Is there passive voice in either sentence?

[Svrtnsse]

Svrtnsse,

Sorry if I created confusion with my use of the term "passive prose." I used the term to denote prose that does not convey motion and is, thus, passive.

The character rested in his chair.
The character was tired.
The character watched the bad guy.

It's not a bad thing to have inactive sentences when they're called for, but in general, sentences that utilize verbs that convey movement are considered stronger. If a section of your narrative is reading kinda dull and boring, take a look at your verbs.

No worries. These things happen, and it got cleared up, so it's all good now.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

"It was cold" is NOT passive. Neither is a sentence like, "They were silver."

Those are "to be" verbs, as Steerpike pointed out, and while "to be" verbs may be an indicator of passive voice it is not always passive voice.

In the examples you used above, they are a "state of being" and not passive voice.

Passive vs. Active Voice

John mailed the letter. - Active

The letter was mailed by John - Passive

In these examples, John is the actor. However, if written in passive voice, the letter takes the emphasis of the sentence. Typically you'll want to write in active voice. Active voice is more engaging for your reader. However, there are times when you'll want to purposefully employ passive voice.

Some examples:

Say you want to diminish any personal responsibility, as a PR statement may wish to do-
"Mistakes were made." - That is passive voice, but a purposeful use.

Or, you may wish to intentionally place emphasis away from the actor in a sentence because they are not the most important part of that sentence.
"Baby Jane was delivered at 4:15 AM." - Here the baby is important, not the actor.

Look how silly that statement would appear if written actively-
"Dr. Jones delivered baby Jane at 4:15 AM." - Maybe it's not silly. Maybe for your purpose the doctor as the actor is important, but most times people care about the baby that was born. They usually don't care about the doctor.

Another good use of passive voice is when the actor is unknown.

"The coins were stolen from my apartment sometime last night." - If I don't know who stole them, how can I attribute the action to the actor? Here "were stolen" is passive. Well, there is a way to attribute action to an unknown actor. You could, for example, write -

"The thief stole coins from my apartment...", but you can certainly use passive voice to good effect in this case.

 

[Butterfly]

I find it easier to select the' grammar & style' option on my word spellchecker and let the computer do the thinking. That's me being lazy, but it works.

 

[Darkfantasy]

That is tempting, Butterfly but I just felt as a writer, as a serious writer I should understand the concept and not be lazy. It is my craft and you should really learn. And sometimes the computer is wrong.

So active voice would be.
The spider climbed the wall
Passive would be:
The wall was climbed by the spider.

If I got that right I get it if not well...I should have been born blonde. hehe bet you're all looking forward to my next question. The next one is really going to bake your noodle.

 

[BWFoster78]

That is tempting, Butterfly but I just felt as a writer, as a serious writer I should understand the concept and not be lazy. It is my craft and you should really learn. And sometimes the computer is wrong.

So active voice would be.
The spider climbed the wall
Passive would be:
The wall was climbed by the spider.

If I got that right I get it if not well...I should have been born blonde.

Correct!

And I think it's good that you're mastering the concept.

From my perspective, though, passive voice is a much less useful (searching for the right word, there; not sure I got it) concept than avoiding passivity overall.

My natural tendency is to have characters sit around and talk about doing stuff. My writing is improved greatly when someone points out to me, "Hey, this scene would be so, so much better if your characters actually, you know, did this stuff instead of just talking about it."

Even realizing that it's a weakness and knowing that active characters are so much more interesting, I still find my characters sitting around too much.

You know, I think I've just figured out the problem: my characters are lazy. Anyone know where I can find some characters with a better work ethic?

 

[Russ]

You know, I think I've just figured out the problem: my characters are lazy. Anyone know where I can find some characters with a better work ethic?

Go with older characters if it is work ethic you are looking for, because kids today...

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

I find it easier to select the' grammar & style' option on my word spellchecker and let the computer do the thinking. That's me being lazy, but it works.

Like Butterfly, I found this tool useful.

I don't need it anymore, but I found it incredibly helpful while training myself to write in active voice as a default.

Now, it's a rarity if I fall into the passive voice unintentionally. I attribute that to a desire to learn and practice writing. That practice is more efficient if you use tools like the grammar & style check to show you problems you might otherwise overlook.

In critique groups, when writers have a hard time understanding or recognizing passivity in their writing, I always suggest the use of this function. How can you guard against what you don't readily recognize?

You can still gain an understanding while using a tool. When you get the green, squiggly line underneath a sentence or pairing of words, right click. If it says passive voice, seek to understand why it's passive, & then rewrite it actively. Doing this in repetition can teach you a ton and train your writing to default to the active voice as a second nature.

 

[Devor]

I think others have explained the passive voice pretty well by now. If you're missing subject noun (the "zombies") then it's passive. Passive voice looks like "This was affected (by that)." It's usually a weak way to write, and people don't really use it much. It's primary purpose is to make public critiques more confusing.

Most people who complain about "passive voice" don't mean it in the English teacher sense, or they have it confused. If there's a single tip to writing good prose, it's to develop your use of good strong active verbs. Was / To Be is just about the weakest verb out there, and some people suggest hunting it down with a hatchet. I've come to realize why I hate that advice, and advice like it: It looks at the bottom and says "let's avoid this one bad verb" instead of "let's talk about good verb use."

Here's your first sentence. And below is how I would re-write it. First just read the verbs.

It was a cold, dark day. The weather matched her mood perfectly as she leant her forehead against the frosted window. Her breath fogged up the glass.

She leaned her forehead against the cold frosted window and her breath fogged up the glass. The day was cold and dark. The weather matched her mood perfectly.

Those are almost the exact same sentences, but by trying to focus the wording around the verbs, IMO the second is a lot stronger. Notice the sentence with the weaker verb was: The focus shifts to the other words in the sentence. "It was" is horrible just because it's two weak words next to each other.

 

[kennyc]

Strunk and White people, Strunk and White:

Chapter 11:

11. Use the active voice. The active voice is usually more direct and vigorous than the
passive:
I shall always remember my first visit to Boston.
This is much better than
My first visit to Boston will always be remembered by me.
The latter sentence is less direct, less bold, and less concise. If the writer tries to
make it more concise by omitting "by me,"
My first visit to Boston will always be remembered,
it becomes indefinite: is it the writer, or some person undisclosed, or the world at
large, that will always remember this visit?
This rule does not, of course, mean that the writer should entirely discard the passive
voice, which is frequently convenient and sometimes necessary.
The dramatists of the Restoration are little esteemed today.
Modern readers have little esteem for the dramatists of the
Restoration.
The first would be the right form in a paragraph on the dramatists of the
Restoration; the second, in a paragraph on the tastes of modern readers. The need of
making a particular word the subject of the sentence will often, as in these examples,
determine which voice is to be used.
The habitual use of the active voice, however, makes for forcible writing. This is true
not only in narrative principally concerned with action, but in writing of any kind.
Many a tame sentence of description or exposition can be made lively and emphatic
by substituting a transitive in the active voice for some such perfunctory expression
as there is, or could be heard.
....

https://faculty.washington.edu/heagerty/Courses/b572/public/StrunkWhite.pdf

 

[skip.knox]

Knowing the difference between active and passive voice means you know how to use them. As a writer. The only way to break rules effectively is if you know the rules in the first place. Everything else is just making mistakes.

I pound my history students over the head with this one. Agency is crucial to constructing a coherent historical argument. A common student mistake is to say something like "it was believed." When writing history, the whole point is to explain who was doing the believing. When students use the passive voice, they dodge the very point and, worse, fool themselves into thinking they've said something.

Fiction is different. In fiction, leaving out the agent is sometimes _exactly_ the rhetorical trick that is needed. Unless it isn't. And *that* is why the difference must be known. By you. Notice that it's one thing to use the passive voice, but it's actually a separate (rhetorical rather than grammatical) matter to leave off the agent.

I am Skip. This message was approved.

 

[Saigonnus]

Active - focus on the character.

Passive - focus on the object..

He opened the chest.

The chest was opened.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[spectre]

The first sounds active and the second passive. I don't really know of specific syntactic uses for voice but insofar as showing motivation or overwhelming they are interchangeable. What are you aiming for in these sentences? What expression are you working toward?