So far my technique is to just let it go during the rough draft. Not worry about it and let the words go. I work better when I have something that I can work from. But it also creates more work in the future. What are your ways to dealing with little writing addictions?
I ignore them in the first draft, edit them out in the second draft, and cringe if I see them in the third draft. Writing is work. Rewriting is even more work. Resign yourself to lots of work and learn to love it.
Adverbs are part of the English language and should be used by any author wishing to write in grammatic English
The problem with overdoing the adverbs in a 1st draft is that they modify the meaning of the sentences. You can't just cut them out or the meaning changes, so it requires more extensive re-writing. I think in the case of adverbs and adjectives it might be good practice to try to rein them in even in the 1st draft. Keep it simple, and then reworking should be a bit simpler too. That's the theory anyway.
The most important thing to remember with adverbs is to only use them when they definitively enhance or clarify the meaning of the sentence. Otherwise they end up being a load of filler. The best way to look at it when editing is to cut any of them that you find difficulty coming up with a reason for them being there. Unless, of course, it's dialogue. Dialogue you want to cut down on them, but they can help define the speech patters of particular characters.
I'm with Catriona, if I have a writing tic I'll ignore it in the first draft. It's too stifling to be over-aware of it when you're trying to be creative. Also some of what I find irritating can be me over thinking it, and it might not be so bad after a re-read when it's all done. I like adverbs for enhancing or clarifying a mood - quickly. Sometimes it's easier to say - smiled smugly or said smugly than to offer ten more words conveying smugness. But if you're leaning on them - maybe highlight them with a color and see how often they occur in your ms. I've found that switching the angle of how I approach a subject broke my was habit.
Nothing wrong with adverbs if it suits the story. If we all followed the advice in those 'how to write better' books, our stories would end up like pop idol-type programmes where they just want everybody to sing the same tune but with slightly different words.
I think adverbs can be super useful especially if only use one or two in a sentence and not in a row. But obviously they can get excessive, especially when stacked on one word. Indubitably certainly adverbs can be a dreadful, terrible pain when there is a profuse, great abundance of them.
It's just my own theory, and the way I personally approach it. Otherwise editing becomes nightmarish later. I mean, unless somebody works out a style with lots of adverbs and/or adjectives that's pleasing and whimsical. Like any rule it can be broken or bent or stretched if you know what you're doing or if you can make it appealing enough. Some people do that naturally without needing to think about it. It sounds like you're a very intuitive writer. Most of us need to study and practice to make our work appealing and clear.
I feel like sometimes an author doesn't trust the reader. He/she tries to put the story fully formed into their head and the effort fails. Parts of the story should already be with the reader, which is why everyone reads a book differently. But then you get these Stanley Kubricks of the page who try to exert too much control and overexplain everything, and they pile on all these adj/adv qualifiers that really aren't necessary. That's that lack of trust I mentioned. The reader feels that as a vague annoyance. It's what I feel is a mistake. You have to say enough to be complete and make a breathing world. The reader fills in the obvious details with what they know. So they're a participant of sorts in the story world. In avoiding the above mistake, a lot of writers become too minimalistic, and that creates a new mistake. Instead of being overwritten, the story's underwritten. Adjectives and adverbs exist for a reason. They tack on info, but the whole story is doing that. You start with "Once upon a time they lived happily ever after" * and then you insert details until the story is entertaining or serves your purpose. Adjectives/adverbs are part of the extra info. (* hmmm. . . . that's a good book title. I bet it's already been done.) I guess every mechanical/stylistic/grammatical device could be seen this way. Everything is extra and potentially not needed. In the end it's a matter of knowing your own quirks and being very honest about where your weaknesses lie while not being a "hypochondriac of text" who sees ailments everywhere. When I assess my writing, I only look at this: know the conventions of your genre know the expectations of your audience make the story live with your voice (know your strengths and quirks) You don't have to conform to anything else. If another writing style is outside of your genre, it doesn't matter. If a critic is outside of your audience, their opinion is meaningless. Be honest about what you over/underdo and fix it, but don't touch the rest.
Are you able to pay attention to the number of adverbs you use as you're writing the rough draft? I realize that writing deliberately requires practice; however it is possible. It's entirely possible to get in the habit of writing rough drafts a particular way.
