I know they are 'bad' and yet we see them in great fiction all the time. In a previous post, I ask what people thought about the rules of POV and how its seem that professional writers are able to get away with what amateurs are not. I am again looking for practical, applicable advice on this so examples with explanation are always great. I'll start with one of my own.
Kyle knew the rain had been coming down for over an hour. In this case, the meaning would not be changed but simply writing:
The rain had been coming down for over an hour.
But what if it's relevant that Kyle knew this? Perhaps to show a unique skill.
Kyle knew that the rain had been coming down for over an hour by kicking at the pine needles and finding them damp in the deepest layers below.
However, we could reword this and eliminate the filter word.
Kyle kicked the pine needles and found they were damp in the deep layers below. The rain must have been coming down for over an hour. Here I think the 'must have' is able to show that this is his conclusion. Without it, it would seem more like a plain statement of fact. The rain had been coming down for over an hour.
Now here's an example from a book published last year, Annex, by Rich Larson:
She knew Wyatt was right to act like nothing had happened at all, like he didn’t even remember it. Same thing she was doing. She just ****ing hated it, that was all.
I think if the passage read: "Wyatt was right to act like nothing had happened at all, like he didn’t even remember it." It would work just as well.
My take on it is that filter words should be avoided where ever possible, but don't be afraid to use them when necessary. Still, I don't think this covers everything. I'v read more than one opinion stating that they should never be used ever. I'm eager to hear what you all have to say.
Kyle knew the rain had been coming down for over an hour. In this case, the meaning would not be changed but simply writing:
The rain had been coming down for over an hour.
But what if it's relevant that Kyle knew this? Perhaps to show a unique skill.
Kyle knew that the rain had been coming down for over an hour by kicking at the pine needles and finding them damp in the deepest layers below.
However, we could reword this and eliminate the filter word.
Kyle kicked the pine needles and found they were damp in the deep layers below. The rain must have been coming down for over an hour. Here I think the 'must have' is able to show that this is his conclusion. Without it, it would seem more like a plain statement of fact. The rain had been coming down for over an hour.
Now here's an example from a book published last year, Annex, by Rich Larson:
She knew Wyatt was right to act like nothing had happened at all, like he didn’t even remember it. Same thing she was doing. She just ****ing hated it, that was all.
I think if the passage read: "Wyatt was right to act like nothing had happened at all, like he didn’t even remember it." It would work just as well.
My take on it is that filter words should be avoided where ever possible, but don't be afraid to use them when necessary. Still, I don't think this covers everything. I'v read more than one opinion stating that they should never be used ever. I'm eager to hear what you all have to say.