The use of the verb "been" passive and shouldn't be used?

I have a sentence that I'm starting my novel with:

"Her name, her real one, had long since been lost to the past."

Now I was testing out prowritingaid and it says that "been lost" was a passive verb.

Now thing is I'm not sure how else I can really write this. All other rewrites in my head seem to include the verb "been."

Is it ok to use passive verbs occasionally depending on what you're conveying or should passive verbs be eliminated 100% from creative writing. Everything I seem to google seems to indicate to get rid of passive verbs.

 

Pretty hard to write a whole novel with no passive verbs.

"Long since been lost to the past" is redundant, however. Try to avoid saying things twice. 'Lost to the past' or 'long since been lost' are both stronger IMO than doubling up. We have a tendency to think doubling up is more dramatic but you can have more impact without it.

Don't get hung up on these sentences until you are further along in the story (if you are not further along). I get the story down, then go back and edit. A lot of people can write with only a few edits needed. I can't do that.

 

That's one of those rules that is often trotted out, but shouldn't be adhered to slavishly. There are plenty of places where passive verbs are absolutely fine. You just need to know when and where to use them. Passive verbs often go hand in hand with telling, rather than showing - and that too, has its place. Sometimes you need to tell, and sometimes, passive verbs are the best choice.

You could write:
Someone had opened the coffin - from the inside.

Or:
The coffin had been opened - from the inside.

I prefer the second, because the first contains redundant information. The only "someone" it could be is whoever was inside the coffin in the first place, unless they'd got into the coffin and opened it. There's no need to point that out. IMO, the second has more dramatic impact, but it depends on the scene - the first could work better if you're now implying that the "someone" is in the creepy old mansion with the narrator.

Know when to use each.

My opinion as a rank amateur.

 

"Nobody remembered her name any more, and hadn't for a long time" is an active equivalent of your statement. I prefer your original one, and my version is no more telling rather than showing than yours is. I don't see a problem with using the passive voice here.

 

Sure. I mean, of course it's okay, if you think it's necessary or beneficial.

Getting rid of passive language is "good advice" in the sense that it usually makes your narrative more dynamic. However, we have passive voice for a reason, and ultimately it comes down to making a judgement call based on context. Thinking about this stuff as "rules" that should be arbitrarily followed regardless of context is just you wanting very simple and logical guidelines to what is actually a complex, highly intuitive process.

 

The reason why that feels off to me isn't the passive.

It feels odd because you are using an unnecessary past perfect. It'd be simple passive if you said "Her name, her real one, was long lost to the past". You only need past perfect when you want to highlight a timeline-comparison between recent and proper past either implied (through its use) or expressed directly. EG; "By the time she ascended to lead that army, her former name had long since been lost to the past".

 

Thanks for the comments. Can I also assume that PWA isn't well liked?

 

Why would you try to expunge all passive verbs from your writing?

 

I don’t know if that’s passive voice but there’s nothing wrong with the construction. Getting hung up on it is wasted energy that could be put to better use dealing with areas of the writing that need work.