snatch anything you like from any self-indulgent re-writes I do, and discard the rubbish. ;)

[backslashbaby]

I agree that it is too plain. Describing some of the things more could pull me in more[make it spookier, or more sad... more something]. Or more about the feelings/motives of the characters. Maybe more about what they think will happen.

In other words, it's not enough of something :D It doesn't have to be adjectives.

I think sentence structure/listing seems to be what throws it off most.

Then again, it's not far off if it's just a little transition scene. I get the feeling I'm supposed to be more intrigued than I was, though. Give it a bit more oomph, yes ;)

[lauraannwilliams]

Well, it is mostly a transition scene, yes. I was trying to build tension, do some foreshadowing with Milo's response. If anything though, this thread has shown me that I'm sure gonna need beta readers when I get the darn thing finished.

[Juliette Wade]

One thing adjectives (and certain other words too) can be good for is infusing the judgment of the narrator into a sequence of text. Right now, even though your excerpt does include "I," a first-person narrator, I don't see many hints as to that person's judgment of the situation. You could give hints about Milo's wolfy status, for example, by using more canine-specific words than "jumpy" or "restless," which can apply to just about anyone. Or compare "the trees were planted in a rough rectangle" with something like "the trees were planted in a claustrophobic rectangle." Same number of words, but suddenly you get a judgment from the narrator included. You don't need to do this with every word, but even a tiny change in an adjective, adverb or noun that you use can help keep the personal identity of the narrator fresh in the reader's mind. And depending on what you're trying to achieve, that can be very useful - particularly if the narrator is highly anxious.

A couple of days ago I wrote an essay on point of view, unreliable narrators, and subjective experience which you might find relates to this topic. It's here (http://talktoyouniverse.blogspot.com/2009/08/point-of-view-unreliable-narrators-and.html), if you're interested.

[lauraannwilliams]

I will take a look at the link, thank you.

It's a great tip!

[Lady Ice]

We avoided the main house and took a back road into the fields. Milo grew increasingly jumpy and restless, hunching down as if seeking cover under the window. Alan pulled the truck up to a small copse. A path lead into the trees. I stared at in silence. The trees and bushes were planted in a rough rectangle. The path was well worn, and I could see patches of mud where other vehicles had been parked.

Okay:
1- 'hunching down as if seeking cover under the window'. What window? Aren't we in a field? Don't use adjectives or phrases that take us out of the scene.
2- As someone else said, very samey sentences.
3- I'm liking some of it; you are verging into a Hemingway stylee prose. If you wish to channel him, use description to write what you see, not just to make the story seem more flowery. Then when you do put emotive writing in, it'll totally pack a punch (Hemingway's analogy of a butterfly used to critique Scott Fitzgerald is amazing)

[lauraannwilliams]

I've rewritten this scene about eight times since I posted this. It's funny to see critiques still coming in. Thanks for taking the time, Lady Ice.

They're in a truck, by the way, and in this version Milo was hunching down in the back seat ( extended cab ).