L.L. Maurizi
Troubadour
Hey guys! this may not be the right corner of this forum to open this thread (mods, feel free to move it to the appropriate spot, or let me know)
Here is the thing. My editor and I got stuck for a bit on a small passage in my book, trying to choose the appropriate verb-tense.
Here is the passage, then I'll highlight the issue, and finally explain where we stand:
"Fhuarchen Chathair was the gem of central Velorath. Founded half a century after the end of the Final War, it had since become a world-center of culture, art, and philanthropy. It was also the birthplace of the Faith of Chathair, back when the majestic city of dragons, golden buildings, and indestructible walls had been a wasteland of rocks, lava, and death."
The particular issue is:
"It was also the birthplace of the Faith of Chathair, back when the majestic city of dragons, golden buildings, and indestructible walls had been a wasteland of rocks, lava, and death."
So, we both agree that the appropriate tense should be "had been", but "had been", in this instance, sounds wrong and even unclear to me (in that "had been" identifies a specific moment, as opposed to a situation that stretches in time. i.e. "I had been to that store three times before that day.")
I was arguing that in this case, syntactics and grammar notwithstanding, we could replace "had been" with "was," making the sentence become:
"It was also the birthplace of the Faith of Chathair, back when the majestic city of dragons, golden buildings, and indestructible walls was a wasteland of rocks, lava, and death."
Extensive google search and personal knowledge point towards the "had been" argument, but I was wondering if I am the only one to find the "sound" of it odd (I though it may simply be due to me not being a native English speaker and maybe having it somewhere in my brain that "was" is supposed the right sound - even though it would actually sound odd to a native speaker).
What's your take?
Thank you all!
Here is the thing. My editor and I got stuck for a bit on a small passage in my book, trying to choose the appropriate verb-tense.
Here is the passage, then I'll highlight the issue, and finally explain where we stand:
"Fhuarchen Chathair was the gem of central Velorath. Founded half a century after the end of the Final War, it had since become a world-center of culture, art, and philanthropy. It was also the birthplace of the Faith of Chathair, back when the majestic city of dragons, golden buildings, and indestructible walls had been a wasteland of rocks, lava, and death."
The particular issue is:
"It was also the birthplace of the Faith of Chathair, back when the majestic city of dragons, golden buildings, and indestructible walls had been a wasteland of rocks, lava, and death."
So, we both agree that the appropriate tense should be "had been", but "had been", in this instance, sounds wrong and even unclear to me (in that "had been" identifies a specific moment, as opposed to a situation that stretches in time. i.e. "I had been to that store three times before that day.")
I was arguing that in this case, syntactics and grammar notwithstanding, we could replace "had been" with "was," making the sentence become:
"It was also the birthplace of the Faith of Chathair, back when the majestic city of dragons, golden buildings, and indestructible walls was a wasteland of rocks, lava, and death."
Extensive google search and personal knowledge point towards the "had been" argument, but I was wondering if I am the only one to find the "sound" of it odd (I though it may simply be due to me not being a native English speaker and maybe having it somewhere in my brain that "was" is supposed the right sound - even though it would actually sound odd to a native speaker).
What's your take?
Thank you all!