Passives for Weasels

 

Most grammar lessons are about trying to communicate more clearly – to get your message across as effectively and efficiently as possible. And that’s great for most people. But for a true weasel – dedicated con artists, sleazebags, and, of course, politicians – one grammar lesson is all you need: a lesson in passives.

With a little mastery of the passive, you can report that someone ate the last piece of cake, while conveniently failing to mention that it was you. You can heap praise onto yourself without drawing attention to the credibility of the source. And you can win an argument about just about anything as long as your opponent isn’t quick enough to get in, “Wait a minute. What’s your source on that?”

This is all true because the passive lets you say that something was done without actually saying who did it.

The grammar blogger is considered to be the greatest genius to have ever lived.

An impressive credential, provided no one asks: “Considered so by whom?” If no one’s demanding that info, no one will ever know that she is considered so only by her least-lucid grandparent.

The passive voice takes the object of an action (of a transitive verb) and makes it the grammatical subject of a sentence.

Joe at the last piece of cake = active

The last piece of cake was eaten by Joe = passive

Though both forms are grammatical and, at times, ideal, there are potential problems with the passive. The most common problem is that you lose a sense of immediacy associated with quality writing.

The benefit of passive voice is that it lets you shift the focus off the doer of the action. Notice how Joe is no longer the subject of the second sentence above. You could also cut him out of the picture altogether:

The last piece of cake was eaten.

The car was totaled.

The bank account was emptied.

No telling who did it. So avoid the passive voice except when you want to emphasize the action over the doer of the action or anytime you want to avoid telling the whole truth.

Tags: ,