Harvey - thank you so much for sharing your talent. The most descriptive words to me were “scrawny neck on pointed shoulders” and “yellowed fingernail.” I imagined him as an Ebenezer Scrooge before I got to that part. How Brilliant!
Stupid question but I will ask it - what is the difference if you write “his head was bowed” vs “his head bowed” or “his bag was draped” vs “his bag draped.” As a reader, I don’t care but as a writer I feel like I use “was” too much and try to remove it where I can during cycling. Am I wasting my time or do you think that is beneficial?
First, "His head was bowed" is a complete sentence, whereas "his head bowed," where "bowed" is an adjective, is only a phrase. In the case of the first excerpt, it was among several other phrases, which led to the convolution (in my readerly opinion).
As the writer, I'm guessing the average reader would be pulled deeper into the scene with the second excerpt rather than the first because in the second he would have to focus however briefly on each aspect of the scene.
(I might be wrong. The 'average' reader might rather flash through the description as in the first, to me convoluted, excerpt. But in the end, that's all down to the reader. As writers, we can only present it in what we believe is the best possible light.)
I'll explain more about this in tomorrow's TNDJ. Again, thanks for the question.
Manisha, since you were good enough to ask the question, here's the rest of the answer. I might still elaborate further in tomorrow's post.
<b>To explain...</b>
In the second (revised) excerpt, the use of "was" in the construction of the sentences in the third paragraph is also a matter of timing.
It enables the use of whole sentences, each with a full stop (period) afterward, rather than a quick series of phrases. The POV character noticed those aspects one at a time, so that's how I (slowed down and) presented them.
In the second excerpt, the reader also has to notice them one at a time (focus) because each is in its own sentence. But he still also gets through them fairly quickly because they're all delivered in the same paragraph.
<b>An aside about "was"... </b>
Some instructors will tell you "was" creates passive construction and to recast any sentence that includes it. To put it bluntly, they're wrong.
When any state of being verb (am, is, are, was, were, be, being, been) is combined with an actual or implied "by" phrase (e.g., "The package was delivered" or "The package was delivered by UPS"), that's passive construction.
But when you're describing a state of being, you can do so only by using a state-of-being verb.
In the case of that second excerpt, "Was" is that state-of-being verb. Since it isn't combined with a "by phrase" (a preposition phrase beginning with "by") it isn't a passive construction.
I'm probably wrong, because I learned sight reading before I was 18 months old (as I could read Dick and Jane books by 18 months - with only an occasional correction by my mother) and make those mistakes like pronouncing some words wrong because I had only read them and not heard them or "phoneticked" them out. I also have problems spelling certain words for the same reason. Anyway, on WAS and a few other words like that (and I might be saying the same thing, but not know the right way to say it, and I might be saying something totally different!):
I feel as a reader and a writer that leaving it out makes the sentence feel immediate, almost like it just happened, whereas adding it makes the sentence feel like it has been that way for a while/long while.
Example:
His head bowed - he just dropped his head forward in front of us.
His head was bowed - we came into view and his head was already hanging down, and we don't know for how long.
So, almost a present tense, though written in past tense to flow with the rest of the story, vs a truly past happening in past tense.
Maybe that is what you are saying above? Or is it just my perceptions due to my non-grammatical reading upbringing?
Another was is "HAD"
She started down the road. - She just now, right in front of me began walking down the road.
vs
She had started down the road. - She was already walking down the road when I saw her. (speaking as the reader when viewing the order of things)
Conventional wisdom says to leave out the "had" and that it's the same sentence, but it seems to leave out the direct order of happenings when you do that. (Conventional wisdom being an editor for a short story I turned in for an anthology).
By the way, I can see the poetry in your prose writing, with the repeating patterns (2-1-2) and some other techniques. It's very cool.
"His head was bowed - we came into view and his head was already hanging down, and we don't know for how long."
Exactly. The POV character had just opened the door of an office and the target came into view.
Which either excerpt "shows" when you have the context of the POV character having just opened the door.
And your two examples (and explanations) re "had" are spot on. One would be "right" in one case and the other would be right in a different scenario.
Possibly, your editor is applying a blanket rule (e.g., omit all instances of "had" ("was") etc. If so, he doesn't know the nuances of the language and shouldn't be editing at all.
Your explanation definitely helps!! ! I didn’t want to tell you, but you figured it out. I “was told” by an instructor that, “if you use ‘was’ your verb is not powerful enough to stand alone, thus boring.” So, yes Harvey, I have fixated on that a bit because I want my story to be “active” and exciting, not passive. OMG - I think you knew this, didn’t you?!
Harvey - thank you so much for sharing your talent. The most descriptive words to me were “scrawny neck on pointed shoulders” and “yellowed fingernail.” I imagined him as an Ebenezer Scrooge before I got to that part. How Brilliant!
Stupid question but I will ask it - what is the difference if you write “his head was bowed” vs “his head bowed” or “his bag was draped” vs “his bag draped.” As a reader, I don’t care but as a writer I feel like I use “was” too much and try to remove it where I can during cycling. Am I wasting my time or do you think that is beneficial?
Hi Manisha,
Great question. Thank you.
First, "His head was bowed" is a complete sentence, whereas "his head bowed," where "bowed" is an adjective, is only a phrase. In the case of the first excerpt, it was among several other phrases, which led to the convolution (in my readerly opinion).
As the writer, I'm guessing the average reader would be pulled deeper into the scene with the second excerpt rather than the first because in the second he would have to focus however briefly on each aspect of the scene.
(I might be wrong. The 'average' reader might rather flash through the description as in the first, to me convoluted, excerpt. But in the end, that's all down to the reader. As writers, we can only present it in what we believe is the best possible light.)
I'll explain more about this in tomorrow's TNDJ. Again, thanks for the question.
Thank you Harvey. I look forward to learning more on this tomorrow.
Manisha, since you were good enough to ask the question, here's the rest of the answer. I might still elaborate further in tomorrow's post.
<b>To explain...</b>
In the second (revised) excerpt, the use of "was" in the construction of the sentences in the third paragraph is also a matter of timing.
It enables the use of whole sentences, each with a full stop (period) afterward, rather than a quick series of phrases. The POV character noticed those aspects one at a time, so that's how I (slowed down and) presented them.
In the second excerpt, the reader also has to notice them one at a time (focus) because each is in its own sentence. But he still also gets through them fairly quickly because they're all delivered in the same paragraph.
<b>An aside about "was"... </b>
Some instructors will tell you "was" creates passive construction and to recast any sentence that includes it. To put it bluntly, they're wrong.
When any state of being verb (am, is, are, was, were, be, being, been) is combined with an actual or implied "by" phrase (e.g., "The package was delivered" or "The package was delivered by UPS"), that's passive construction.
But when you're describing a state of being, you can do so only by using a state-of-being verb.
In the case of that second excerpt, "Was" is that state-of-being verb. Since it isn't combined with a "by phrase" (a preposition phrase beginning with "by") it isn't a passive construction.
Hope this helps.
I'm probably wrong, because I learned sight reading before I was 18 months old (as I could read Dick and Jane books by 18 months - with only an occasional correction by my mother) and make those mistakes like pronouncing some words wrong because I had only read them and not heard them or "phoneticked" them out. I also have problems spelling certain words for the same reason. Anyway, on WAS and a few other words like that (and I might be saying the same thing, but not know the right way to say it, and I might be saying something totally different!):
I feel as a reader and a writer that leaving it out makes the sentence feel immediate, almost like it just happened, whereas adding it makes the sentence feel like it has been that way for a while/long while.
Example:
His head bowed - he just dropped his head forward in front of us.
His head was bowed - we came into view and his head was already hanging down, and we don't know for how long.
So, almost a present tense, though written in past tense to flow with the rest of the story, vs a truly past happening in past tense.
Maybe that is what you are saying above? Or is it just my perceptions due to my non-grammatical reading upbringing?
Another was is "HAD"
She started down the road. - She just now, right in front of me began walking down the road.
vs
She had started down the road. - She was already walking down the road when I saw her. (speaking as the reader when viewing the order of things)
Conventional wisdom says to leave out the "had" and that it's the same sentence, but it seems to leave out the direct order of happenings when you do that. (Conventional wisdom being an editor for a short story I turned in for an anthology).
By the way, I can see the poetry in your prose writing, with the repeating patterns (2-1-2) and some other techniques. It's very cool.
"His head was bowed - we came into view and his head was already hanging down, and we don't know for how long."
Exactly. The POV character had just opened the door of an office and the target came into view.
Which either excerpt "shows" when you have the context of the POV character having just opened the door.
And your two examples (and explanations) re "had" are spot on. One would be "right" in one case and the other would be right in a different scenario.
Possibly, your editor is applying a blanket rule (e.g., omit all instances of "had" ("was") etc. If so, he doesn't know the nuances of the language and shouldn't be editing at all.
Thank you for helping me clarify to my own mind! (just like your title!)
Welcome.
Me too. :-)
Your explanation definitely helps!! ! I didn’t want to tell you, but you figured it out. I “was told” by an instructor that, “if you use ‘was’ your verb is not powerful enough to stand alone, thus boring.” So, yes Harvey, I have fixated on that a bit because I want my story to be “active” and exciting, not passive. OMG - I think you knew this, didn’t you?!
Yes, Miss, I knew. I've been putting up with and correcting faux writing instructors for 40+ years. :-) I'm glad you got it.