Academic English revision

Stop Hiding Behind 'It Is Argued': Reclaim Agency in Humanities Writing

In the humanities, passivity is not objectivity; it's a retreat from intellectual ownership. Put the human back in the verb.

You are staring at a sentence that says nothing about who is actually doing the thinking. The theory exists, floating in a void, detached from any human hand that crafted its interpretation. This is the silent killer of humanities essays: passive circumstantial clauses. They masquerade as objectivity, but they are really just vacuum cleaners for your voice. In literary or cultural studies, if no one is arguing, the argument doesn’t exist. You are creating meaning; you don't just document it.

Stop treating your humanities paper like a lab report from a science lab. You are not observing the weather or measuring gravity; you are making meaning out of text and context. ❌ The theme of isolation is highlighted in the novel. ✅ The author emphasizes isolation by stripping the protagonist of all community ties, forcing a confrontation with self-hatred. The first sentence describes a feature; the second explains a move. When you use active verbs like “emphasizes” or “strips,” you force the reader to see your analytical eye at work, not just a list of themes.

The hardest part isn't the grammar; it's remembering to name the actor. ❌ It is argued that the setting represents the psyche. ✅ Barthes argues that the bourgeois salon functions as a mirror for the fragmented self. Notice the shift? “It” is a placeholder for thought, a ghost; “Barthes” is a person with a specific stance. Citing scholars in the active voice turns your literature review from a boring pile of summaries into a conversation you are leading. It shows you know who is saying what and why.

Ditch the “It has been suggested that...” opener. It is the beige wallpaper of academic writing—safe, boring, and completely forgettable. ❌ The role of gender is analyzed in the context of domestic labor. ✅ I analyze how domestic labor serves as a site for gendered power struggles, arguing that the kitchen is a political arena. Your theoretical lens is your signature. Hiding it behind passive structures is like signing a contract with a fingerprint instead of a name. Be bold; take the stance.

Here’s a practical trick: if you see a passive participle clause, ask “Who is experiencing this state?” If the answer is “the text” or “the reader,” make them active. ❌ Observed through a postcolonial lens, the narrative seems disjointed. ✅ Through my postcolonial reading, I interpret the narrative’s discontinuity as a deliberate strategy to mimic trauma. This isn't just a syntax fix; it's an upgrade in your argumentative precision. You are not reporting on the text; you are interpreting it.

I don't manually comb through every passive sentence. I paste the paragraph into easydue to spot where my agency is hiding, then I fix the specific theoretical terms myself. It handles the structural cleanup so I can focus on whether my interpretation is actually sharp. Don't waste your brain cycles hunting for misplaced verbs; that’s a tool job, not a scholar's job. Use it to save time, then use your brain for the ideas.

Your dignity as a writer comes from owning your ideas. Don't let them drift in passive tides. When you put the human subject back into the verb, your writing stops floating and starts landing. Take the wheel. Argue from a position.