I would like someone to please explain to me the difference between active and passive voice, maybe I have a thick head. But, out of all these years of sitting in a classroom, I have yet to learn the difference.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
I would like someone to please explain to me the difference between active and passive voice, maybe I have a thick head. But, out of all these years of sitting in a classroom, I have yet to learn the difference.[/quote]
Here’s active voice: DBCooper loves strange pussy.
Here’s passive voice: Strange pussy is loved by DBCooper.
The subject in active voice is doing something (an action), whereas the subject in passive voice (in this case strange pussy) is the benefactor/recipient/target of action from someone else. In passive voice, strange pussy is what the focus is on because it comes first, even though the sentence is really about my love of strange pussy, and therefore about me. I am not doing anything in the passive voice sentence, so I am “inactive” and therefore “passive”.
Another example:
active-I am holding my dick.
passive-my dick is being held by me.
I am the subject in both sentences, but again, I am not doing anything in the passive voice sentence. But I am doing something in the active voice sentence. When the subject is doing something, rather than something being done to something else by the subject, it is active voice.
One more example:
I slit his fucking throat-active voice
His fucking throat was slit by me-passive voice
A lot of people think it’s incorrect to write in passive voice, but it isn’t. It’s just not the best way to say things. All of the above passive voice sentences are grammatically correct in every sense, they aren’t contradictory and all of that shit, but they don’t sound as clear or as “good” as the active voice sentences, even though they are both saying the exact same thing.
Personally, I never understood why people have a tendency to write in passive voice. Again, it’s not incorrect, but it sounds fucking awkward in most cases. I think people who struggle with staying away from passive voice aren’t cut out to be writers anyways because they clearly lack the ability to write in a conversational tone, which is of utmost importance for most genres of fiction writing.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
I would like someone to please explain to me the difference between active and passive voice, maybe I have a thick head. But, out of all these years of sitting in a classroom, I have yet to learn the difference.[/quote]
Also, are you a fan of Hemingway? Because he probably never wrote a passive voice sentence in his life.
I use passive voice only when when my client did something bad and I want to soften the tone, or when I am sloppy and don’t have sufficient time to edit.
Compare:
Joe robbed the bank and shot the teller.
with
The bank was robbed and the teller was shot by Joe.
Or even better:
The bank was robbed and the teller was shot and Joe was responsible.
Best:
Joe is my client and he is charged with a crime. The bank was robbed and the teller was shot.
DB Cooper, Irish, and Squiggles all raised good points. But I would also suggest that good writers become great through their work ethic and dedication to editing. Hemingway reportedly started each day editing his work from the day before and spent 3-4 hours editing for every hour writing new text. Hemingway also continued editing even after the proofing started–usually a no-no in publishing. Turning the 100 mediocre pages that you wrote into 20 great pages takes more work than writing the 100 mediocre pages, but that is where the rubber meets the road.
Here’s another tip: don’t read anything by Faulkner, especially when you are writing.
Finally, Brian Garner is a lawyer who teaches other lawyers how to write effectively. Ignore the “for lawyers” designation and read his stuff. Garner really understands how language works and how to communicate complicated ideas to the reader. I think a budding fiction writer could learn a great deal from Garner.
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
I would like someone to please explain to me the difference between active and passive voice, maybe I have a thick head. But, out of all these years of sitting in a classroom, I have yet to learn the difference.[/quote]
Also, are you a fan of Hemingway? Because he probably never wrote a passive voice sentence in his life.[/quote]
I read one of his placed in France where the main character is a writer and he goes to the coffee shop and gets drunk, a lot, and goes fishing (I didn’t finish the book so I didn’t understand the plot, but I remember that much).
[quote]DeterminedNate wrote:
FightinIrish - what is your occupation? Journalist? Freelance writer? Fiction writer ? Non-fiction writer? Copy? I’m sure you do all of the above, but how do you earn a living from writing?[/quote]
I am a journalist for a very, very large newspaper- that’s what (barely) pays my bills. I also write freelance articles, mostly about boxing, that have been published on some very prominent boxing websites.
As far as fiction goes, I’m very good at it but I’m undisciplined, so my short story/novel sits unfinished as of yet.
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
I would like someone to please explain to me the difference between active and passive voice, maybe I have a thick head. But, out of all these years of sitting in a classroom, I have yet to learn the difference.[/quote]
Here’s active voice: DBCooper loves strange pussy.
Here’s passive voice: Strange pussy is loved by DBCooper.
The subject in active voice is doing something (an action), whereas the subject in passive voice (in this case strange pussy) is the benefactor/recipient/target of action from someone else. In passive voice, strange pussy is what the focus is on because it comes first, even though the sentence is really about my love of strange pussy, and therefore about me. I am not doing anything in the passive voice sentence, so I am “inactive” and therefore “passive”.
Another example:
active-I am holding my dick.
passive-my dick is being held by me.
I am the subject in both sentences, but again, I am not doing anything in the passive voice sentence. But I am doing something in the active voice sentence. When the subject is doing something, rather than something being done to something else by the subject, it is active voice.
One more example:
I slit his fucking throat-active voice
His fucking throat was slit by me-passive voice
A lot of people think it’s incorrect to write in passive voice, but it isn’t. It’s just not the best way to say things. All of the above passive voice sentences are grammatically correct in every sense, they aren’t contradictory and all of that shit, but they don’t sound as clear or as “good” as the active voice sentences, even though they are both saying the exact same thing.
Personally, I never understood why people have a tendency to write in passive voice. Again, it’s not incorrect, but it sounds fucking awkward in most cases. I think people who struggle with staying away from passive voice aren’t cut out to be writers anyways because they clearly lack the ability to write in a conversational tone, which is of utmost importance for most genres of fiction writing.[/quote]
Teachers have corrected me on my passive voice in papers, but I was attempting to write above my ability (complex sentences, big words, &c). However, when I just write simply, attempting to write it as fast as possible, no one tells me my paper is in passive.
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
I use passive voice only when when my client did something bad and I want to soften the tone, or when I am sloppy and don’t have sufficient time to edit.
Compare:
Joe robbed the bank and shot the teller.
with
The bank was robbed and the teller was shot by Joe.
Or even better:
The bank was robbed and the teller was shot and Joe was responsible.
Best:
Joe is my client and he is charged with a crime. The bank was robbed and the teller was shot.
DB Cooper, Irish, and Squiggles all raised good points. But I would also suggest that good writers become great through their work ethic and dedication to editing. Hemingway reportedly started each day editing his work from the day before and spent 3-4 hours editing for every hour writing new text. Hemingway also continued editing even after the proofing started–usually a no-no in publishing. Turning the 100 mediocre pages that you wrote into 20 great pages takes more work than writing the 100 mediocre pages, but that is where the rubber meets the road.
Here’s another tip: don’t read anything by Faulkner, especially when you are writing.
Finally, Brian Garner is a lawyer who teaches other lawyers how to write effectively. Ignore the “for lawyers” designation and read his stuff. Garner really understands how language works and how to communicate complicated ideas to the reader. I think a budding fiction writer could learn a great deal from Garner. [/quote]
Why not read Faulkner?
squiggles- good point in the last paragraph.
I’m a firm believer that writers, like punchers, are born, not made. You can do this, or you can’t. And if you can’t, go find something else to do.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Why not read Faulkner? [/quote]
Too complicated.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Why not read Faulkner? [/quote]
Too complicated.[/quote]
Okay. When you say too complicated, do you mean too complicated to explain, or that Faulkner is too complicated for a beginner?
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Why not read Faulkner? [/quote]
Too complicated.[/quote]
Okay. When you say too complicated, do you mean too complicated to explain, or that Faulkner is too complicated for a beginner?[/quote]
A lot of what are considered Faulkner’s best novels are written in a stream-of-conscious narrative, in which the narrator tries to convey his thoughts as they occur. It mimics the actual thought process of the narrator and is intended to give the reader a better look into the mind of the narrator. This style can get kind of hard to read at times and can be even harder to write. For whatever reason, I do well with this style. I write for a magazine that is essentially a poor man’s underground version of Rolling Stone. When a big act comes up here (I live in a small college town so when someone like Snoop or Static X or Nas or Lamb of God or Wynton Marsalis show up it’s a big deal) I usually nab the duties of covering the show and write the review in a stream-of-conscious style that I feel comes across as a much better, more accurate description of the show.
Normally I loathe writing reviews since I kind of have carte blanche to write whatever the hell I want for the mag, but when a good act comes to town, since I feel that I am by far the best writer for the mag (a sentiment shared by most of our readers if I do say so myself), I feel it is my duty to cover the show in proper fashion.
Also, regarding your short sentences you mentioned earlier: I read somewhere that Hunter S. Thompson would sit and think about each sentence he wrote for several minutes. That way, each sentence had some sort of forceful impact since each one had a lot of thought devoted to it. As a result, when he got on a roll his pieces were like repeated rapid-fire bursts of good shit. In fiction, using this technique, combined with shorter sentences, can really get across a sense of urgency and a fast pace.
One other thing Brother Chris: since you seem to do best when simplifying things, I would start reading some of the “minimalist” writers. Hemingway and Pahlaniuk are the first that come to mind. Neither uses large words (well, Pahlaniuk does, but usually in reference to the human anatomy or something along those lines) and for the most part keep their shit simple, straightforward, to the point and they rarely ever wander from what is going on right then and there in the plot movement. Raymond Carver and Tobias Wolff are two more you might enjoy. Given what you seem to write best, these are definitely some authors you should let influence you.
But you don’t necessarily have to strive to be a minimalist. Like someone said here earlier, the most important thing is to simply write. Write every single day if you can, whether it’s for ten minutes or eight hours. Don’t feel like you have to get it perfect the first time either. I’m sure there are some books that are classics that were written largely in one go-round, but I’m sure they’re far and few between. Write about anything. Write about things that happen in your daily life, expand on some weird dream you had, write a detailed account of some mundane event like getting gas. Just write as much as possible. Once you have something fleshed out, then go back and make corrections. Sometimes a little bit of time away from a particular segment can bring out new ideas for it.
Get the book STORY by Robert McKee. It’s THE best resource on writing and storytelling I’ve ever encountered.
[quote]TheJonty wrote:
Pick up On Writing by Stephen King. Good read, should be helpful.[/quote]
I am just now reading this and was just going to post this.
I have seen very few writers capture how different people act and think in writing better than Stephen King.
His movies (aside from a select few like The Mist, Shawshank, and Green Mile) do not do his writing justice.
The man is a genius.
The Mist movie was so good because they matched what he wrote extremely close…because the movie/book wasn’t true horror aside from the people being the real monsters.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]TheJonty wrote:
Pick up On Writing by Stephen King. Good read, should be helpful.[/quote]
I am just now reading this and was just going to post this.
I have seen very few writers capture how different people act and think in writing better than Stephen King.
His movies (aside from a select few like The Mist, Shawshank, and Green Mile) do not do his writing justice.
The man is a genius.
The Mist movie was so good because they matched what he wrote extremely close…because the movie/book wasn’t true horror aside from the people being the real monsters.[/quote]
Nice avatar there, sir. Why exactly did you cut your head off?
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Nice avatar there, sir. Why exactly did you cut your head off?[/quote]
Brand New hair style.
You are so 2009.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]TheJonty wrote:
Pick up On Writing by Stephen King. Good read, should be helpful.[/quote]
I am just now reading this and was just going to post this.
I have seen very few writers capture how different people act and think in writing better than Stephen King.
His movies (aside from a select few like The Mist, Shawshank, and Green Mile) do not do his writing justice.
The man is a genius.
The Mist movie was so good because they matched what he wrote extremely close…because the movie/book wasn’t true horror aside from the people being the real monsters.[/quote]
Movies rarely do the book justice. The Godfather, A Clockwork Orange and One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest are a few, but none of these are better movies than books by any means (well, maybe The Godfather; there were a couple weird tangents with Sonny’s mistress and Johnny Fontaine in the book that I thought distracted from the overall plot)
But I have also found that in most cases, if a book was turned into a movie and the movie was even halfway decent, the book was probably the Real Deal. The above-mentioned books, The Shining for you King fans, American Psycho, Fight Club, The Day of the Locust, and virtually any book that Stanley Kubrick based his movies on (all of his movies are based on books).
Fighting Irish, DB, Squiggles, thanks for putting all of this info on the table. Writing is something I spend a lot of time doing, and have done since I was a kid. Did not know we had pros in here. Good stuff.
[quote]benos4752 wrote:
Anybody out there consider themselves a writer and know any good books or sites that contain good information on how to write fiction? Especially dialogue? I’m a good non-fiction writer. I can write good essays and similar things, however, I suck at fiction…which is a flaw since my goal is to be a published fiction writer haha My biggest weakness is dialogue though. Everything I try to write just sounds soooo cheesey. Anyone got any resources they wouldn’t mind sharing?[/quote]
There are tons of resources on the web- just google how to write dialogue fiction and work your way through the links etc.
But my post is primarily about the dialogue. Get as complete a portrait of your characters as you can, write a bio for them, their desires, hobbies etc. Then try to embed yourself in their characters as they go through their tasks, story etc.
It’s partly practice, part imagination. But you know what? LISTEN to the people around you as they talk. How do the young boys talk (or grunt)? What are they talking about? Ask yourself questions:why did that guy shout that way? Why did that girl swear on the bus? Trackyour own dialogue and find the reasons for what you say, and reverse the process.
This is a screenplay site, but you can apply mnay of the ideas here to fiction - got to the Michael Hauge screenply mastery site (google this) and it’ll get you thinking about character, which leads to dialogue…
Do you know what kind of fiction you want to write? is there a story in your head already? An idea, a character? Stephen King has a book on writing I believe, which has some great advice for fiction writers.
All I have for now, except - take a notebook wherever you go, speculate about the people you see and start writing about them and what you think they might say in a situation…