By Vincent B. Davis II, @vbdavisii

“For all have sinned and fallen short of editorial perfection.”

This is one of my favorite quotes from Stephen King’s On Writing. Isn’t it true? No matter how hard we may try to correct, edit, and rewrite our manuscript, there is always something left lurking in the material that just gets under an editor’s skin.

That’s okay.

Every editor has their own ticks, and every writer has their own weaknesses. That’s why we have editors in the first place.

That being said, if we send our editor a manuscript that is loaded with poor writing and grammatical mistakes, will they really be able to focus on the content? Will they be able to zone in on the fine details of the Chicago Manual of Style? Probably not. They’ll be too busy cleaning up sloppy writing. And if that’s the case, you are paying a lot of money or a cut of your royalties for work that you could have accomplished.

While it is impossible to present your editor with a flawless manuscript, there are many things we should work to avoid on the front end. The first thing that comes to my mind in this category is adverbs.

When my editor returned the first revision of The Man with Two Names, it was so covered in red ink from my removed adverbs it was difficult to read. The use of too many adverbs may seem like a rookie mistake but we all do it, right? It may be impossible to anticipate all of your editors pet peeves, or to pinpoint your own weaknesses, but adverbs are almost universally hated by those who polish our cherished stories.

“I believe the road to hell is paved with adverbs, and I will shout it from the rooftops.”

This is another quote by Stephen King. When I read it, I cringed. “Sure, you can say that, Mr. King. But I don’t know how to express myself without the use of adverbs,” I thought to myself.

After spending a few weeks trying to rationalize my use of adverbs, I finally gave in. Since then, I have worked to eliminate them as often as I can, and my writing has been much better for it.

I want to backtrack and say that not all adverbs are evil. When used correctly, they can help modify a verb or an adjective in a way that explains something to the reader that they need to know. The trap lies in that when we begin to use them carelessly they can clog up our writing and not allow the reader to infer. And the writer’s goal should always be to allow the reader to experience the story, and not simply listen to it be explained.

For example, I might write, “she smiled happily.” Isn’t that a bit redundant? If she smiled, it was almost certainly happy. Perhaps it was a forced smile, or perhaps a sad/ironic/hopeless smile. If that is the case, you could certainly say, “she smiled sadly,” or something else that fits. But better yet, wouldn’t you want the context of the situation to speak for itself?

Stephen King believes that adverbs are used out of fear. Adverbs are an example of author intrusion, because we fear that the reader won’t understand what we are trying to express without them. But give the reader some credit! And give yourself some credit as well. If you’ve made it this far, it means you have a story to tell. And that story deserves to speak for itself.

Here is another instance of bad adverb usage. “‘Geez, I love it when you leave your muddy boots on the carpet,’ she says sarcastically to her husband.” Can’t you already imagine the tone of her voice? We didn’t need to reiterate that her statement was sarcastic. No one likes muddy boots on the carpet.

Here’s one more, “She fell into his arms, and kissed him lovingly.” If someone is falling into someone else arms, and kissing them, love can be assumed.

But in all of these cases, why is the adverb a problem? Maybe it doesn’t strengthen the writing, but does it actually weaken it? I think it does. By explaining exactly how or why something was said or done, we intrude on the readers interpretation, and do not allow them to come to their own conclusions. If we have set up the context correctly, they will see where we are going. But by eliminating the adverbs, we allow them to put their own spin on it. To experience the story in a way that only they can.

When you write about someone falling into someone else’s arms and kissing them, the reader can place themselves in that scene. They can remember that feeling, and perhaps it isn’t exactly the way you would have experienced it. Maybe it is vulnerability that rings truest to them. Perhaps it is the feeling of comfort or security. Maybe the reader will recall a feeling of reckless abandon.

Regardless, the reader receives a better experience of the story when they are telling the story alongside you. If it is crucial that something is said or done in a particular way, than break the rules and don’t apologize for it. But first, try to alter the context to make it crystal clear. Eliminate what remains and what doesn’t enhance the reader’s experience.

Your readers will thank you. And your editors will too.

Vincent B. Davis II is an Amazon International Bestselling author, entrepreneur, speaker, and soldier.

He joined the United States Army in 2014 and had the privilege to train at the John F. Kennedy School of Special Warfare at Fort Bragg. Still enlisted in the Reserves, Vincent uses the military discipline instilled in him to manage the writer’s life.

With a background in financial planning and a degree in business management, he is focused on the marketing aspect of book publishing. His first book, “The Man with Two Names” launched in July 2017, and has sold over 1,500 copies in its first six months. Using the same strategies he used to generate his own success, Vincent works with publishing companies and individual clients to help them sell more books in the modern publishing environment. He is passionate about helping authors improve their brand and platform.

When Vincent isn’t writing and marketing books, he enjoys spending time with his dogs, reading about history or philosophy, watching Carolina Panthers football, hunting, and volunteering in his hometown.