Stay active
Do these statements have a depressingly familiar tone?
- Provision is made for members to book by mail.
- Parents are requested to arrive before 3pm.
- A meeting was convened to address the issue.
… You’re probably zoning out already. These sentences all use the dreary passive verb form, which sucks energy from the page and from the reader. But even though it’s lifeless, it shows no sign of fading away.
What's the difference between the passive and active voice?
Passive voice
This uses a form of the verb ‘to be’ and a past participle: is made, are requested, was convened.
In passive sentences, a person or thing has something done to them:
The meal was prepared by three local chefs.
Active voice
In active sentences, the subject performs the action:
Three local chefs prepared the meal.
It’s more direct and energetic, and usually more concise. It may also force you to state who is doing the action!
PASSIVE: It was decided that her contract would be terminated.
ACTIVE: The board decided to end her contract.
PASSIVE: The lecture was attended by over 300 people.
ACTIVE: Over 300 people attended the lecture.
PASSIVE: A fee may be applied if payment is not made by the due date.
ACTIVE: We may charge a fee if your payment is overdue.
Why do people use the passive?
Writers often resort to it if they are in a position of responsibility, are unsure of the topic, or want to impress someone. It sounds important, it helps fill up the page, and you can avoid stating who is responsible for doing something – the agent of an action. And actually, if you’re not ‘thinking active’, it’s very easy to just slip into using it.
So what’s wrong with it?
- It’s dull.
- It’s harder to understand.
- It keeps readers at a distance.
- It doesn’t foster trust.
Avoiding accountability
If you don’t say who cut costs/declined an application/miscalculated, you can avoid accusations and blame. The passive is a handy device for politicians, companies or anyone who doesn’t want to front up. ‘Mistakes were made’ is the famously easy way out. It’s much harder to say, ‘Our chief engineer made mistakes.’
In his 1946 essay Politics and the English Language George Orwell states that ‘the decline of a language must ultimately have political and economic causes’. He saw the passive voice as one way for those in power to hide the truth rather than express it.
When the active won't do
‘Never use the passive where you can use the active.’ This is the fourth point in Orwell’s six guidelines for writing. His rules are black and white – for example, ‘Never use a long word where a short one will do.’ But in writing, rules don’t always apply. Indeed, Orwell himself opts for the passive when describing its overuse: ‘In addition, the passive voice is wherever possible used in preference to the active.’
In some situations the passive is the better option. Here are some examples:
When the agent is unknown
‘Four people were killed yesterday during skirmishes between the government and rebel forces.’ At the time of writing, it would not be possible to accurately report who had killed them.
‘Her legacy will be honoured in a ceremony next Sunday.’ It’s not easy to provide a plausible agent here.
For correct emphasis
Consider the headline ‘Mayor criticised by housing committee’. This has more impact than ‘Housing committee criticises mayor’. Readers know and are interested in the mayor, rather than a group of anonymous people.
Another example: ‘Her latest book is published by XYZ Press.’ In this context the passive works because the focus is on an author and her books. Also, you don’t want to appear to promote the publisher by saying ‘XYZ Press published the book.’
A less extreme guideline …
The best approach is to do a final sweep of your writing and replace the passives that crept in when you weren’t looking – as long as this makes better sense.