One of the most pervasive pieces of advice given to writers is to avoid passive voice like the plague. This guidance is so widespread that many writers develop an almost reflexive aversion to it. But like many aspects of the English language, the truth about passive voice is more nuanced than the blanket prohibition suggests. Let's unpack this myth and understand when passive voice isn't just acceptable but potentially preferable.
The Origin of Passive Voice Phobia
The aversion to passive voice likely stems from its comparison to the active voice, which is often celebrated for bringing clarity, vigor, and directness to sentences. In an active sentence, the subject performs the action, making the sentence straightforward and dynamic. For example, "The editor revised the manuscript" is active and leaves no doubt about who did what.
Passive voice, on the other hand, flips this around. The subject is acted upon by the verb, and the doer of the action might not even be mentioned. "The manuscript was revised" is a passive construction. The advice against passive voice comes from the idea that it can make sentences weaker, less direct, and sometimes vaguer.
The Reality: Passive Voice Has Its Place
Despite the bad rap, passive voice isn't inherently bad. It has specific functions and can be quite effective in the right contexts. One of its primary uses is to shift the focus from the doer to the action or the recipient of the action. For instance, in "The final chapter was written in one night," the emphasis is on the remarkable feat of writing, not on the writer. This can be particularly useful in scientific or formal writing where the action or result is more important than the actor.
Passive voice is also handy when the doer is unknown, irrelevant, or obvious. In a sentence like "Mistakes were made," the focus is on the fact that there were mistakes, not on who made them. This can be used to deliberately obscure the actor, but it can also simply reflect that the actor is not known or important to the context.
Striking the Right Balance
The key to using passive voice effectively is understanding when and why to use it. It's not about never using passive voice; it's about using it judiciously. When the focus should be on the action or the recipient, or when the actor is unimportant or unknown, passive voice might be your best choice. But when clarity, energy, and directness are needed, active voice will likely serve you better.
Conclusion: Embracing Flexibility in Voice
So, should you never use passive voice? Absolutely not. The belief that passive voice is always wrong is a myth that needs debunking. Like any tool in a writer's toolbox, passive voice has its time and place. The most skillful writers understand this and are flexible, employing passive or active voice as the situation demands. They know that variety in sentence structure can make writing more engaging and nuanced. Next time you're writing, consider your options. Don't shy away from passive voice out of habit; think critically about what serves your sentence, your paragraph, and your piece as a whole. Your writing will be all the richer for it.
Have you ever been puzzled about when to use passive voice, or have you received conflicting advice? Share your story or questions by commenting on the episode page in the podcast description. We'd love to hear from you!
Comments