"Was"

"She was nude, standing behind and leaning forward over the back of the chair that was made of heavy wood .."

I’ve noticed lately a number of authors using, what I tend to think of as, a lot of ‘passive’ rather than ‘active’ sentences in their writing and particularly in introductory paragraphs. Many stories here are good and imaginitvie, but I feel frustrated when they're down let down by too many 'was' lines. I’ve always been told that ‘was’ is a ‘passive verb’. I know it’s impossible to avoid the word completely when writing, and you shouldn't, but lately I’ve come across several stories that were just full of ‘wases’ . One actually had four in the first two sentences!

The above surely would have had more umph as, "She stood there nude leaning forward over the back of a heavy wood chair."

The opening sentences of a story, especially, are so important - they’re surely what make a reader want to continue, or just simply back click.

Good grief, I'm not expert, so is this just me?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alex Bragi

"Good grief, I'm not expert, so is this just me?

---

No. I was taught in my English classes that, when writing a piece, an author should try to eliminate as many "be" verbs from sentences as possible. Like you pointed out, it makes sentences seem less mundane and more active to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDSM_Tourguide

Originally Posted by Alex Bragi
"Good grief, I'm not expert, ...

---

Well, thanks for reiterating the fact! *g*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alex Bragi

The above surely would have had more umph as, "She stood there nude leaning forward over the back of a heavy wood chair."

---

The other reason your version works better is there are fewer words. One of the most effective (and easiest) ways to edit a story is to see how many words you can take out without changing the meaning. Shorter sentences have more impact. As an example, you can improve the rewrite even more by taking out the word "there".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chromedome11

The other reason your version works better is there are fewer words. One of the most effective (and easiest) ways to edit a story is to see how many words you can take out without changing the meaning. Shorter sentences have more impact. As an example, you can improve the rewrite even more by taking out the word "there".

---

That's an excellent point. I read an quote by a very experienced and talented author on line who said, "I writes a story, then chop a third of it out". That does seems a little extreme. I guess it depends on how economical you are with your words to begin with.

"She stood there nude leaning forward over the back of a heavy wood chair."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chromedome11

The other reason your version works better is there are fewer words. One of the most effective (and easiest) ways to edit a story is to see how many words you can take out without changing the meaning. Shorter sentences have more impact."

---

Yes and no. One doesn't want to use empty words, but I think most writers neglect opportunities to invite the senses of their readers into their story.

Which has more 'flavor'? -- "She stood, nude, leaning forward over the back of a heavy wood chair."

Or

"Her glossy hair wild about her naked shoulders, Cynthia fought to control her agitated breathing as she felt the unyielding solidity of the mahogany armchair pressing against her naked belly."

So much detail may be old-fashioned, but done properly it can add immeasurably to the texture of a story.

IMO

Boccaccio

Well, boccaccio, I certainly couldn't, and wouldn't try to, argue that one.

I think, however, what some authors, sometimes, forget is the difference between detail and clutter.

"She was nude as she stood there leaning over the chair that was made of wood."

That's cluttered with 'too many words'. Yes?

Your example is... well it's just simply hot and sexy, really. *ss*

Learn something new every day...

I have to admit honestly that I've never paid much attention to passive verbs versus action verbs and other such details when i write. I type whatever comes into my head and somehow when I look at it when its done it all seems pretty coherent. I've never had a problem getting my meaning acorss, and several of my beta readers have commented on how often I cn make them cry with certain stories. Hmm. If I started paying attention to verb usage and stuff like that would it detract from my storytelling , or make my writing better? I honestly don't know. Will limiting my use of certain words decrease my ability to convey my mental images to others? Or enhance it?
If anyone reading this has read any of my stories, can you tell me if I fall into the trap Alex describes and can I make my stories better by changing my word usage?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaeangel

Learn something new every day...


If anyone reading this has read any of my stories, can you tell me if I fall into the trap Alex describes and can I make my stories better by changing my word usage?

---

... can you tell me if I have fallen ... ;-)

Yes. As can we all. No story is ever perfect. But the more care one takes with it, the better it will be.


Boccaccio

To tell you the truth, the two sentences aren't the same to me.

"She was nude..." emphasizes her state of undress. "She stood there nude..." emphasizes the fact that she was standing, and the "there" suggests a kind of familiarity with her environment.

I don't know. I guess I haven't seen that much of this kind of thing for it to bother me. The passive voice I worry about are in things like "The whip was picked up by him" instead of "He picked up the whip."

Besides, what do you do with Dickens' "It was the worst of times; it was the best of times"?

---dr.M.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dr_mabeuse

Besides, what do you do with Dickens' "It was the worst of times; it was the best of times"?

---

Hmmm... becomes a Led Zeppelin song?

“"It was the worst of times; it was the best of times”? Oh, but shouldn’t that really be, “"It was the worst of times; it was the best of times…” ?

Honestly, did you really expect me to pass up an opportunity like that, did you? ;)

And, yes, what the Dickens do you do with it? (Sorry, but I couldn’t let that one slip either.) *gg*

Sure, the example you’ve given here is passive, but as juxtapositions, and not just those two—a whole string of them— it gives the story an incredible impact right from the start, doesn’t it? It’s a clever contrast, as Dickens then launches into a story set in times of competing and contradictory attitudes, as the entire tale becomes one giant juxtaposition of love and hate, sympathy and apathy, and poverty and wealth.

Besides, the hard and fast rule of fictional writing is, surely, there is none.

Oh, and…

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the good doctor

I guess I haven't seen that much of this kind of thing for it to bother me.

---

…I wouldn’t go as far as saying it ‘bothers’ me. Just sometimes, it seems a pity to see a great idea for a story flattened with too much passive phrasing and/or a repeated and/or an excess of unnecessary words.

:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alex Bragi

“"It was the worst of times; it was the best of times”? Oh, but shouldn’t that really be, “"It was the worst of times; it was the best of times…” ?
:)

---

Just to stop an interesting thread coming to an end I thought I would chip in. The Dicken's version is more poetic and therefore worthy of breaking grammatical rules. Rules are there to be broken but should only be broken to make a better or more powerful poetic sense. Metaphysical connections can say a lot more than literal meaning.

The irony of the poetry in Dicken's work, is that he was a really lousy poet.