This editor admits: the overuse of the passive “was” in fiction is one of our biggest pet peeves. In fact, it’s our major bone of contention with a certain Famous Writer Everyone Is Angry At Right Now.
However, in a post on Writers in the Storm, Kathleen Baldwin says that writers and editors are unfairly maligning poor, pitiful “was.”
First, Baldwin notes that other grammar tics are equally passive and can slow down your narrative flow. For example, prepositions – of, at, before, from, toward, within – can create passivity and slow your pace. Also, you can introduce passivity with words that end in -ing and that require a variance of the to be verb. “They are following me” is weak, and “They follow me” is stronger.
Meanwhile, writers can – and do – use was effectively to focus the reader’s attention on an action or other element besides the subject/actor. For example, referring to Charlotte’s Web, Baldwin asks which sounds better:
- A spider named Charlotte spun an amazing web to save Wilbur the pig from slaughter.
- Wilbur the pig was saved from slaughter when a spider named Charlotte spun an amazing web.
Which sounds better is a personal preference, but if you want to focus reader attention on Wilbur, the latter choice – while technically passive – is better.
