I need to read Wendell Berry. Edited out a “really” just for you, Jonathan.
One point on that passage: I would say “unconsecrated” is a complex adjective. It works so well because it’s a punchline after a long list of simple words. The double mindedness of the preacher is revealed.
I've been thinking about this article every now and then ever since I read it, a few years ago. Reading it again, I understand why it made me think all this time. There's a lot of writing advice revolving around what writers should avoid (eg passive voice, stative verbs, adverbs, adjectives, metaphors, comparisons, etc.). While it's better to produce "workmanlike" prose than poor prose, I'd say that stative verbs, passive voice, adjectives, etc. are essential to produce truly great prose. It all depends on the way they are used.
In the Lord of the Rings, moments before King Theoden gives the order to charge into battle, the descriptive passage is full of stative and perception verbs as well as adjectives. Why shouldn't it be? Nothing moves, nothingn happens, that's the point. The charge itself is full of action verbs. Later, when Merry faces the Lord of the Nazgûl, Tolkien uses a lot of passive voice. Again, there's a purpose: anyone facing such a foe is bound to be stripped of agency.
I'd assume that a sophisticated fifth-grader shouldn't be faulted for using too many adjectives but for using them without a clear purpose in mind.
I'm glad to hear you've been thinking on this for six years, Vincent! I heartily agree that passive voice, stative verbs, adverbs, adjectives, and all the other varieties of verbal expression exist because often they are exactly what you need. Still, I think it's a healthy habit to treat nouns and verbs as the default mode for descriptive prose and not to skip straight to adjectives and adverbs when looking to dial up descriptiveness.
I’ll never begrudge a long Wendell Berry quotation. Each time I encounter it. His work feels like a masterclass!
I need to read Wendell Berry. Edited out a “really” just for you, Jonathan.
One point on that passage: I would say “unconsecrated” is a complex adjective. It works so well because it’s a punchline after a long list of simple words. The double mindedness of the preacher is revealed.
I've been thinking about this article every now and then ever since I read it, a few years ago. Reading it again, I understand why it made me think all this time. There's a lot of writing advice revolving around what writers should avoid (eg passive voice, stative verbs, adverbs, adjectives, metaphors, comparisons, etc.). While it's better to produce "workmanlike" prose than poor prose, I'd say that stative verbs, passive voice, adjectives, etc. are essential to produce truly great prose. It all depends on the way they are used.
In the Lord of the Rings, moments before King Theoden gives the order to charge into battle, the descriptive passage is full of stative and perception verbs as well as adjectives. Why shouldn't it be? Nothing moves, nothingn happens, that's the point. The charge itself is full of action verbs. Later, when Merry faces the Lord of the Nazgûl, Tolkien uses a lot of passive voice. Again, there's a purpose: anyone facing such a foe is bound to be stripped of agency.
I'd assume that a sophisticated fifth-grader shouldn't be faulted for using too many adjectives but for using them without a clear purpose in mind.
I'm glad to hear you've been thinking on this for six years, Vincent! I heartily agree that passive voice, stative verbs, adverbs, adjectives, and all the other varieties of verbal expression exist because often they are exactly what you need. Still, I think it's a healthy habit to treat nouns and verbs as the default mode for descriptive prose and not to skip straight to adjectives and adverbs when looking to dial up descriptiveness.