Opinions of Peter Belmont
Speaking Truth to Power
| Beware the deliberately hidden passive voice and the deliberately hidden and still misleading unexplained “we”. |
|
by Peter A. Belmont / 2010-02-25
I wish to thunder against the obfuscatory use of the passive voice. I wish to denounce with special vehemence the use of the unexplained “we” especially when its use is merely implied. In recent weeks there has been much discussion in the WSJ about what the US President—or US Treasury Department or US Elite Oligarchy or IMF or BIG BANKS—should do about Greece. The problem with such statements is that they are too darn explicit. They let you in on the writer’s thoughts and perhaps on the affiliations or intended audience of the writer. She let’s you know what she is thinking about—so that you can decide if you care. She doesn’t try to ‘bring you on board’ by pretending to be talking about your interests—unless she is! If I am embarrassed to admit that my concern is with IMF action, or if I don’t want to let on that I am really trying to raise the hackles of ‘The US Elite Oligarchy’, it is more convenient for me to say, as the author did, “there has been much discussion about what to do about Greece.” More convenient, but less honest. And much less clear. This way of writing is profoundly misleading. The writer doesn’t even say “we”—”what we should do”. He hides it. But he wishes all readers to assume he is taking to them! He wants to raise everyone’s hackles (“what should YOU do about Greece?”). He wants everyone to feel powerful (indeed he seems to suggest that YOU can do something about Greece). I never trust a writer who says “we” unless he has explicitly made it clear who “we” is. Even more do I distrust someone who hides the “we”. The passive voice, as in, “Mistakes were made” (a pretty wishy-washy statement, possibly a mild admission—but equally possibly a mild accusation) is used to hide the identity of the actor and the nature of the “mistake”. It’s a bit like saying “Something happened.” To say that “J.B.S. falsified his accounts” is clear both as to the action and as to the actor. To say, in passive voice, that “accounts were falsified” is clear only as to the action, but not as to the actor. To say, as national politicians are wont to do, “Mistakes were made” elides both the act and the actor. How about “What is to be done about the mistakes that were made.” How indeed. |
Comments:
| Paris Romero 2010-03-17 | |
| I learned the passive voice in my duties of Quality Control Department of Mortgage Banking. In that content, the passive voice is called Diplomacy. For the QC Gal to say "There is fraud in this file." she has committed two sins. One is to not use "The 'F' Word", and the other is that I don't make the final decision. My finding has to be verified by my supervisors. They can be direct and state "XYZ submitted falsified pay stubs." Passive voice. Diplomacy. |
Submit a comment, subject to review:
|
123pab.com | Top
©2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 www.123pab.com |