Seemed, Appeared, Almost

'He seemed to consider my comment.' The only reason (I can see) for the 'he seemed' here is if you want to imply that the POV character suspects that the person is dissembling and isn't actually considering it. Ditto for 'he appeared flustered' - mostly when someone 'appears' flustered they are actually flustered and just writing 'he was flustered' would tell the reader everything they need to know.*

'His face seemed brighter...' either it was or it wasn't. 'His face was brighter than usual, it glowed.' I'm not a great fan of the 'it glowed' for some reason I can't quite identify but if it's got to glow, better to glow than almost glow. We know (unless this guy's an alien) that his face doesn't literally glow, so no need to wallop us with the info that it's a metaphor. We can tell

*Edited to add: I think this is telling anyway, even in the 'he was flustered' form. Better to show something he does that conveys that he's flustered. Fumbles lighting a cigarette, blushes, stammers, looks at his feet...

Your reader can't request that you ban common useful words without giving some kind of rationale and you should ignore and feedback that doesn't explain why that word doesn't work in context. This may be related to 'filtering', a technique I barely ever notice and am ambivalent about.

In narration, terms like seemed, appeared and almost are weak and are usually examples of filtering. Most of the time, you're better off replacing them with something more concrete.

Compare:

"He seemed to consider my offer."

To:

"He raised his eyebrows and took a deep breath, but he wouldn't look me in the eyes."

It's an opportunity to create additional characterization. Let the reader conclude that those actions indicate he was pretending to consider the offer, but didn't intend to take it.

It's not that those are never the right words. Sometimes, they might be exactly what you need there, but it's worthwhile to check each instance and make sure there's not a stronger way to get the meaning across.

It's not wrong. You have a POV character. It seems to him that the other person is considering his offer. If you cut out "He seemed" you'd be head hopping. Yes, you could rewrite in a way that shows him considering... but that's not that easy to show and frankly, it may not be important enough to waste the word count on.

Sometimes telling is the right choice... but you need to evaluate on a case-by-case basis.

I'm not sure this would be head hopping as it's clearly a first person POV - 'He considered my comment.' Although in close third I'd agree.

jkillan said:

My crit reader mentioned that I shouldn't use words like seemed, appeared, and almost, such as

Maybe its too much telling? not showing?

Click to expand...

The biggest problem I've ever noticed with such words is that it doesn't paint a clear picture of anything. If it's "almost red", what color is it? If he "appeared to be confused", is he confused or not? if something "seems this way", then that introduces doubt into the reader's mind.

I've often find that writers (self included) use these words when they don't want to make a decision about something. They don't know, so they fudge it. In a first draft, that's not a big deal; but in the final form, those words should be reserved for times when you do want to introduce subtle doubt or question into the reader's mind or if it truly something the POV is uncertain of (but those instances are better handled by saying what the POV is experiencing instead of giving a summation).


And, BTW, that last sentence should be "Maybe it's too telling? Not showing?"

Maryn said:

I second the "filtering" commentary.

The bruise seemed bigger than Orville's fist could just as easily be The bruise, bigger than Orville's fist, glowed red and purple as an Italian sunset.

Click to expand...

Yeah, but what if the POV character is trying to decide whether Orville was in fact responsible for the bruise? "The bruise seemed bigger than his fist" says "the POV character isn't sure, but is leaning towards believing Orville's fist couldn't be responsible." If you baldly state that the bruise is bigger, it removes any ambiguity, and you might want ambiguity in the context.

The little girl appeared to be neglected, her clothes filthy and her hair in knots could be The little girl's filthy clothes and knotted hair announced her parents' neglect.

Click to expand...

Again, 'appeared' adds some uncertainty to it. Some POV characters might immediately jump to a conclusion of parental neglect - most might, to be honest - but what if the little girl has just come from a dress rehearsal of OLIVER?

As with all words, tropes, techniques etc, filtering terms will be appropriate in some contexts and not in others. I don't hold with striking out words without at least explaining why they're superfluous.

I am so, so guilty of these words.

The problem with them is that they are too convenient. They package the meaning up nicely, but they don't have a lot of substance.

I use them way more than I should when my MC is observing other people, but there are much better ways for him to describe his observations.

jkillan said:

My crit reader mentioned that I shouldn't use words like seemed, appeared, and almost, such as

"He seemed to consider my comment."

Click to expand...

rainsmom said:

It's not wrong. You have a POV character. It seems to him that the other person is considering his offer. If you cut out "He seemed" you'd be head hopping. Y

Click to expand...

Maythe said:

I'm not sure this would be head hopping as it's clearly a first person POV - 'He considered my comment.' Although in close third I'd agree.

Click to expand...

I think what rainsmom is saying is this:

Your 1st pov character, let's call him Sam, is looking at Terrance.

Sam has just said, "Give me the girl, and I'll let you go, I won't tell anyone what you've done."

Terrance shook his head, but then he seemed to consider my comment.

If you wrote instead, "Terrance shook his head, but then he considered my comment" - you'd be in Terrance's head at that point. You can't know someone is considering something without knowing his thoughts - his pov.

If you do as some have suggested and show the actions that show he's considering, then Sam is still the pov - he's seeing Terrance shake his head or shrug or whatever. He's not inside Terrance's thoughts.

And I agree with Torgo - sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, and just saying "No, bad dog!" doesn't mean anything.

I don't know the exact words your critter used in his comments but I think he should have tried to convey that words like that can be vague if not used with care.

It's nothing to do with telling or showing- it's more a case of what do the words mean or convey when used? How is the reader supposed to interpret them?

I can't say I would get in a flap over the particular examples you give because context is everything, but if these and other potentially 'vague' words are used carelessly and without thought they can become meaningless.

jkillan said:

My crit reader mentioned that I shouldn't use words like seemed, appeared, and almost, such as

Maybe its too much telling? not showing?

"He seemed to consider my comment."

"He appeared flustered at my proposal."

"His face seemed brighter than usual, almost glowing."

Click to expand...

These words are not "bad" but they are weak, and sentences that use them are generally not the best sentences you could write. Each such word has its place, but they seem to fill manuscripts by new writers, and if there's a way to eliminate them, do so.

As someone once said, "It isn't about right or wrong, it's about weak or strong."

jkillan said:

My crit reader mentioned that I shouldn't use words like seemed, appeared, and almost, such as

Maybe its too much telling? not showing?

"He seemed to consider my comment."

"He appeared flustered at my proposal."

"His face seemed brighter than usual, almost glowing."

Click to expand...

Whenever you feel the desire to use words like "seemed" or "appeared", try using dialogue instead. These are linking verbs and they are almost always bad in that they take away the immediacy and tightness of your writing.


"He seemed to consider my comment."

"He considered my comment" is showing. Try this for showing:

"Maybe we can grab a bite to eat after school?"

"Hmm, let me call you after second period and let you know."


"He appeared flustered at my proposal."

My proposal flustered him is telling. Try this for showing:

"I can take Glenda to the prom if you have to work that night."

"What? Take my girlfriend to the prom?" Joe stuck his hands in his pockets and shook his head. "No way, man. Not gonna happen."

"His face seemed brighter than usual, almost glowing."

If you don't prefer dialogue, try:

His face glowed, where most days it paled in comparison.

Using "seemed" and "appeared" makes it sound like the narrator isn't sure about much of anything. It can make the reader a little iffy about continuing.

More on linking verbs. Sorry, I feel like I wrote another blog post here.

pyrosama said:

Using "seemed" and "appeared" makes it sound like the narrator isn't sure about much of anything. It can make the reader a little iffy about continuing.

Click to expand...

What if the narrator isn't sure about what they're seeing?

"He seemed to be telling the truth, but I still wasn't sure."

I mean, we can take that and turn it in to a whole slew of observations about expressions and mannerisms and stuff, but it might not be as clear and direct, and it might bog down the narrative.

"The Duchess appeared to be somewhat worse for wear."

OK, we could have her slur her words and trip over the furniture, but that might be too broad. Maybe what you want in the narrator is the elegant understatement. Maybe what you want is storytelling now and again.

Telling is fine. You can tell where appropriate. It's often the shortest distance between two plot points. A no-tell book often reads like a poorly-paced list of stage directions.

(I don't know why a reader would be turned off by a narrator who is unsure about things. It's never happened to me.)

I would be dubious about any suggestion that perfectly useful words should be banned. It's like telling people that the passive should never be used.
"He seemed flustered" tells something about the observer as well as the fellow who is supposedly flustered.
"He was flustered" doesn't.
You're the one writing the book. Which do you want?

Yeah, I have to agree with some of what people have already said.

If you're using seemed/appeared/etc because the narrator/character is unsure, then yes, by all means.

You can just as easily show the reader through actions, but that tells you nothing of how they are being perceived by the narrator/character.

So, they do have a place. Just have to know when to use them and to not overuse them, because obviously your character has to be able to discern some things by him/herself.

Torgo said:

What if the narrator isn't sure about what they're seeing?

"He seemed to be telling the truth, but I still wasn't sure."

I mean, we can take that and turn it in to a whole slew of observations about expressions and mannerisms and stuff, but it might not be as clear and direct, and it might bog down the narrative.

"The Duchess appeared to be somewhat worse for wear."

OK, we could have her slur her words and trip over the furniture, but that might be too broad. Maybe what you want in the narrator is the elegant understatement. Maybe what you want is storytelling now and again.

Telling is fine. You can tell where appropriate. It's often the shortest distance between two plot points. A no-tell book often reads like a poorly-paced list of stage directions.

(I don't know why a reader would be turned off by a narrator who is unsure about things. It's never happened to me.)

Click to expand...

I have never agreed with a post so much. I can't even add anything to that.

Except.... STOP WITH THE WORD WITCH HUNTS, PEOPLE!

If it wasn't so damaging as advice, I'd be laughing.

Torgo said:

What if the narrator isn't sure about what they're seeing?

Click to expand...

That's the problem for me and others in my critique group whenever these things come up. Why would a narrator even report something they aren't certain about? What purpose would it serve?

It leaves me feeling like I do when reading from the POV of an unreliable narrator. It could just be a preference thing, so if you don't see a problem with it, then it's perfectly okay to continue using seems and appears. Just know that some readers have a problem with reading passive voice.

Torgo said:

(I don't know why a reader would be turned off by a narrator who is unsure about things. It's never happened to me.)

Click to expand...

For me, as a reader, I like a more active voice and a commanding narrator, someone who can observe and report their point of view without questioning themselves or others around them.

She seemed upset.

Really? Is she crying? Is she showing any physical signs that something is bothering her? Did she throw a dish towel in the sink and cross her arms exclaiming, "Wait until your father gets home!" To me, that would indicate that she's upset and the narrator never had to tell me. Again, it might just be a preference thing.

Like others have said though, without the context of the entire scene, it's hard to tell if this is effective writing or not. With only this information, wouldn't you think it odd that something more revealing isn't shared by the narrator?

Seems, madam! nay it is; I know not 'seems.'
'Tis not alone my inky cloak, good mother,
Nor customary suits of solemn black,
Nor windy suspiration of forced breath,
No, nor the fruitful river in the eye,
Nor the dejected 'havior of the visage,
Together with all forms, moods, shapes of grief,
That can denote me truly: these indeed seem,
For they are actions that a man might play:
But I have that within which passeth show;
These but the trappings and the suits of woe.

Click to expand...

Still an important distinction, and one that is often useful for storytelling.

pyrosama said:

That's the problem for me and others in my critique group whenever these things come up. Why would a narrator even report something they aren't certain about? What purpose would it serve?

Click to expand...

Well, if you're writing a book in which the motives or thoughts or veracity of other characters are supposed to be ambiguous at certain points, in order to create suspense. It would be hard to write a detective story in which everyone's always certain about stuff. "He seemed to be sincere, but I still wasn't sure if I could trust him."

Or, alternatively, if you wanted to comment specifically and perhaps metaphorically on the appearance of something or someone. "He appeared to have cut his own hair, possibly while wearing boxing gloves."

Just know that some readers have a problem with reading passive voice.

For me, as a reader, I like a more active voice and a commanding narrator, someone who can observe and report their point of view without questioning themselves or others around them.

Click to expand...

[/quote]

In passing, I'm not sure you're clear on the meaning of 'passive voice'. "He seemed to be drunk" is active, not passive.

She seemed upset.

Really? Is she crying? Is she showing any physical signs that something is bothering her? Did she throw a dish towel in the sink and cross her arms exclaiming, "Wait until your father gets home!" To me, that would indicate that she's upset and the narrator never had to tell me. Again, it might just be a preference thing.

Click to expand...

I agree with this - that would be, to my mind, bad writing. The signs of being upset are not so complex to describe, and baldly stating it like that feels flat and colourless. But then that would go for the non-filtered "She was upset" version as well.

As you say, context is everything, and I will only ever criticise the use of words like these if they aren't appropriate in context. I remain staunchly against blacklisting words, phrases, parts of speech, voices, or letters of the alphabet!

Apart from to note Torgo is nailing it, as usual (esp re what constitutes passive, and blacklisting words/phrases -- all have their uses, yes, even telling)

pyrosama said:

That's the problem for me and others in my critique group whenever these things come up. Why would a narrator even report something they aren't certain about? What purpose would it serve?

Click to expand...

How is a narrator so certain what other people are feeling? Unless he's a telepath perhaps...Yes you can show what someone is doing to show they might be upset. But if I cross my arms or fling a dishtowel, am I angry? Upset? Pretending to be angry/upset so the other person will apologise? Trying not to laugh perhaps? The outside observer/narrator cannot know what is going through the other person's mind and to me, it would seem odd if s/he was always so certain of everyone else's emotions.

And sometimes for flow, you don't want to make a big show of showing - maybe that's not the point of teh scene, or you're trying to show something else as well or....actually any number of reasons

And of course, it can serve the purpose of voice - the narrator's spin on what is going on (which may or may not go with what the author actually shows. I really love it when a character sees something and gets something really different from it -- frex, to me, from what the author has shown, they seem angry and trying to cover it up, but the narrator thinks no, they're fine...)

Torgo said:

In passing, I'm not sure you're clear on the meaning of 'passive voice'. "He seemed to be drunk" is active, not passive.

Click to expand...

There is a thing of passive construction in the use of linking verbs where the sentence itself is neither active nor passive, where the subject of a sentence is merely equal by comparison via a state of being (to be).

It's just a preference for me, the reader, to read for myself and judge for myself the state of a character. There's nothing wrong with putting a little effort and presenting something as such:

He drank a lot of whiskey and stumbled around the bar.

To me, that would appear to be drunk, but it may seem to be perfectly normal to another reader (who knows). I would think most readers would want to make that determination themselves, but I could be wrong, and it might be just me and a few others in my group.

I think it's perfectly okay for a narrator to use seemed or appeared when warranted, but they are two words that I scan for religiously when I critique. I once retrieved a count of 32 while scanning two chapters for the word "seemed". That sort of abuse is just lazy writing, in my opinion.

pyrosama said:

I once retrieved a count of 32 while scanning two chapters for the word "seemed". That sort of abuse is just lazy writing, in my opinion.

Click to expand...

In my MS, I use the word "millipede" 16 times. I use "around" 211 times. I use "baby" 89 times. I use "poop" 12 times. I use "cock" 10 times.

Which one of these words am I abusing? Am I being lazy?

(Hint: It's cock. I'm abusing cock.

...People/things cock their heads too much...

but there's no way you would know that, not having read the MS and context.)

buzhidao said:

...People/things cock their heads too much...

but there's no way you would know that, not having read the MS and context.)

Click to expand...

I only scan for words after having detected a pattern of use while reading in a short period of time. Some writers aren't even aware they are using a word repetitively until it's pointed out.

In my group, we don't read entire manuscripts each month, only a couple chapters at a time. I think 32 times in two chapters is excessive for a linking verb, so should be pointed out. You don't want the writer to continue and eventually produce 544 in their 34 chapter completed manuscript.