"Tools, Not Rules" Grammar Series: Passive Voice

A lot of the “rules” of writing are more flexible than some believe. Any given construct of grammar, punctuation, sentence structure, etc. has a time and place it’s most effective.

I’ve been fighting with English teachers about passive voice since tenth grade. It always felt obvious to me that there would be situations right for it, and there are—but my understanding of it has certainly evolved since then. I understand a lot more after earning a B.A. in English, interning in a comics department at Penguin Random House, spending several years in multi-genre critique groups, editing everything I could get my hands on on a freelance basis for over a decade, working for two years in technical writing, and trying my own hand at wildly different types of writing. Let me share what I've learned.

What is Passive Voice? 

Passive voice looks like this:

In passive voice, noun that would ordinarily be the direct object appears at the beginning instead. The active party (which would normally be the subject) is placed at the beginning.

In active voice, this would have been:

Because passive voice adds words and reorders the sentence, it feels more obstructive and less clear. Fair enough - this is why politicians often use it. “Mistakes were made” dodges blame better than “I made mistakes.” 

It also emphasizes the ball. There are times the direct object deserves that emphasis, but emphasis can also come at the end of a sentence. 

Passive Voice Uses Reflexive Verbs

For several years, I didn’t recognize passive voice in sentences where the “subject” was not named, especially in past or past perfect tense. Passive voice was explained to me along these lines: “If it feels like it should come at the end of the sentence, it shouldn’t be at the beginning.” This made sentences like this confusing: 

“The garden has been grown.” 

“The crime was solved.”

“The printer has been used.” 

The subjects of these sentences are “The garden,” “The crime,” and “The printer.” A noun and a verb, no matter what tense–that’s all a sentence needs, right? There weren’t two different nouns to juggle, so I struggled to see the issue. 

However, these verbs are reflexive. They require an acting party (writer) and a party acted upon (printer). The writer used the printer. When looking for passive voice, look for reflexive verbs, not just the the sentence structure. If a reflexive verb is necessary, the information on each side of it is often necessary. 

When is passive voice a useful tool?

Here’s where some writers disagree with me: I believe that, in many cases, the passive voice is more succinct and natural. Let’s go through some types of writing where passive voice can be an advantage.

When brevity is necessary: Frequently 

If you were sending a telegram, you probably wouldn't revise "Problem solved" into "My brother solved the problem." Often, fewer words are better. Economy of language and all.

I first wrote the sentence above as “Standard English sentences are structured with a noun subject, a verb, and a direct object.” I could find no verb more accurate than “structure” but any subject noun I could have paired with it felt clunky and redundant. For example, “Writers structure sentences with…” would also add unnecessary words. If brevity is your goal, passive voice will not always be the right solution. I rewrote it using the more informal language and a colon, and it works, but I still honestly prefer the first version. 

When the active party is unknown: Frequently 

Oh, no! Someone broke into the store! Fortunately, the cash register was closed up properly. Perhaps later you’ll figure out which employee did their job well–but for now, all that matters is that the cash register was locked up.

To emphasize a mystery: Frequently

If, for example, it’s important to emphasize a mysteriously locked door, then you can say, “The door was locked.” This might make a chilling ending for a chapter. 

Once your character is freed, they might tell a friend: “Someone locked the door,” and the discussion about the identity of that person can commence. 

In dialogue: Frequently

A character in an intense situation is not going to think through an urgent sentence and rearrange it to be active. Depending on the character, “I’ve been shot!” might sound more natural than “Someone shot me!” 

In book reviews: Frequently

It’s difficult to write a book review in active voice without repeatedly reusing the author’s name. This causes reviews to sound more analytical and academic, like a paper. “Author Authorton crafts a charming small town with a magic unto its own.” This might work for an opening paragraph, but then we might be referring back to Authorton repeatedly, or using pronouns. Some authors leave their pronouns intentionally vague. Not to mention, especially these days, ghostwriters abound; the overuse of names in reviews further attributes work to the wrong person. 

These effects bother me, but it’s partly a matter of taste. I prefer to use the author’s name only a couple of times and use passive voice for much of my critique: “The world-building is exquisitely crafted.” 

In journalism: Sometimes 

“A store was robbed” is, in my opinion, clearer and more direct than “A robbery took place.” However, “An unknown burglar robbed a convenience store” is a great option because it clarifies the status of the investigation. 

When using or translating other languages: Sometimes 

In Japanese for example, standard sentence structure places the direct object at the beginning of the sentence. It goes first. Think of how Yoda speaks to get an idea of Japanese grammar. These sentences translate well enough with rearrangement, but there might be instances where passive voice feels more true to the original. For example, I wouldn’t restructure a lot of Japanese poetry.

Speech writing and political writing: Sometimes

While clarity and transparency are important in politics, some find obscuring facts to be an advantage, and other times they discuss circumstances with unknown active subjects (See Journalism above). I personally think politicians would be better off using less passive voice, but passive voice is common in political speeches and campaign language, and I would be remiss not to mention it as a time passive voice is acceptable. 

To avoid redundancy: Sometimes 

“The gardener grew the garden.” This is in active voice, but it feels repetitive. In the wrong context, it could even create a condescending tone. There’s typically a good way to rephrase it: “The gardener grew the flowers along the eastern fence,” but sometimes you won't have that information. “The garden was grown by the gardener” is no better, but in a succinct list of accomplished tasks, “The garden was grown” or even simply "The garden" might suffice. 

In technical writing: Rarely

In technical writing, active voice is the rule of thumb. Much of it is instructional, so the sentences are imperative, and the subject ("you") is implied.

Occasionally you might need to specify conditions existing before the beginning of a procedure. An example might be: "Proceed only if the green light is lit." Safety first, always. You don't want to a work for a company that neglects it.

In some technical reports, the active party might be unknown or irrelevant performing a task. You might be instructed to summarize: "The test was completed." Before you default to this, however, refer to your company's standards for guidance. Please research any missing information or ask an available subject matter expert (SME).

In business writing: Rarely

To make a strong impression in the world of business writing, clarity is key. Keep an eye out for situations like those above, but when possible, use active voice. 

Fiction outside of dialogue: Rarely 

I believe the exceptions above stand. Be mindful of the effect you want to create. I’ve always been curious to see a narrator start out using a lot of passive voice and use more active voice as they gain confidence–would this really reinforce the effect of their character change? Feel free to borrow the idea. 

In romance novels: Rarely

The situations above stand, but be clear about which character is performing which action. This is especially important in LGBTQ+ fiction, where your characters might have the same pronouns. It can be tricky to guide readers to keep track of which “she” is performing which action; excessive passive voice adds to this confusion

Direction in scripts, including scripts for comics or picture books: Rarely

Only use passive voice in scripts if you want to leave the acting party up to interpretation. Passive voice in dialogue is often more natural and acceptable, but please be clear about directions you give to actors and artists. Which character is performing which action?

When you want to sound confident: Rarely

The badass assassin character in your story might seem cool and confident when he announces: "It is done." You probably won't sound that way when you report on a task to your boss. Be specific and be sure to credit yourself and the people who helped you.

In academic writing: Never

Avoid passive voice in your English papers! It will count against you. I understand why professors ask for active voice; it's a good exercise and demands additional research if information is missing. Is it an element of writing that's applicable to all other forms? No.

Our understanding and usage of language are always evolving.

If you feel I'm wrong about any of this, please let me know. Also let me know if it came in handy! I might update this post with additional sections or even corrections in the future, and you'll find those edits described below. Thanks for checking out the article!