In his book On
Writing: A Memoir of the Craft, Stephen King highlighted what he considered
the two hallmarks of poor writing: adverbs (which we’ve already discussed here)
and the passive voice, which we will discuss today.
What is the passive voice? It is a manner of writing that
takes the direct object of the sentence (whoever or whatever is having something
done to them) and makes them the
subject of the sentence (the person or thing who is doing something.) So a normal, active-voice sentence would read
like this:
Gretta painted a picture.
(Subject) (verb) (direct object)
And a sentence in the passive voice reads like this:
The picture was painted by Gretta.
(New
subject) (form of (past participle (Original subject,
“to be”) form of verb) now an indirect object)
Now, as usual, you don’t need to remember all of the
grammatical terms that I’ve listed above. All you need to remember is that a
passive sentence is a sentence written backwards. The passive voice generally
weakens your writing, making it boring and difficult to read.
I could dig much more deeply into what constitutes the
passive voice and how to identify it, but I’ll be honest—I don’t think I need
to. Perhaps it is because writers and English teachers have taken Mr. King’s
complaints to heart, but the passive voice doesn’t seem to be much of a problem
anymore. Just as I mentioned with adverbs, people seem to have learned that the
passive voice is a convention that should be shunned and are generally doing a
good job of it (at least in the manuscripts I’ve edited).
So instead of railing any further on the passive voice, I’m
going to give you some advice on when the passive voice is permissible:
When you want to
emphasize the object of the sentence over the subject. It’s not a common
situation, but every now and then, the object of the sentence needs greater
focus than anything else.
All five keys
were needed to open the door.
This could be written as, “The door needed all five keys to
open,” but that would place greater emphasis on the door. In this case, the keys
are clearly more important.
When the subject of
the sentence is unknown. Sometimes, your characters might not know who
performed an action. For instance:
The painting had
been stolen.
While this could be phrased, “Someone had stolen the
painting,” the passive voice can be used to place emphasis on what is known and to avoid the useless “someone.”
We know someone stole the painting
whether or not you actually use the word, so this is one of those rare cases
where the passive voice can actually be stronger, less redundant, and more
focused than the active voice.
When it’s not important
who performed the action. Your readers don’t need to know every little bit
of extraneous information. For instance, you might have a paragraph like this
in a story:
Nils and Gretta
hurried to the hospital and arrived with only minutes to spare. The baby was
delivered before Gretta could even don a hospital gown.
In this case, it’s really not important who delivered the baby—that’s not central to the story. While we
could say, “Doctor Bosch delivered the baby,” we don’t need to; plus, that would just add another random name to the story
for readers to remember. If the name isn’t going to be important to the story,
then it’s probably better not to mention it.
In scientific
documents. I don’t mean that you should use the passive voice if you are personally
writing a scientific document—I mean that you can use the passive voice for the text of a scientific document
that appears in your story. For better or worse, the passive voice can be quite
common in lab reports or scientific articles, as many people feel that it
establishes an “objective tone.” (That is, it avoids use of the first person.)
While scientific documents can be
written objectively without slipping into passive voice, they may feel more
genuine to your readers if you use the passive. The same can be said for legal
or business documents.
In dialog. Sometimes,
people speak in the passive voice, and you might want to reflect that in your
dialog. Perhaps you have a slimy businessperson or politician who is constantly
trying to evade responsibility for any of the consequences that their actions
have wrought—they might speak in the passive voice with irritating frequency.
Try to use this one sparingly, though.
No comments:
Post a Comment