Japanese doesn’t really have sarcasm or irony, but seeing as that myself and my actor friends are highly steeped in the dark sarcastic arts, and she’s quickly earned her black belt in cutting sarcasm, trust me.

So, Japanese. Good luck with that, it’s gonna be a challenge but I’m sure you’ll be successful. The only way I would EVER take on the study of a non- indo-european language is if I had a child who was going to speak that language. You have the ultimate motivation!!

Funny tidbit, as an undergrad, I had two teachers who were married - he was german, she was japanese and neither spoke the other’s language. Their relationship was entirely negotiated in… English. I’ve always thought that was interesting. Like, maybe because both of them spoke such hobbled English, they could never really fight and be mean the way you can with a fellow native speaker.

It’s really laziness . . . it’s too hard to differeniate between progressive / etc, so they just show what they think you should do and label that as active.

Japanese, what a complex language . . . I can’t tell ya, and I have to learn how to speak soon, too, before my son gets too old, heh.

.
.
.

Yep, Mystery Man’s favorite, Trottier, calls “Suzy is walking past the cafe” a passive expression. Argh!!

I’m sure if you hooked up electrodes to a person’s brain while they read a passage full “is” expressions (both types - passive and progressive) vs. the simple versions, it’d take more processing power or time. Here is a study of Japanese kids that showed passive constructions were more difficult for them to comprehend.

http://www.springerlink.com/content/62t1rk7d80cehmp1/

That is the kind of stuff I used to study when I thought I wanted to be a researcher. Gack!

No worries, and I got your original point - I think I misunderstood King originally, but I’d note that a host of screenwriter books / blogs mix up the definitions of active / progressive, which is the semantic term here.

Rather than tell a screenwriter that they’re writing present / continuous, which can confuse some, it’s simpler just to point out that their sentence isn’t “active” in the sense, that the “is” or “was” puts the brakes on the sentence.

I cannot tell you how often I’ve been told, by various scribes on ladders above me, that “He is kicking the Republican” is passive and “He kicks the Republican” is active.

Technically, they’re right for pointing out that “is” or “was” slows it down but they’re wrong in the terms that they’re defining it, does that sound correct?

It’s a reminder to me that screenwriting and fiction / essay writing is essentially different in how their creators define the terms.

I’m gonna have to reread ON WRITING again, but I’m due anyway, just to go over the section where King covers this, but for my part, I’m glad you defined the terms for me here.

As I’ve mentioned, I’m largely a self-taught writer, and all good information is welcome information. Thanks!

First off, I totally agree with the main thrust of your post - write action in the simple present tense:

“He throws a book at her. She kicks him in the nuts.” Etc.

I do it. And it bugs me when people don’t. I notice it. It’s icky.

The following sentences, however, are NOT considered passive (in grammatical terms):

“He is throwing a book at her. She is kicking him in the nuts.”

Rather, they are written in the present continuous verb tense, ACTIVE voice. [Sometimes this tense is called the progressive tense.] English verbs are inflected for five things: person, number, tense, voice and mood. You’re confusing tense and voice.

What you despise so much is the present continuous tense (active voice), in addition to the dreaded and much hated passive voice. The reason you are confused is because the tense LOOKS like sentences written in the passive voice. Consider:

The dog bites the postal worker. [simple present tense, active voice]

The dog is biting the postal worker. [present continuous tense, active voice]

The postal worker is bitten by the dog. [present tense, PASSIVE voice]

What characterizes a passive construction from an active one is that the direct object of the verb, in this case, the postal worker, appears in subject position and the subject is the object of an optional prepositional phrase, i.e., “by the dog.” That’s passive.

So what you really want to say is not only keep it active, but keep it SIMPLE.

My friend read over my post and told me I have “tense voice” - Ha Ha.

I feel the same, and sometimes I’ll read an old script of mine with a description in it, like “Jill is waiting,” and I’ll go “what?”

If you have to use IS for a description, Christina pointed out the way to do it. But in a screenplay or play, it’s best to avoid it when possible.

Somewhat different for fiction . . . and Christina outlines it more proper than I do.

My pet peeve for fiction is going present tense, like A MILLION LITTLE PIECES, I’m not saying it’s not a technique that one can do and make work, it just kinda makes me crazy to read it.

Even in novels, Stephen King bashed passive writing and I tend to agree. ‘Tis far more exciting to put people right in the middle of the action as if it’s happening RIGHT NOW as opposed to talking about something that took place in the distant past.

Great post, Josh.

-MM

I never considered putting the subject first (the collie) and certainly that is passive . . . what I have done is usually use the IS for present - but I’ve found it to be less active than justing using the verb form . . .

Rush molests a border collie.

Is a more active sentence, to me . . . but your examples work even better.

Josh shits a brick.