To be or not to be?

[NotWise]

"Avoid all forms of 'to be'" is a long-standing style recommendation. Text becomes more dynamic without it. Removing "to be" pretty much eliminates the passive voice. I didn't learn to write that way, but I'm experimenting with it. (How many times did I use "to be" in this paragraph?)

Some changes come easily, some uses are hard to write around, and maybe sometimes the text works better with it.

Have you tried writing without "to be?" How did it work for you?

I may use more adverbs when I remove "to be." That might be about rhythm and flow more than anything else. If I also want to get away from unnecessary adverbs, then I find myself between a rock and a hard place.

 

[SimonDoom]

I look at it this way. The single thing you can do to punch up your prose style most effectively is to mind your verb choices. Active voice is generally better than passive voice. But it's best seen as a general guideline rather than a hard and fast rule. Pick up a book by any author that you like and you'll see plenty of use of the verb "to be."

I've never tried to do without the verb "to be" altogether, and I never will. But when I'm writing a story I try to spice up the verbs to make the prose more interesting.

Keep in mind, too, that not all uses of "to be" are passive voice. "The flower is red" is not passive voice; it's just a use of "is" as a linking verb. "The flower was smelled by me" is passive voice, compared to "I smelled the flower" as active voice.

 

[gunhilltrain]

If it was good enough for Shakespeare, it's good enough for me. Seriously, I never noticed that before. I'm not even sure if I've done that myself or not.

 

[KeithD]

Fiction and the need to show authentic narrators and characters in their dialogue cut down on any "avoid this" writing guidance.

 

[NotWise]

Fiction and the need to show authentic narrators and characters in their dialogue cut down on any "avoid this" writing guidance.

I suspend grammar and style guidance in dialogue. It needs to "sound" like the character and be understandable to the reader. It also needs to be interesting, but that's about all.

For me, the narrative voice needs a little different balance. I tend to make it more formal, especially in third person. Style guidance comes into play more often.

 

[KeithD]

I suspend grammar and style guidance in dialogue. It needs to "sound" like the character and be understandable to the reader. It also needs to be interesting, but that's about all.

For me, the narrative voice needs a little different balance. I tend to make it more formal, especially in third person. Style guidance comes into play more often.

Your narrator is also a story character in fiction. It can be one who follows writing guidance strictly but it need not be.

 

[EmilyMiller]

"Avoid all forms of 'to be'" is a long-standing style recommendation. Text becomes more dynamic without it. Removing "to be" pretty much eliminates the passive voice. I didn't learn to write that way, but I'm experimenting with it. (How many times did I use "to be" in this paragraph?)

Some changes come easily, some uses are hard to write around, and maybe sometimes the text works better with it.

Have you tried writing without "to be?" How did it work for you?

I may use more adverbs when I remove "to be." That might be about rhythm and flow more than anything else. If I also want to get away from unnecessary adverbs, then I find myself between a rock and a hard place.

The passive voice used to be employed by this author all of the time. She was once a scientist and the field which now occupies her professionally is one which could be described as relatively technical and demanding of dry, dispassionate descriptions of events.

Old habits cannot be kicked with total facility.

Em

 

[theWollstonecraftWoman]

The speech, To be or Not To be, from Hamlet, is by far the most introspective contemplation of suicide in literature. His quandary isn't about hurting others, how it might effect events, or even the morality of killing ones self, it's all about if there is punishment waiting for him. More to the point, its about his pain in living vs his possible punishment in taking his life. Suicide has been called the most selfish act. It certainly isn't always that. But a healthy person taking their life because of sadness and giving up on themselves, is pretty oblivious to those around them. It may not be selfish, I can't imagine how much pain it takes to make a person kill themselves, but is, at least, uncaring about those who must carry on without them.

Yes, a derivation from the passive vs active verb discussion. Sorry. So, to get back on subject, sometimes passive isn't a bad thing. I think for expediency in writing Honestly, works better than To be totally honest, but the second way is how my husband talks and sound more like a normal man to me. But Honestly, honestly sounds more like a woman to me.

 

[MrPixel]

To be continued...

 

[Britva415]

For this rule to cover quoted speech spoken by characters would be an over-application.

Mama's face was in the doorway. "Where is your brother right now?"
vs.
Mama looked in through the doorway. She did not say, "Where is your brother right now?" Instead she said, "What location has your brother right now?" or "Where does your brother find himself right now?" or something else unnatural.

 

[NoTalentHack]

The passive voice used to be employed by this author all of the time. She was once a scientist and the field which now occupies her professionally is one which could be described as relatively technical and demanding of dry, dispassionate descriptions of events.

Old habits cannot be kicked with total facility.

Em

EMILY.

 

[EmilyMiller]

EMILY.

Present!

Em

 

[Emilymcplugger]

Don’t do this is good guidance…right until someone does it and makes it awesome (“To be or not to be”is a great example).

I find reading and re-reading re-editing my own work acts as a great cleanser for repitition and other such problems. My biggest issue is THAT. I am guilty of overusing THAT word, so much so THAT when I hear THAT word it stands out and caps itself. THAT is such a pain in the arse.

 

[NotWise]

The nice thing about THAT is, you can usually just delete it.

After struggling this morning to cleanse a fairly short passage of "to be" and contractions using it, I deleted the thing. I think it'll be easier to write without "to be" if the characters are active.

 

[TheRedChamber]

I was going to say that I had no problem using the passive voice when necessary, but then realized that I had very little idea of how often I did actually use it. Thus, I scanned through one of my recent stories (The Cellist) and noted down each occassion when I used it. I only counted 11 uses in 6.5k words (and a few are arguable). Grouping by type rather than order...

"The guest violinist is supposed to be very good, I've heard."

Nor did [the shop] carry condoms – clearly a certain standard of behaviour was expected of students.

Both reporting a general opinion where the exact holder isn't important. Classic use of the passive voice.

A few bars in an, on a technical level, my inner connoisseur was satisfied.

And so one enters the second stage of a relationship. It's no longer about making sure she chooses you, but making sure she is satisfied with her choice.

I was quite pleased with myself.

These are the arguable ones. I stared at them for a long time and decided they weren't really passive voice. They look like it - 'Her playing satisfied me', 'I was satisfied with her playing' - but the verbs are nominalized her - all the examples could be replaced with the word happy - the fact that I've used with rather than by as a following preposition maybe indicates this more strongly.

The sounds of about five or six different simultaneous tunes and a couple of practice scales were all being played on a range of different instruments.

Use of passive voice to flip a longer phrase to the beginning of a sentence. I guess I could have made this less clunky in other ways.

Her nudity, so quickly revealed was just as suddenly hidden by the body of the cello. Still, naked she was and that meant even looking at her neck or shoulders or arms carried with it a forbidden thrill. The hour-glass of her figure was mimicked by the frame of the instrument. Her legs were forced apart to accommodate the instrument.

The only time a paragraph is written with most of the verbs in the passive. I'd argue it works because the nudity is the thing 'I' wants to focus on and it is contrasted by the actions of another object (the cello). Keeping 'her nudity' as the subject makes sense to me.

The answer came in the form of a number of gym mats that were stored behind the piano.

Difficult to rewrite without using the passive because it's the mat's that are the real answer and the fact that they are stored behind the piano is a lesser detail. 'We found a number of gym mats behind the piano that provided a solution' possibly.

So in conclusion, it looks like I very rarely actually use the passive. So if someone else is, maybe cut down on it? But at this level of frequency it doesn't seem like a problem in my writing, even if any one particular setence could be improved.

 

[Pureotica]

I agree in principle. 99% of the time I'll go out of my way to avoid "to be" constructions. But once in a while it's the least awkward way to say something. If I have to contort a sentence into a pretzel, or force awkward wording, I'll just use the "to be," or adverb, or whatever and get on with my day. I came to fiction through poetry, so I grasp the concept of verb choice. A poem is essentially a verb scavenger hunt, with delusions of grandeur.

In any case passive voice isn't always bad. Only when it dominates the prose or gets awkward. Used sparingly it has its place, and not all" to be" constructions are passive voice. Progressive tenses use them. Not that I advocate loading prose with progressive tense, but sometimes it's useful.

But "to be" is the most boring verb in the language. I try to do better when possible.

Except in forum posts, where every principle of prose writing goes out the window.

As an aside, my writing teachers always told me to avoid nominalizations. So why can't they create a word that isn't itself, a nominalization?

It's even one of the worst offenders. It's an adjective (nominal) converted to a verb (nominalize) further twisted into a noun. I love English, but it gets silly sometimes. Especially when the gatekeepers don't even follow the rules.

And whoever created "incentivize" should be kicked in the nuts until they beg for mercy. I hate that awkward and totally redundant word. Not as much as irregardless, but it's up there.

Oops, I de-hijack the thread and release it to it's intended purpose. Once I get started...