**Note: This article is adapted from the forthcoming 2024 edition of Professional Writing: The Command and General Staff College Writing Guide.**
Soldiers love rules. In some situations, following rules is the best way to succeed (as my boss often reminds me). But writing isn’t one of them. What works well in one sentence, paragraph, or paper may not work well in the next one.
Writers can’t just follow rules. They must make choices.
Active voice writing is a well-known Army “rule” that’s really a choice. But one could forgive Army writers for treating it like a rule. After all, Army Regulation 25-50 paragraph 1-38b (Standards for Army writing) states that active voice is an “essential” requirement for effective Army writing. Regulations. Standards. Essential requirements. Sure sounds like a rule—a commandment, even. And as LTC Max Ferguson points out, Army leaders treat it as such by regarding every passive sentence as a mortal sin.
But the choice to use active or passive voice is just that—a choice. While Army writers should choose active voice in most cases, passive voice still plays an essential role in effective writing.
Active vs. Passive
Active voice sentences follow the subject-verb-object pattern. The doer (subject) comes before the action (verb) and the person or thing being acted upon (object). The role of the doer, the action, and the object are clear.
Sergeant Jones fired the weapon.
In the active voice sentence above, Sergeant Jones (the subject/doer) comes before the action (fired) and the object being acted upon (the weapon). In contrast, a passive voice revision reverses the subject and the object, emphasizing the object.
The weapon was fired by Sergeant Jones.
This passive sentence communicates the same information as the active version but requires two more words to do it. The active voice version is clearer and more concise.
Passive sentences can also omit the subject altogether:
The weapon was fired.
This version is vague (who fired the weapon?). Once again, the active voice version, which avoids confusing the reader about who is doing what, is better.
Choosing Passive Voice
Despite its advantages, active voice isn’t always the better choice. Passive voice works better when the subject is unimportant, when stating a general truth, when emphasizing the subject, and when maintaining sentence cohesion.
First, passive is useful when the doer of an action is unknown or unimportant.
Passive: Gaddafi ruled Libya until he was killed in 2011.
Active: Gaddafi ruled Libya until militia gunmen killed him in 2011.
The passive sentence is better if the fact that Gaddafi was killed is more important than who killed him. It keeps the focus on Gaddafi without introducing unimportant actors.
Second, passive voice is appropriate when stating a general truth.
Passive: General Smith is a well-respected leader.
Active: People inside and outside the Army respect General Smith as a leader.
The passive version expresses the idea clearly and concisely, while the active version is longer and awkward. A word of caution, however: Be sure your claim is widely known and accepted. Otherwise, readers will ask, “Says who?”
Third, writers can use passive voice to emphasize the subject. Consider two alternatives for the first sentence of an essay about tanks:
Passive: Tanks have been used in combat since the First World War.
Active: Armies have used tanks in combat since the First World War.
The passive sentence is stronger because it begins with the key element—tanks. Strong sentences put important ideas at the beginning and end. Lesser information goes in the middle. Passive voice allows writers to rearrange information in the strongest order.
Finally, passive voice can make writing cohesive. Cohesive writing pulls the reader from one sentence to the next. One way to write cohesive sentences is by presenting ideas from old to new. Start a sentence with what the reader already knows (old ideas), and end with what the reader does not yet know (new ideas).
Passive: Unable to retreat, the 20th Maine did the only thing they could: a bayonet charge. The charge was ordered by a professor-turned-soldier named Joshua Chamberlain.
Active: Unable to retreat, the 20th Maine did the only thing they could: a bayonet charge. Joshua Chamberlain, a professor-turned-soldier, ordered the charge.
The first sentence in both passages ends with the bayonet charge. The passive version creates cohesion by starting the second sentence with old information from the first sentence—the bayonet charge. In contrast, the active voice version is less cohesive because the second sentence introduces new information—Joshua Chamberlain—before the bayonet charge.
Choosing Active Voice
Although passive writing occasionally works better, we must remember why we prefer active voice. Consider this active, energetic passage from LTC Max Ferguson’s essay on catalyst papers:
We often just need a nudge, a reason, external validation that our ideas are worth sharing. We overcomplicate the idea of writing: rigid memo formats, expectations about the quality of writing, active voice hassles that supervisors might cut us up about…because “that’s how we write in the Army!” So many avoid these minefields entirely by just not writing.
Replacing the underlined active constructions with passive alternatives yields:
A nudge, a reason, or external validation that our ideas are worth sharing is often needed by us. The idea of writing is overcomplicated by us: rigid memo formats, expectations about the quality of writing, active voice hassles that we might be cut up by supervisors about…because “that’s how writing is done in the Army!” So these minefields are avoided by many entirely by just not writing.
My revised, passive passage is cluttered and awkward. LTC Ferguson’s active approach is the better one. Active voice usually is.
Tools, not Rules
Writing defies rules and checklists. What works well in one situation may not work well in the next one. Active and passive voice are good examples. Army writers should prefer active voice most of the time. It’s usually the most direct, concise approach. But do not use it mindlessly in every situation. Writers can use both active and passive writing—they should choose whichever one best serves the ultimate goal: clarity.
Trent J. Lythgoe, PhD is an associate professor of military leadership at the US Army Command and General Staff College and the Major General Fox Conner Chair of Leadership Studies. Dr. Lythgoe is the project editor of Professional Writing: The Command and General Staff College Writing Guide.
 | A guest post by
|