O.K. -- I wouldn't want to be barbaric (though -- I do wonder whether any
languages have gotten by without a passive voice. One internet page suggests
that Slovenian is such)
Instead -- Aesthetics should just ban reference to knowledge or feeling unless
they specify the ones who know or feel. (with the single exception of this
sentence, of course)
That way, we could also get rid of "one knows" -- or Derek's favorite -- "we
know".
Other exceptions might be allowed for rhetorical effect -- but the real
problem is that thinking, not just speaking, is occurring passively. It's
the herd mentality, and it reduces aesthetics to an up-scale variety of rumor
mongering.
"One knows that XXX is an important artist/style/movement/gallery/museum" --
so unless one wishes to appear ignorant -- one spreads the word.
******************
Active and passive allow one to place different kinds of emphasis on the same
content, or allow one to eliminate information that is unhelpful or unknown in
a given context (NB constructions use 'one' as a subject are an ersatz
passive). One's choice to use either the passive or active, then, has
everything to do with desired effect. To say that one must in certain
circumstance write in one or the other is barbaric.
____________________________________________________________
Click here to become a professional counselor in less time than you think.
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/PnY6rc21PbJeD7Av3QYuCb8z4cyk1Q
5E8GOs6UXycxrA1Zlio2s7a/
