After going through a chapter of my book and trying to correct the errors I think are obvious, I usually run a spell and grammar check to see if word can find something. One of the grammar complaints I get from the word program is passive voice consider revising. Now, I understand that computer programs aren't exactly English Professors, but I decided to do a little investigation and reviewed a bit of literature on the passive voice. According to some of what I have read the passive voice is only used when we want to put focus on something without the use of the active voice. The active voice being the voice we use all the time. Active voice: Cats eat fish. Passive voice: Fish are eaten by Cats. So that is the basic structure, in its simplest terms, but that is not the end of the story, or the dilema I find myself in as a writer. You see, for me it is all about flow and not sounding mechanical. We are, after all, storytellers, are we not? So, if you are writing a story you have to ask yourself this. "How do I tell my story and hold the attention of my audience?" Ah yes, the age old question. Well I think that we need to focus on the story and giving a credible inviting voice and if that means bending the rules of grammar a bit to entice our reader then it is a necessary evil. One piece of literature stated that we should not become hung up on the mechanics of writing to a point that it sounds more like an IKEA INSTRUCTION MANUAL than a story. That is the approach I am taking and though the Grammar Czars will take umbridge with this approach I believe that delivering a good story to the reader outweighs the sometimes anal retentiveness of English Language Structure. Granted, I am no Ernest Hemingway, but I think I'd rather be a Quentin Tarantino and have fun with my writing than come to look upon it as a tedius chore. Anyways, what do you folks think.