Digital Raven (digitalraven) wrote,
Digital Raven
digitalraven

  • Mood:

Passive Time

First, I'm going to Liverpool later today. Chucking a few things in a bag and jollying off to see aarondb and Johnny "No, my real name is Ryan" Blaze, who is over from the untamed wilds of the colonies. I'll be back Sunday. If you have anything to say, shove it in an e-mail or a comment. I'll be taking my semi-functional internet organ along with me, for photos and to make small posts (though I can't make photo-posts direct from it), so really urgent stuff can go through that. The contest a few posts down looking at this current one (sue me, I like long links) will run until midnight on Sunday at which point I work out which words I'm writing a sequel to.

Story ideas in my head. You may see tiny fragments from stories come up in SMS-posts. All depends if I can get anything written on the train and put through to the phone. I want it to, moblogging is the sort of thing I want to be able to do.

And finally, I rant:

The passive voice is perhaps the most insidious yet telling sign of bad English in our age. It proliferates in technical writing where (it seems) the idea of an actor is anathema, and this putrid seed has spread to the works of fiction despite the best works of editors to combat them.

Passive phrases are of the style: "$foo was done", "$bar is required", "$baz is to be based on $frotz" and so on. A passive phrase has no acting object, an action happens without anything instantiating the action: "the gun was fired", as opposed to "he fired the gun". These phrases read like shit. They're boring, they are vague and hand-wavy and ridiculous. They are the über-airy-fairy phrasing, the grammatical equivalent of giving no child a failing grade in case it hurts their feelings or referring to anyone under the mean height as a "statistically vertically challenged person". People who write passive phrases need to learn some real fucking grammar.

My problem with passive phrasing is simple: At work I have to read lots of technical documentation. If there is a single active sentence in said documentation I stand amazed. These documents are painful to read. Seriously, it really does break my brain to look upon them with a writer's eyes. Such phrasing does not make things more accurate and it certainly doesn't make such a doc read better. The only advantage is the simple lie that a doc can be written without a person, in some vague future tense. Fuck that. A doc without a person is badly written, it doesn't matter if this document is a novel or a manual. It does not scan properly and any sense of phony authority conveyed by the author's overly-passive writing styleis immediately trashed by their own inability to write with any kind of style.

A small amount of passive phrasing is almost inevitable, especially when the author uses it for dramatic flair or description -- but even then, it is possible for someone to write entirely without passivity. When passive phrasing is over-used in order to sound technical or authoritive or just because the hack writing it doesn't know any better is when people need their fingers breaking and their keyboards confiscating.
Subscribe

  • The Great Migration, Take 2

    This is my last post to Livejournal. If you don't already know why, you haven't been paying attention. I moved my main activity over to…

  • Party On, Dudes

    I wrote a thing on Virtue Signalling in Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure. Originally posted at Dreamwidth, where people have commented. Please…

  • Pounded in the Butt by my Atypical Neurochemistry

    With thanks to Chuck Tingle. Let’s talk about mental health for a minute. Specifically, my experiences, because I can’t really talk…

  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Comments allowed for friends only

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 4 comments