Huh? What’s wrong with adjectives? Aren’t they the way we tell the reader exactly what we’re trying to tell them? Aren’t adjectives part of “show, don’t tell?” Well–maybe yes and maybe no. It depends on the quality of the adjective. Unfortunately, most of us tend to use what I call “wimpy adjectives.” Here are some examples adapted from a recent writing workshop:
1. She drove down the street past sparkling, elegant houses.
2. We could not see behind the brightly-colored walls: they ran from one house to the next down the cobbled road.
3. Her house was beautiful, cozy, comfortable, and welcoming.
So what’s wrong with those sentences, you ask? Is Professional Writing Coach getting entirely too fussy? The adjectives involved are: elegant, sparkling, beautiful, brightly-colored, cobbled, cozy, comfortable, welcoming. Of all of those, “cobbled” is the closest to being a good, descriptive adjective.
But what about the others? We know what “splendid” means, don’t we? We know what “sparklingl” is. Or do we? Consider that what you might be thinking of when you write “splendid,” may not be the way your reader defines splendid. I may think a restored California Craftsman style house on a shady older neighborhood street is splendid. You may prefer a Mac Mansion in a newer suburban neighborhood. The same goes for “sparkling.” What does that mean? It was after dark, and the lights were on? It was in Arizona and the sun was bright?
In reality wimpy adjectives tell us nothing. They don’t contribute toward the accomplishment of every writer’s task: to take what is in the mind of the writer, transfer it, through the medium of the page, to the mind of the reader–as directly and accurately as possible.
Now look at the other adjectives in the list. Do they paint the picture we are trying to paint? Or do they leave it to the reader to fill in the colors–perhaps not the colors you had in mind, at all.
Consider this selection from Lawrence Durrell’s Justine, the first book in his Alexandria Quartet: Read the rest of this entry »