Use of the verb "was"

[grahamsealby]

The verb "was" denotes a passive approach in creative writing. I find it can be overused, making writing very cumbersome. I once read a story in GA where the author used "was" so frequently that it affected the story's readability. I've tried to eliminate 'was' as much as possible. Using the 'active' tense produces much cleaner sentences, making prose more elegant.

Does anyone agree or disagree?

[Zombie]

“was” is an interesting verb in colloquial dialogue where it often doesn’t follow the expected rules of tense and is frequently used in the present sense, or in place of "were"

grammatically this may be non-standard, but using informal /regional /dialect speech patterns like this can help bring characters to life, make written storytelling more vivid, dialogue more ‘authentic’:

"So I’m talking to this guy, and he was like, 'No way!'" (meaning he is currently saying this or said it just now)

"Then I was, 'Well, I'm not doing that!'" (meaning "I said" or "I say")

In many dialects eg parts of London (Cockney), Northern England, "was" is used for all persons, replacing "were":

"You was" instead of "you were"

"We was" instead of "we were"

"They was" instead of "they were"

Then there’s the Colloquial Subjunctive ("If I was")

standard grammar requires "If I were" for hypothetical situations, in conversational English, but "If I was" is commonly used, even when referring to a present hypothetical scenario:

"If I was you, I'd go" (instead of "If I were you"

"I was wondering" is used to make a present request or question sound more polite and less direct

"I was wondering if you agree with me." (meaning: "Do you agree with me now?")

Here’s a final dialogue example of “was” in the present sense from another thread

“So, who’s driving?”, said the Penguin, looking disapprovingly down her beak at Brad and Steve, lolling in their seats, legs spread wide open with no care for the spectacle they presented.

Brad burped. Loudly.

Steve thought for a moment. Or, rather, tried to think.

”We couldn’t agree who was the designated driver”, he replied, speaking slowly and with exaggerated precision in order to avoid slurring but having particular difficulty with “designated driver”, which he had to repeat several times until he was satisfied he had correctly enunciated the phrase (he hadn’t). 
 

 

 

Edited February 19 by Zombie

[Jason Rimbaud]

Seeing as I am one of those horrible people who overuses "was" in the narrative, and rarely to never in dialogue. In all my grammar AI programs, I am constantly being corrected. 

For some reason I can't beat that rule into my sub-conscious. 

I, once upon a time, had a horrible habit of interchanging "write" with "right". It was so bad I started to train myself whenever I needed to use either word, to write/right or right/write. Believe it or not, this is how I trained myself to use the correct word. 

I also use know/now like they all mean knowledge. I'm a mess who uses "was" probably more than I should. 

My pet peeve, is when authors use phrases such as, "flashed a million dollar smile", "shirt hugged me in all the right places", instead of describing the fabric, or any other numerous things, to take the easy way out and using a phrase that is eye-rolling. Or describing dick size, unless it's something crazy or directly related to the plot, I don't need to know how big the dick is. In a story, I do talk about the dick size because it's part of the reason the characters got together, but usually I try to refrain from dick size, looking into mirrors, wearing shirts that hug me in all the right places. *shrugs* 

Told you I am a mess. 

[LJCC]

In my experience, the loudest critics of passive voice are often the worst at spotting it.

They’ll point to a sentence like “Susan had walked to the shops” and declare it passive.

It isn’t.

It’s active, just in the past perfect tense.

The true passive construction would be, “The shops had been walked to by Susan,” which sounds awkward precisely because it shifts the focus away from the subject performing the action.

Passive voice removes—or at least softens—agency.

But sometimes that’s the point.

“My dog was hit by a car” keeps the emotional focus on the dog.

“The car hit my dog” spotlights the vehicle and, by implication, the driver.

Similarly, “someone shot him” draws attention to the unknown actor, which might matter in a murder mystery.

In the chaos of a battlefield, though, “he was shot” may be more accurate to the lived experience and less misleading about the importance of the shooter.

Like most writing “rules,” the guidance against passive voice is meaningless if you don’t understand the reasoning behind it.

If you can’t clearly explain why passive voice might weaken a sentence (or when it might strengthen one), you probably shouldn’t be policing its use.

And you definitely shouldn’t if you can’t reliably identify it in the first place.

Active voice is often stronger and more direct.

But effective writing isn’t about rigid obedience to rules; it’s about control. A well-placed passive construction is far less rare and far more useful than its harshest critics would have you believe.

[Gary L]

15 minutes ago, LJCC said:

In my experience, the loudest critics of passive voice are often the worst at spotting it.

They’ll point to a sentence like “Susan had walked to the shops” and declare it passive.

It isn’t.

It’s active, just in the past perfect tense.

The true passive construction would be, “The shops had been walked to by Susan,” which sounds awkward precisely because it shifts the focus away from the subject performing the action.

Passive voice removes—or at least softens—agency.

But sometimes that’s the point.

“My dog was hit by a car” keeps the emotional focus on the dog.

“The car hit my dog” spotlights the vehicle and, by implication, the driver.

Similarly, “someone shot him” draws attention to the unknown actor, which might matter in a murder mystery.

In the chaos of a battlefield, though, “he was shot” may be more accurate to the lived experience and less misleading about the importance of the shooter.

Like most writing “rules,” the guidance against passive voice is meaningless if you don’t understand the reasoning behind it.

If you can’t clearly explain why passive voice might weaken a sentence (or when it might strengthen one), you probably shouldn’t be policing its use.

And you definitely shouldn’t if you can’t reliably identify it in the first place.

Active voice is often stronger and more direct.

But effective writing isn’t about rigid obedience to rules; it’s about control. A well-placed passive construction is far less rare and far more useful than its harshest critics would have you believe.

Spot on. 

[Jason Rimbaud]

15 minutes ago, LJCC said:

In my experience, the loudest critics of passive voice are often the worst at spotting it.

They’ll point to a sentence like “Susan had walked to the shops” and declare it passive.

It isn’t.

It’s active, just in the past perfect tense.

The true passive construction would be, “The shops had been walked to by Susan,” which sounds awkward precisely because it shifts the focus away from the subject performing the action.

Passive voice removes—or at least softens—agency.

But sometimes that’s the point.

“My dog was hit by a car” keeps the emotional focus on the dog.

“The car hit my dog” spotlights the vehicle and, by implication, the driver.

Similarly, “someone shot him” draws attention to the unknown actor, which might matter in a murder mystery.

In the chaos of a battlefield, though, “he was shot” may be more accurate to the lived experience and less misleading about the importance of the shooter.

Like most writing “rules,” the guidance against passive voice is meaningless if you don’t understand the reasoning behind it.

If you can’t clearly explain why passive voice might weaken a sentence (or when it might strengthen one), you probably shouldn’t be policing its use.

And you definitely shouldn’t if you can’t reliably identify it in the first place.

Active voice is often stronger and more direct.

But effective writing isn’t about rigid obedience to rules; it’s about control. A well-placed passive construction is far less rare and far more useful than its harshest critics would have you believe.

It is comments like this that I enjoy reading. Though it does make me realize how little I know about English, grammar, and anything remotely good. 

I am self taught, I'm horrible in school, and probably couldn't break down a sentence with underlining nouns, verbs, adverbs, etc etc. So when I read comments like this, I gain understanding. Though my poor brain will probably forget everything said here, but that says less about the commenter and more about myselves. 

I enjoy discussions like this. 

[Krista]

It also comes down to preference. Some people cannot overlook the word, "said," either. They see it as a glaring stop sign, and they prefer more drawn out dialog tags. I was told not to use Said repetitively once or twice. Then others have told me they prefer said, because their brain glosses right over it and allows the scene to play out without the prodding of more stylistic or intrusive dialog closes.

It honestly has to be excessive before I pay it any mind. Unless it is something that I found clever early on in the writing, and it keeps popping up time and again. To the point where it loses the punch or wit. I can see where repetitive words can be intrusive and immersion breaking, but if it is a mind counting the words issue, and nothing truly disruptive my brain probably won't care. I am much more invested in characters than I am the words getting them there. I can forgive flaws in grammar and writing structure, I can't forgive character decisions.  Looking at you Bridgerton Season 3. 

I use Was a lot - I'm southern.  I change tense a lot as well. I've been told the switching of tense is an issue, but I can't be bothered correcting it this far into the game. The only thing that would accomplish is me being so self-aware I've done it, that I get nowhere. I will be in editing purgatory and I simply won't write.

Which is why I do my writing here, where it is more forgiven than having my hand constantly swatted elsewhere. Mind you, it would take a brave person to do so.  

[Krista]

3 hours ago, LJCC said:

In my experience, the loudest critics of passive voice are often the worst at spotting it.

They’ll point to a sentence like “Susan had walked to the shops” and declare it passive.

It isn’t.

It’s active, just in the past perfect tense.

The true passive construction would be, “The shops had been walked to by Susan,” which sounds awkward precisely because it shifts the focus away from the subject performing the action.

Passive voice removes—or at least softens—agency.

But sometimes that’s the point.

“My dog was hit by a car” keeps the emotional focus on the dog.

“The car hit my dog” spotlights the vehicle and, by implication, the driver.

Similarly, “someone shot him” draws attention to the unknown actor, which might matter in a murder mystery.

In the chaos of a battlefield, though, “he was shot” may be more accurate to the lived experience and less misleading about the importance of the shooter.

Like most writing “rules,” the guidance against passive voice is meaningless if you don’t understand the reasoning behind it.

If you can’t clearly explain why passive voice might weaken a sentence (or when it might strengthen one), you probably shouldn’t be policing its use.

And you definitely shouldn’t if you can’t reliably identify it in the first place.

Active voice is often stronger and more direct.

But effective writing isn’t about rigid obedience to rules; it’s about control. A well-placed passive construction is far less rare and far more useful than its harshest critics would have you believe.

And I wish I could "love" react to this twice. 

[Jason Rimbaud]

15 minutes ago, Krista said:

I change tense a lot as well. I've been told the switching of tense is an issue, but I can't be bothered correcting it this far into the game.

*cough cough*

15 minutes ago, Krista said:

Mind you, it would take a brave person to do so.

Look at the pretty butterflies!

[Jason Rimbaud]

15 minutes ago, Krista said:

And I wish I could "love" react to this twice. 

I loved it for you!  Teamwork!

[grahamsealby]

22 hours ago, Zombie said:

“was” is an interesting verb in colloquial dialogue where it often doesn’t follow the expected rules of tense and is frequently used in the present sense, or in place of "were"

grammatically this may be non-standard, but using informal /regional /dialect speech patterns like this can help bring characters to life, make written storytelling more vivid, dialogue more ‘authentic’:

"So I’m talking to this guy, and he was like, 'No way!'" (meaning he is currently saying this or said it just now)

"Then I was, 'Well, I'm not doing that!'" (meaning "I said" or "I say")

In many dialects eg parts of London (Cockney), Northern England, "was" is used for all persons, replacing "were":

"You was" instead of "you were"

"We was" instead of "we were"

"They was" instead of "they were"

Then there’s the Colloquial Subjunctive ("If I was")

standard grammar requires "If I were" for hypothetical situations, in conversational English, but "If I was" is commonly used, even when referring to a present hypothetical scenario:

"If I was you, I'd go" (instead of "If I were you"

"I was wondering" is used to make a present request or question sound more polite and less direct

"I was wondering if you agree with me." (meaning: "Do you agree with me now?")

Here’s a final dialogue example of “was” in the present sense from another thread

“So, who’s driving?”, said the Penguin, looking disapprovingly down her beak at Brad and Steve, lolling in their seats, legs spread wide open with no care for the spectacle they presented.

Brad burped. Loudly.

Steve

22 hours ago, Zombie said:

“was” is an interesting verb in colloquial dialogue where it often doesn’t follow the expected rules of tense and is frequently used in the present sense, or in place of "were"

grammatically this may be non-standard, but using informal /regional /dialect speech patterns like this can help bring characters to life, make written storytelling more vivid, dialogue more ‘authentic’:

"So I’m talking to this guy, and he was like, 'No way!'" (meaning he is currently saying this or said it just now)

"Then I was, 'Well, I'm not doing that!'" (meaning "I said" or "I say")

In many dialects eg parts of London (Cockney), Northern England, "was" is used for all persons, replacing "were":

"You was" instead of "you were"

"We was" instead of "we were"

"They was" instead of "they were"

Then there’s the Colloquial Subjunctive ("If I was")

standard grammar requires "If I were" for hypothetical situations, in conversational English, but "If I was" is commonly used, even when referring to a present hypothetical scenario:

"If I was you, I'd go" (instead of "If I were you"

"I was wondering" is used to make a present request or question sound more polite and less direct

"I was wondering if you agree with me." (meaning: "Do you agree with me now?")

Here’s a final dialogue example of “was” in the present sense from another thread

“So, who’s driving?”, said the Penguin, looking disapprovingly down her beak at Brad and Steve, lolling in their seats, legs spread wide open with no care for the spectacle they presented.

Brad burped. Loudly.

Steve thought for a moment. Or, rather, tried to think.

”We couldn’t agree who was the designated driver”, he replied, speaking slowly and with exaggerated precision in order to avoid slurring but having particular difficulty with “designated driver”, which he had to repeat several times until he was satisfied he had correctly enunciated the phrase (he hadn’t). 
 

I agree that 'was' can be used in colloquial dialogue quite well, but in other cases I'd rather use the active approach. For example instead of 'I was wondering' say simply 'I wondered'. It's concise. 

 

thought for a moment. Or, rather, tried to think.

”We couldn’t agree who was the designated driver”, he replied, speaking slowly and with exaggerated precision in order to avoid slurring but having particular difficulty with “designated driver”, which he had to repeat several times until he was satisfied he had correctly enunciated the phrase (he hadn’t). 
 

 

 

 

[grahamsealby]

On 2/20/2026 at 6:48 AM, Jason Rimbaud said:

Seeing as I am one of those horrible people who overuses "was" in the narrative, and rarely to never in dialogue. In all my grammar AI programs, I am constantly being corrected. 

For some reason I can't beat that rule into my sub-conscious. 

I, once upon a time, had a horrible habit of interchanging "write" with "right". It was so bad I started to train myself whenever I needed to use either word, to write/right or right/write. Believe it or not, this is how I trained myself to use the correct word. 

I also use know/now like they all mean knowledge. I'm a mess who uses "was" probably more than I should. 

My pet peeve, is when authors use phrases such as, "flashed a million dollar smile", "shirt hugged me in all the right places", instead of describing the fabric, or any other numerous things, to take the easy way out and using a phrase that is eye-rolling. Or describing dick size, unless it's something crazy or directly related to the plot, I don't need to know how big the dick is. In a story, I do talk about the dick size because it's part of the reason the characters got together, but usually I try to refrain from dick size, looking into mirrors, wearing shirts that hug me in all the right places. *shrugs* 

Told you I am a mess. 

Don't feel bad, Jason . . . I'm the same. I seem to think in the passive tense using ' was.' I've been doing it for years, always going back to try and fix the problem. That's why I decided to ask my peers if anyone had a similar problem

[grahamsealby]

Thanks to all who responded about using the word 'was' too frequently. If I understand Zombie's response, he finds no problem using 'was' in colloqual dialogue. I agree with this and intend to use 'was' when writing dialogue. I will maintain using the active tense in all my other writing.

[Jason Rimbaud]

4 hours ago, grahamsealby said:

Don't feel bad, Jason . . . I'm the same. I seem to think in the passive tense using ' was.' I've been doing it for years, always going back to try and fix the problem. That's why I decided to ask my peers if anyone had a similar problem

Number One, to feel bad suggests a certain level of intelligence. Yeah, I don't have that. 

And two, you give me great credit, assuming I understood I was/had used the word incorrectly. I did not. I only know it was/had constantly set off anger in my AI. After reading all the great explanations in this thread, I still don't really understand why I can't use it. I am attempting to stop but that's because of peer pressure as opposed to understanding. . 

[Tomkin Watts]

I too am a great offender in overuse of "was," and thought I'd share my experience.

I worked on a story and felt it was close to finished, perhaps with a few last checks for grammatical errors or other small items I needed to fix. Then, I read it to myself, aloud.

Appalling, I thought, almost every time I read my story. My sentences didn't sound right, and so often, due to overuse of "was." Or "were."

I rewrote every sentence, trying to expunge almost every "was." Then, I read it aloud again, then rewrote; read, rewrote; read, rewritten again...

After so many rewrites, I realized the solution had more to do with my style than grammar. The obvious solution is to replace "was" with another, more expressive verb. But there are more options: For example, moving clauses around within a sentence can sometimes eliminate a need for a "was;" it's already understood and doesn't need to be there. Combining two sentences with "was" as clauses within a longer sentence also might work. 

A few minutes ago, while reading Ian McEwan's novel, "Atonement," this issue popped up in my head. I stopped reading, glanced at the page, and scanned for the next usage of "was." Here, a little girl, an aspiring writer, ponders symbols, using a castle as an example:

"You saw the word castle, and it was there, seen from some distance, with woods in high summer spread before it, the air bluish and soft with smoke rising from the blacksmith’s forge, and a cobbled road twisting away into the green shade." (page 35 in the Anchor Paperback edition)

I noted that there's only one "was" in the passage. The rest are understood. And as to that single "was?" It works, quite economically, and does the heavy lifting for the rest of the sentence. That throws the emphasis back to "saw."

(Wow! I wish I could write like that!)

But what if McEwan had kept every "was" (or "were") in place? It might have read something like this:

"You saw the word castle, and it was there, it was seen from some distance, and the woods that were in high summer were spread before it, the air was bluish and soft and smoke was rising from the blacksmith’s forge, and a cobbled road was twisting away into the green shade."

I am already bored--that cumbersome version doesn't work. You forget what it's all about by the end of the sentence.

But in my first draft of a story, every "was" is there, weighty and cumbersome, to be dealt with through layer upon layer of rewrites.

Edited April 12 by Tomkin Watts

[Krista]

On 4/12/2026 at 12:50 AM, Tomkin Watts said:

I too am a great offender in overuse of "was," and thought I'd share my experience.

I worked on a story and felt it was close to finished, perhaps with a few last checks for grammatical errors or other small items I needed to fix. Then, I read it to myself, aloud.

Appalling, I thought, almost every time I read my story. My sentences didn't sound right, and so often, due to overuse of "was." Or "were."

I rewrote every sentence, trying to expunge almost every "was." Then, I read it aloud again, then rewrote; read, rewrote; read, rewritten again...

After so many rewrites, I realized the solution had more to do with my style than grammar. The obvious solution is to replace "was" with another, more expressive verb. But there are more options: For example, moving clauses around within a sentence can sometimes eliminate a need for a "was;" it's already understood and doesn't need to be there. Combining two sentences with "was" as clauses within a longer sentence also might work. 

A few minutes ago, while reading Ian McEwan's novel, "Atonement," this issue popped up in my head. I stopped reading, glanced at the page, and scanned for the next usage of "was." Here, a little girl, an aspiring writer, ponders symbols, using a castle as an example:

"You saw the word castle, and it was there, seen from some distance, with woods in high summer spread before it, the air bluish and soft with smoke rising from the blacksmith’s forge, and a cobbled road twisting away into the green shade." (page 35 in the Anchor Paperback edition)

I noted that there's only one "was" in the passage. The rest are understood. And as to that single "was?" It works, quite economically, and does the heavy lifting for the rest of the sentence. That throws the emphasis back to "saw."

(Wow! I wish I could write like that!)

But what if McEwan had kept every "was" (or "were") in place? It might have read something like this:

"You saw the word castle, and it was there, it was seen from some distance, and the woods that were in high summer were spread before it, the air was bluish and soft and smoke was rising from the blacksmith’s forge, and a cobbled road was twisting away into the green shade."

I am already bored--that cumbersome version doesn't work. You forget what it's all about by the end of the sentence.

But in my first draft of a story, every "was" is there, weighty and cumbersome, to be dealt with through layer upon layer of rewrites.

I see the point. Overuse can make the sentences cumbersome. I found that I use, "just" a lot, when it isn't necessary. And, I sometimes over explain with tag-on afterthought sentences at the end of paragraphs. My paragraphs tend to be long as they are, making them longer with that tag-along statement. I see it now, but time will tell if I allow myself to change the way I operate.

The example you provided though, I am too forgiving in the second example for it to matter. To me the Was/Were additions didn't steal from the intent. The first read like a soft exhale, but the second one read similarly. I can see where an editor would remove, but as far as my own personal regard for both examples, there's not much difference in preference for me. Like I said though, I am far more forgiving with the words on the paper, what I tend to not forgive are character choices that seemingly doesn't make sense to me. 

If I had to choose though, I'd pick the first sentence, as the style seems more stylistic than the second example. 

[Tomkin Watts]

1 hour ago, Krista said:

I see the point. Overuse can make the sentences cumbersome. I found that I use, "just" a lot, when it isn't necessary. And, I sometimes over explain with tag-on afterthought sentences at the end of paragraphs. My paragraphs tend to be long as they are, making them longer with that tag-along statement. I see it now, but time will tell if I allow myself to change the way I operate.

The example you provided though, I am too forgiving in the second example for it to matter. To me the Was/Were additions didn't steal from the intent. The first read like a soft exhale, but the second one read similarly. I can see where an editor would remove, but as far as my own personal regard for both examples, there's not much difference in preference for me. Like I said though, I am far more forgiving with the words on the paper, what I tend to not forgive are character choices that seemingly doesn't make sense to me. 

If I had to choose though, I'd pick the first sentence, as the style seems more stylistic than the second example. 

I use "just" too much as well. I was working through that earlier today. But with a lot of dialogue, as long as it goes with the natural and vernacular flow of conversation, I don't worry about fixing it.

I tend to write long, multi-clause sentences, internally segmented with varied punctuation, but try to either follow or precede them with very short single-clause sentences. Even then, my paragraphs always seem too short. 

I realized I use "seem" too often, too.

Right now, I'm focusing on my style more than anything, and I'm opting for economy, and that's why the sentence I quoted by McEwan (the first example) stood out for its economy. For me, it pops.