Active and Passive Voice

 

Hello students, this blog post contains comprehensive overview of English Grammar topic Active & Passive voice. 

What is Active and Passive Voice ?

In English grammar, voice refers to the relationship between the verb and the subject in a sentence—specifically, whether the subject is performing the action or receiving it. Based on this relationship, we classify sentences into two types: Active Voice and Passive Voice.

• In an active voice sentence, the subject performs the action.

• In a passive voice sentence, the subject receives the action.

Simple active sentence can be formed with the help of "Subject + Verb + Object". On the other in passive sentence objects comes in the place of subject and receives the action, and the entire sentence changed according to Tense used in the sentence. 

To understand the difference between active and passive voice, let us see a simple sentence:

Active Voice: Ramesh plays cricket.

In this sentence, the structure follows the typical active voice pattern: Subject + Verb + Object. The subject “Ramesh” is the one performing the action of playing. The verb “plays” is in the simple present tense, and the object “cricket” receives the action. Since the subject is actively doing something, the sentence is in the active voice. Active voice is usually more direct and energetic, which is why it is commonly used in academic and spoken English when the focus is on the doer of the action.

Now, let us convert this into the passive voice:

Passive Voice: Cricket is played by Ramesh.

Here, the focus of the sentence shifts. The object of the active sentence (cricket) now becomes the subject in the passive sentence. The verb changes to a passive form, which is made using the appropriate tense of the verb “to be” followed by the past participle of the main verb (played). In this case, “is played” reflects the simple present tense in the passive form. The original subject (Ramesh) is now mentioned at the end of the sentence, introduced by the word “by.”

Though both forms express the same basic idea, they differ in structure and focus. Active voice emphasizes Who is doing the action (Ramesh), while passive voice emphasizes what is being done or who receives the action (Cricket).

Why is Voice Important?

In academic and formal writing, active voice is generally preferred because it is direct, strong, and clear. However, passive voice is also useful and acceptable in day to day conversation, especially when:

• The doer of the action is unknown or unimportant,

• The focus is on the result or receiver of the action,

• One wishes to sound objective or impersonal,

• Or when the subject remains the same through several sentences.

Some Basic Rules to Keep in Mind 

# There are two types of Verbs: 

Transitive Verbs and Intransitive Verb.

Transitive Verbs are those who needs a 'Direct Object' to complete the meaning of sentence. Without an object, the sentence would feel incomplete or unclear. 

For example, "Teacher Gave Homework"

In this sentence 'gave' is transitive verb and it needs direct object of homework. If this sentence would be like 'Teacher Gave' (What?) . It seems incomplete, so it needs homework as object. We can only change Transitive verbs into passive voice. 

Intransitive verbs are those verbs that does not need a direct object. The action ends with the verb and does not pass on to anything or anyone else. These verbs make complete sense on their own.

Sleep, cry, fly, arrive, run...are the examples of intransitive verbs. Since they do not have object we cannot change an intransitive verb in passive voice. 

# When converting sentences from active voice to passive voice, the roles of the subject and object change  and so does their grammatical case, especially when dealing with pronouns.

In an active voice sentence, the subject performs the action, and the object receives it.

For example: She helped me.

Here, “She” is the subject and “me” is the object. The pronoun “me” is in the objective case because it receives the action of the verb “helped.”

When we change this sentence into passive voice, the object of the active sentence becomes the subject of the passive sentence, and the subject becomes the agent, introduced by the preposition “by.” So it would become "I was helped by her". 

# Sometimes it happens that active sentence has two objects, one is direct and other one is indirect object. In this case you can change it into passive voice with help of either of objects. 

Type of Object	Answers the Question	Example Sentence	Object Identified
Direct Object	What? / Whom?	She painted a picture.	picture (direct object)
Indirect Object	To whom? / For whom?	He gave his friend a book.	friend (indirect), book (direct)

#  Always remember that “Being” is used in continuous tenses. He is repairing the car changed into passive as The car is being repaired. And “Been” is used in perfect tenses. She has completed the project changed into passive as The project has been completed.

# Sometimes it's okay to omit the subject ( by + subject) into passive voice if he doer of the action is unknown, unimportant, or obvious from context. For example: 'They submitted the work.' can be change into passive as 'The was submitted'. Here it is not important to add 'by them'. It can be omitted. 

# When the active sentence uses a modal verb (can, could, may, might, must, should, would, etc.), use below mentioned formula to change it into passive voice. 

"modal + be + past participle"

For example: 'She can write a poem' becomes into passive as ' A poem can be written by her'. 

#Tense Must be Maintained

Tense (Active)	Formula (Passive)
Simple Present	Obj + is/am/are + V3 + By +Sub
Present Continuous	Obj + is/am/are + being + V3 + By + Sub
Present Perfect	Obj + has/have + been + V3 + By + Sub
Simple Past	Obj + was/were + V3 + By + Sub
Past Continuous	Obj + was/were + being + V3 + By + Sub
Past Perfect	Obj + had + been + V3 + by + sub
Simple Future	Obj + will + be + V3 + By + Sub
Future Perfect	Obj + will have + been + V3 + by + sub

# Examples 

Tense	Active Voice	Passive Voice
Simple Present	Ramesh plays cricket.	Cricket is played by Ramesh.
Present Continuous	Ramesh is playing cricket.	Cricket is being played by Ramesh.
Present Perfect	Ramesh has played cricket.	Cricket has been played by Ramesh.
Simple Past	Ramesh played cricket.	Cricket was played by Ramesh.
Past Continuous	Ramesh was playing cricket.	Cricket was being played by Ramesh.
Past Perfect	Ramesh had played cricket.	Cricket had been played by Ramesh.
Simple Future	Ramesh will play cricket.	Cricket will be played by Ramesh.
Future Perfect	Ramesh will have played cricket.	Cricket will have been played by Ramesh.

Companion (2025) | Movie Review

Hello cinephiles,

Today I’m going to review a very recent film that falls into the category of previous sci-fi movies and shows like Altered Carbon, I, Robot, Ex Machina, and Her, wherein the relationship between humans and robots/AI is depicted in a rather complicated manner—a central concern in this movie as well. However, the film Companion (2025), directed by Drew Hancock, delves deeper into the intricacies of human-robot relationships, along with several other ethical concerns related to AI identity crises, all intertwined with a twist of human greed. The film is not just a typical love story or a tale of robots taking over the human race. The unsettling events and murders that take place are all driven by human impetus and greed.

At the opening, we find a couple—Iris and Josh (played by Sophie Thatcher and Jack Quaid)—going on vacation to meet Josh's friends at a remotely located lake house. However, this whole vacation is pre-planned by Josh to murder his Russian friend and usurp his wealth. And for this dirty work, Josh uses his robot girlfriend to carry out the deed. He alters some of Iris's programming and makes her more aggressive toward human beings. Iris does not know that she will murder someone—yet she does it.

The whole movie serves as a counter-narrative to the idea of transhumanism, which believes that the human condition can be improved through scientific and technological advancement. However, the film critiques this notion by presenting a cautionary tale about how such advancements, when driven by human selfishness and moral corruption, can lead to exploitation and violence. In the film, both Iris and Patrick are “companions” to Josh and Eli. They are rented robots—essentially sexbots. They don’t even know that they are robots; they are used purely for fun and sexual gratification, subservient to humans. Rather than showcasing technological progress as a path to human betterment, the film presents the dangers of misusing robotic technology and AI for personal gain.

The film also touches upon the question of robots/AI having consciousness of their own—a trope traditionally explored in many sci-fi films, starting with The Matrix trilogy. But this movie attempts to justify this robo-consciousness through love and memory that the robots feel for their partners. Of course, they are programmed to feel a certain way, but there are a couple of moments in the film that go beyond the mere programming of their creators.

It also tries to answer questions about the future of human/AI relationships and robots having free will. As mentioned, the robots (Iris and Patrick) are controlled by their owner/partners through mobile devices, where they can change their voice, eye color, aggression levels toward humans, and most importantly, their intelligence. In order to assassinate his friend, Josh made Iris more aggressive, he used and manipulated her to commit murder. What follows is a series of murders, all triggered by Josh’s commands.

In my opinion, placing human greed and the motive of robbery at the center of the movie makes the plot more interesting and justifiable—because nothing would have happened if not for Josh’s greed. The climax of the movie is also optimistic, suggesting that maybe robots in the near future will live among us with their own free will.

If you're interested in a sci-fi robotic thriller with tender moments of joy and love—and with many questions to ponder—then this is the movie for you.

Here's the trailer, 

Thank you.

Fathers and Sons by Ivan Turgenev | Book Review

Hello readers,

I recently completed reading the novel Fathers and Sons by the Russian novelist Ivan Turgenev. The book explores the ideological clash between the old and new generations. This conflict unfolds between the titular fathers and their sons. The older generation, still clinging to traditional customs and values, struggles to keep pace with the younger, more progressive minds. I believe Turgenev aimed to inspire—or perhaps provoke—the younger generation to engage with the political and social changes taking place in Russia, and to move beyond the narrow liberalism represented in the novel by Paul Petrovich.

The novel is written in the third-person omniscient point of view and primarily revolves around two young Russian men: Arkady and Bazarov. Both have recently graduated and are returning home after a long time. Arkady’s father, Nikolai Petrovich—a wealthy landowner—is eager to welcome his beloved son. Alongside Arkady is his friend Bazarov, who joins them at the Marino estate. Not only are Arkady and Bazarov close friends, but Arkady also considers Bazarov his mentor.

Turgenev crafts Bazarov’s character with such depth that, over the course of the novel, I found myself simultaneously admiring and disliking him. Most of the time, however, I was fascinated by his views. Bazarov is described as a young nihilist who rejects traditional moral codes and ways of life. Because of his radical beliefs, he is often seen as the first Bolshevik character in Russian literature. He is well-read erudite, and the son of a veteran army doctor. Bazarov likes to indulge in argument and enjoys discussing a wide range of subjects, from politics and society to love and natural science.

At the Marino estate, Bazarov frequently engages in heated debates with Arkady’s uncle, Paul Petrovich, whom he regards as a petty aristocrat and a shallow liberal. Meanwhile, Arkady, inspired by Bazarov’s nihilism, finds himself unable to relate to his father and uncle. This newfound philosophy leads Arkady toward a modernist worldview. While Bazarov spends much of his time wandering in isolation and conducting scientific experiments, Arkady helps his father manage the estate, which is in poor condition.

Eventually, the young men grow weary of life at Marino and travel to a nearby province, where they meet Madame Odintsova and her sister Katia. They decide to spend a few days at the Nikolskoe estate. This marks a turning point in the novel as both Arkady and Bazarov begin to experience romantic feelings. Initially, both of them are not willing to admit their emotions. Here, Bazarov’s indifferent, nihilistic, and even misogynistic attitude is revealed, as he refuses to confess his love and instead returns to his parents' home. Although he is warmly welcomed, he remains emotionally distant from his parents.

I view Bazarov as a true representation of what Nietzsche would later describe as the Ubermensch—a person who rejects conventional morality and imposed authority. He lives by his own instincts, values, and principles. He doesn’t follow anyone else’s path, views or philosophy but instead asserts his radical ideas fearlessly. He even criticizes Arkady for being a romantic idealist and for using “beautiful language.”

“Whereas he [Bazarov] was a wild bird, you [Katia] and I [Arkady] are tame ones.”

This remark by Arkady clearly captures the essence of Bazarov’s character and attitude.

As the story progresses, Bazarov and Arkady travel from Marino to Nikolskoe, and eventually to Bazarov’s home. Back at Marino, a dramatic duel (aristocracy vs nihilism, traditional vs modern) occurs between Bazarov and Paul. At last, Bazarov returns to assist his father in treating peasants and serfs. Unfortunately, he caught a deadly infection. H knew that he has little time left, so he asked his father to inform Madame Odintsova of his condition. She visits him, but Bazarov dies the next morning—still without ever confessing his love.

To satisfy the reader’s curiosity, Turgenev adds one final chapter describing the present-day lives of the surviving characters.

Thank you for visiting.

Jaggi (2021) | Movie Review

Jaggi is a raw movie of Indian cinema. The subject of this movie is equally raw and sensitive, addressing the question of male impotency and the humiliation and suffering that follows, especially in rural India. The depiction of scenery and the originality of rural Punjab are masterful. The movie, directed by Anmol Sidhu, was released in 2021.

The story follows the life events of Jagdeep (Jaggi), who lives with his mother and father in a remote village of Punjab. He is a hardworking and obedient boy who balances school and farming work. His father is a drunkard cop who is impotent,  evidently due to his alcohol habit. Because of this impotency, Jaggi's mother has an affair with his uncle.

Ramnish Chaudhary's acting as Jaggi is praise worthy for he is able to convey the emotional trauma of the character very effectively.

The very first scene is bold and surprising, opening with Jaggi masturbating, and the rest of the film seems to explore the context of this scene. The story then moves back in time almost six years, when Jaggi is still studying in a boys' school. In the boys school, sex is a common topic of discussion among students, as it is with Jaggi and his friends. The way the director and dialogue writer captured the originality, nuance, and profundity of this niche subject of boys' talk is commendable. Students in the school frequently talked about sex and masturbation. During a conversation with one of his friends, Jaggi revealed that he is not able to get hard and masturbate, and gradually rumors spread that Jaggi is gay.

He is devastated after realizing that he cannot get an erection and tries to masturbate almost every day to gain respect and to prove his masculinity among his friends, but all his efforts are in vain. Jaggi soon becomes an object of jest, mockery, and humiliation. His classmates start to abuse him both mentally and physically. He is also raped constantly by his senior classmates and subsequently drops out of school in the 9th grade, starting to live a solitary life at his farm where he constantly tries to arouse himself.

This movie lays bare the hypermasculine aspect of males, wherein those males are respected who are sexually and physically superior to others. This superiority is often calculated based on penis size or the frequency of masturbation. In this respect, Jaggi is considered inferior. All the students targeted Jaggi, who simply had the medical condition of erectile dysfunction, and told him that he is a gay to satisfy their sexual hungers.

The film also raises the question of the lack of sex education in rural India, where many myths about sex are held to be true, causing suffering due to this lack of information. Making a movie on this subject is very important and relevant. Besides this, OMG 2 is one such movie that had a similar theme, aiming to raise awareness about the same issue.

The background story involves the societal aspect of impotency. Still, in the largely patriarchal society of India, being impotent, especially if you are male, is often seen as a failing. Because of this, Jaggi's mother had an affair with his uncle under his father's nose. All of this happened in the past, and now we come to the present day, just before Jaggi and Ramana's wedding day. However, he cannot reconcile with the fact that he might bring only trauma and bitterness to his married life, just like his parents. So, at the climax, he takes a very frustrating action of killing. But whom that is, I want you to find out yourself.

Jaggi is unsettling, violent, and unflinching in its portrayal of sex, abuse, and the psychological impact of societal norms. All these things add another layer of authenticity of the subject of this movie.

Here is the trailer,

Thank you.

Detachment (2011) | Movie Review

"And never have I felt so deeply at one and the same time so detached from myself and so present in the world.”

The movie I am going to review begins with this quote by Albert Camus—a line that sets the tone for the rest of the film. There is a sombre and depressing vibe coming from each frame, and yet, it is one of the most feel-good movies I have ever watched. It feels "feel-good" not in a conventional sense, but because we can relate to the protagonist’s situation and his existential dread.

Released in 2011 and directed by Tony Kaye, Detachment is another showcase of Adrien Brody’s remarkable acting prowess. The film follows Mr. Barthes (Brody), a temporary English teacher working at a high school. He has chosen to remain emotionally detached—yet is still kind-hearted—from those around him and from the circumstances he finds himself in. It becomes evident that something traumatic from his past has shaped his indifferent and nonchalance attitude. He leads a solitary life, often visiting his grandfather in a nursing home. His life is filled with sadness, seemingly without any significant purpose.

The narration and cinematography are more or less similar of Taxi Driver, and both protagonists share a profound internal dilemma and existential angst.

While the main narrative focuses on Mr. Barthes’ life, the plot develops through his interactions with three women: a fellow teacher, Sarah; a student, Meredith; and a young prostitute, Erica. Throughout the film, he navigates the complexities and harsh realities of life. Although he finds some solace in teaching, the students at his school are unruly and disrespectful—products of negligent and vacant parenting. The film serves as a satire on absentee parenthood and the consequences of raising children without discipline or empathy. Despite this, Mr. Barthes handles the situation cleverly at the school with his emotionally detached demeanor, eventually earning the students' respect. Meredith, one of the students, fascinated to the sadness within him, but this affection ends in tragedy at the end.

The film also highlights the struggles of teachers, particularly in private education sectors, where their role is reduced to maintaining order rather than truly educating. They are mere puppets, subject to the whims of  parents. It made me understand why some teachers often say that the classroom is the only place where they feel alive. For Mr. Barthes, teaching appears to be a coping mechanism—a way to survive in an indifferent and uncaring world.

Amidst all the existential grief and chaos, Mr. Barthes experiences moments of peace with Erica. Not in a physical sense, but through a shared emotional connection. He offers her a place to stay, and they share fleeting moments of happiness. Through conversations with Erica, we learn about his childhood trauma: an absent father and a mother who committed suicide. This context explains his grief and emotional detachment. By the end of the film, I believe Mr. Barthes begins to accept his fate, moving gradually toward nihilism when he decides to send Erica to a group home. Despite all of this, there remains a slight of hope—represented by the final hug between Barthes and Erica—that speaks to the human spirit’s resilience in the face of despair.

The movie concludes with a deeply affecting and emotionally hollow ending. The climax is quiet yet powerful, filled with meaning and emotional resolution. The final analogy between Poe’s The Fall of the House of Usher and Barthes’ deteriorating mental state is particularly compelling. If you decide to watch this movie, I highly recommend doing so at night, to fully grapple into its emotional depth and the characters’ pain.

Here is the trailer...

Thank you for your visit. 

Presentation Season 4 | Paper 210A

Research Project Writing: Dissertation Writing - Research Writing

Dissertation Topic: 

Welcome to the Desert of the Real: Hyperreality and Blurred Boundaries in Postmodern Hollywood

Welcome to the Desert of the Real_ Hyperreality and Blurred Boundaries in Postmodern Hollywood (1).pptx from AakashChavda4

Video recording:

Presentation Season 4 | Paper 209

 Research Methodology 

Presentation Topic, 

Ghostwriting in Academia- Ethics, Legality, and the Invisible Scholars

Ghostwriting in Academia- Ethics, Legality, and the Invisible Scholars.pptx from AakashChavda4

Video recording, 

Presentation Season 4 | Paper 208

Comparative Literature & Translation Studies

" Why Comparative Indian Literature ? by Sisir Kumar Das "

-

- presented by Aakash Chavda and Akshay Nimbark 

Why Comparative Indian Literature (1).pptx from AakashChavda4

Video recording, 

Presentation Season 4 | Paper 207

Contemporary Literature in English

Presentation Topic, 

Graveyard as a Secular Sanctuary in 'The Ministry of Utmost Happiness'

Graveyard as a Secular Sanctuary in 'The Ministry of Utmost Happiness'.pptx from AakashChavda4

Video recording of presentation, 

Presentation Season 4 | Paper 206

 The African Literature 

Presentation Topic, 

Crowning Identity: African Hair and Cultural Politics

Crowning Identity_ African Hair and Cultural Politics.pptx from AakashChavda4

Video recording of presentation, 

Presentation Season 3 | Paper 205A

 Cultural Studies 

Presentation Topic, 

Hyperreality, Surveillance, and Fragmented Identity in "The Truman Show"

Hyperreality, Surveillance, and Fragmented Identity in _The Truman Show_.pptx from AakashChavda4

Video Recording of presentation,

Presentation Season 3 | Paper 204

Contemporary Western Theories and Film Studies

Presentation Topic,

Deconstructivist Architecture:  An Architectural Reflection of Derrida’s Deconstruction

Deconstructivist Architecture_ An Architectural Reflection of Derrida’s Deconstruction.pptx from AakashChavda4

Video recording my presentation,

Presentation Season 3 | Paper 203

 The Postcolonial Studies 

Presentation Topic, 

Revolution and Class Struggle" Marxism in ‘The Wretched of the Earth’

Revolution and Class Struggle_ Marxism in ‘The Wretched of the Earth’.pptx from AakashChavda4

Video recording of my presentation, 

Presentation Season 3 | Paper 202

Paper 202: Indian English Literature – Post-Independence

Presentation Topic,

"Female Identity and Sexuality in the Poetry of Kamala Das"

Female Identity and Sexuality in the Poetry of Kamala Das.pptx from AakashChavda4

Video recording of my presentation, 

Presentation Season 3 | Paper 201

Indian English Literature – Pre-Independence

Presentation Topic:

"Sri Aurobindo: The revolutionary visionary"

Sri Aurobindo_ The Revolutionary Visionary (1).pptx from AakashChavda4

Video recording of my presentation,

Conclave (2024) | Movie Review

In light of the current global event—the death of Pope Francis, head of the Catholic Church, which is the talk of the town—the Christian ritual of electing a new pope is now under way. This ritual, traditionally called a “conclave,” is a private gathering of cardinals (the highest clergy, ranking just below the pope) from all over the world to cast their invaluable votes on the ballot for the next pope. A new pope must secure a two-thirds majority of the cardinals’ votes, and the conclave continues for as many days as necessary until a candidate is chosen.

The word 'conclave' fascinated me, and there happens to be an Oscar-winning (for Best Adaptation) movie, "Conclave", directed by Edward Berger and released in 2024, which depicts this event rather realistically. The film is adapted from Robert Harris’s 2016 novel of the same name.

As Michel Foucault said, power operates within every aspect of society—including religious institutions like churches and temples—and this is vividly depicted in the movie, where a kind of “war” erupts among the cardinals vying for the papacy to gain power. As I mentioned, the conclave takes place after the death Pope, so,  the movie begins with the death of the “Holy Father,” and in the next minute everyone is speculating about who will be the next pope. Cardinal Lawrence—masterfully portrayed by Ralph Fiennes—manages the entire conclave. Watching so-called religious leaders descend into petty childish fights is both compelling and surprising, since many people regard them as moral ideals.

The film delves into what happens behind the scenes of this private procedure, rather than simply showing us the announcement of the new pope. It’s all about religious politics—so common today, especially in India. We also get echoes of colonialism: historically, British colonial powers not only exploited natives and their lands but altered their faiths through Christian missionaries. This is reflected in the presence of cardinals from around the globe, including the African continent.

Yet even among them there is groupism based on language, which reminds me of the myth of the Tower of Babel. There might have been greater unity and fewer petty fights if they all spoke a single language—Latin. One problematic element I noticed is the latent racism among the white cardinals. For instance, when the Nigerian Cardinal Adeyemi is close to becoming pope, he is sidelined because of a youthful indiscretion—adultery (Lust: one of the seven deadly sins) that occurred nearly thirty years earlier. Historically, there has never been a Black pope; there have been bishops and cardinals of African origin, but never the papacy.

At one point, it felt like an Indian election campaign, where politicians go door to door for votes. Likewise, cardinals roam among groups, seeking that one precious vote that brings them closer to the papacy. Amid it all are conspiracy, mystery, and bribery—elements that keep viewers engaged despite what could be a dull subject: religion. Cardinal Tedesco’s dogmatism—he openly stereotypes Muslims as terrorists and lunatics after a bombing during the conclave—also highlights the issue of religious intolerance.

With its planning, plotting, and realism, the movie is, in my opinion, progressive as it tries to convey hidden truths about people and about such private religious gatherings. The climax is equally fascinating, as we discover the “secret” behind the newly chosen pope that I did not expect at the film’s beginning.

Here's the trailer of the movie...

Thank you for visiting.

Book/Movie Reviews

 

Movie Reviews 

1. Black (2005)

2. The Banshees of Inisherin (2022)

3. Kaidaisi Vivasayi (2022)

4. The Pianist (2002)

5. The Revenant (2015)

6. Conclave (2024)

7. Detachment (2011)

8. Jaggi (2021)

9. Companion (2025)

Book Reviews 

1. The Old Man and the Sea by Ernest Hemingway 

2. Edgar Allen Poe's Short Stories 

3. When Breath Becomes Air by Paul Kalanithi 

4. Fathers and Sons by Ivan Turgenev

The Only Story: Love, Loss, and the Disillusionment of Marriage

The Only Story: Love, Loss, and the Disillusionment of Marriage

Name:- Aakash Chavda

Batch:- M.A. Sem 4 (2023-2025) 

Enrollment Number:-5108230011 

E-mail Address:-aakashchavda637@gmail.com 

Roll Number:-01 

Assignment Details:- 

Topic:- The Only Story: Love, Loss, and the Disillusionment of Marriage

Paper & subject code:- Paper 207: Contemporary Literatures in English

Submitted to:- Smt. Sujata Binoy Gardi, Department of English, MKBU, Bhavnagar

Abstract

Julian Barnes’s The Only Story (2018) is a poignant meditation on love, memory, and the quiet unraveling of romantic ideals. This assignment explores how the novel functions as a subtle yet powerful critique of marriage—not just as a social institution but as a deeply flawed framework for human intimacy. Through the unconventional relationship between the young narrator, Paul, and the older, married Susan, Barnes challenges traditional assumptions about love, commitment, and personal fulfillment. The novel's narrative structure, which shifts from passionate subjectivity to distant reflection, mirrors the emotional arc of disillusionment. This assignment highlights how The Only Story reveals marriage as a complex, often constraining force rather than a source of security or happiness.

Keywords: The Only Story, marriage, critique, love.

Introduction

Julian Barnes, a well known figure in contemporary British literature, is known for his incisive explorations of love, philosophy, memory, and the complexities of human relationships. In his 2018 novel The Only Story, Barnes delves into the emotional depths of an unconventional romantic relationship between a young man, Paul Roberts, and a much older, married woman named Susan Macleod. What begins as a passionate, rebellious affair gradually unfolds into a nuanced and somber reflection on the realities of love and the burdens of long-term emotional commitment.

This assignment seeks to examine The Only Story not simply as a narrative of love and loss, but as a critical commentary on the institution of marriage. Through its introspective protagonist, nonlinear narrative, and emotionally layered portrayal of dependence and disillusionment, the novel challenges idealized conceptions of marriage as a source of stability or fulfillment. Instead, it presents marriage as an institution often marred by silence, compromise, and emotional decay. By analyzing the novel’s characters, themes, and structure, this study aims to illuminate how Barnes critiques marriage from both emotional and societal perspectives.

Brief About Plot

"Would you rather love the more, and suffer the more; or love the less, and suffer the less? That is, I think, finally, the only real question" (Barnes)

The Only Story follows the life of Paul Roberts, a young man who, at the age of nineteen, falls in love with a forty-eight-year-old married woman named Susan Macleod. The two meet at a local country tennis club in a quiet suburban village in 1960s England, where their relationship begins as an unconventional romance that defies societal norms and expectations.

Despite Susan’s existing marriage to a controlling and abusive husband Gordon Macleod, she and Paul develop a deep emotional bond and eventually move in together outside the village. What starts as an idealistic and rebellious love story gradually becomes burdened by emotional strain, particularly as Susan’s mental health deteriorates and she increasingly turns to alcohol as a coping mechanism.

The novel is divided into three parts, reflecting the evolution of Paul’s perspective over time and his detachment from the relationship with Susan—from youthful passion and defiance, to mature disillusionment, and finally to reflective detachment. The narrative shifts from first-person to second- and third-person narration, symbolizing Paul's growing distance from his past and from the idealism he once held about love and relationships.

The novel is less about a singular event and more about the emotional consequences of love that endures, falters, and leaves lasting marks. Through Paul’s journey, Barnes examines the limits of romantic devotion, the quiet failures of marriage, and the painful reality that not all love stories lead to fulfillment or closure.

Marriage in the Novel

In Julian Barnes’ The Only Story, marriage is depicted not as a site of love or mutual understanding, but as an institution marked by emotional emptiness, disillusionment, and quiet suffering. Through the fragmented recollections of Susan, the older woman in a relationship with the much younger Paul, Barnes critiques traditional mid-20th-century British marital norms. Susan reveals that her marriage has been sexless for nearly twenty years, with her and her husband living in separate rooms. This striking admission undermines the conventional image of marriage as a space of intimacy and mutual care. Instead, what emerges is a portrait of domestic life filled with silence, repression, and resigned endurance.

Susan's coping mechanisms—occasional smoking, dry humor, and guarded storytelling—reveal the extent of her emotional fatigue. Her casual remark that she hasn’t “seen his eyes for years” (Barnes)is more than a physical observation; it symbolizes the total absence of emotional connection between her and her husband. Gordon’s grotesque routines—heavy drinking, belching, and rude table manners—transform the home into a space of discomfort rather than companionship. Barnes thus subtly exposes the hidden violence of domesticity, where emotional neglect and habitual disrespect erode whatever bonds might have once existed.

Moreover, Susan’s comment that she was called “frigid” by her husband, not during their intimacy but after it ended, highlights how patriarchal marriages often shame and suppress women’s sexuality. Rather than offering space for healing or intimacy, her marriage became a source of judgment and dismissal. Her past trauma—hinted at in her story of abuse by an uncle—adds another layer to her emotional detachment and reveals how the wounds of the past are often carried silently into marriage. Barnes critiques how societal expectations of marital roles, especially for women, offer little room for vulnerability or complexity.

Susan’s declaration that her generation is “played out” (Barnes) connects her personal disillusionment to broader historical and cultural exhaustion. While Paul, in the idealism of first love, believes that love can overcome all obstacles, Susan’s realism and world-weariness suggest otherwise. For her, marriage is not a romantic ideal but a performance, and love—though present in her affair with Paul—is not necessarily redemptive. In this way, The Only Story presents marriage not as a culmination of love, but as its distortion; not a shelter, but a structure in which individuals are often spiritually and emotionally diminished.

Barnes’s portrayal of marriage can be seen as a poignant critique of its conventional foundations. He explores how love, when constrained by societal expectations and haunted by personal trauma, can fade into quiet tragedy. Through Susan’s life and her failed marriage, Barnes exposes the emotional cost of maintaining appearances, the silence women are forced to bear, and the illusory promises of marital happiness. The novel suggests that while love may begin as a source of hope, it often collides with the painful realities of human vulnerability and the societal structures that fail to support it.

Narrative Structure as Critique

Julian Barnes structures The Only Story in three parts that reflect Paul’s emotional journey and serve as a critique of love and marriage. The first part, told in an idealistic first-person voice, captures Paul’s youthful belief in the power of love to defy societal norms, especially the traditional institution of marriage.

In the second part, the narrative becomes more detached and shifts toward a second-person voice, reflecting Paul’s growing disillusionment as he confronts Susan’s trauma, alcoholism, and the emotional cost of their relationship. Here, love begins to unravel, and the reality of failed intimacy takes center stage. The final part adopts a third-person voice, signaling Paul’s emotional distance and introspection. This shift mirrors his attempt to make sense of the past, revealing the limitations of love and the illusions that shaped his younger self.

Through these narrative transitions, Barnes critiques not just marriage but also the romantic idealism that often precedes it, showing how both can erode under the weight of reality.

Critique of Marriage in the Novel

The Novel gives a scathing critique of conventional marriage by exposing the stark contradictions and inherent injustices of the institution. In the novel, Barnes unpacks the myth that physical violence or other forms of control can be interpreted as signs of love or passion. The narrator reflects on widely held, though outdated, beliefs—such as the notion that it is preferable for a husband to inflict violence rather than commit infidelity—only to counter them with the brutal reality of abuse. This confrontation is particularly evident in Paul’s uncompromising judgment of Gordon Macleod’s actions, as he is held accountable without any possibility for justification. The insistence that a husband’s violent behavior is a “crime of absolute liability” symbolizes a broader condemnation of a marital structure that not only permits, but often conceals, such transgressions behind a veneer of respectability.

The novel presents a powerful critique of marriage by using vivid metaphors and deeply personal experiences to expose the institution’s shortcomings. Marriage is compared to various everyday objects—a jewelry box that mysteriously turns precious metals into base metals, or a disused boat that is no longer seaworthy. These metaphors suggest that, over time, marriage deteriorates, losing its original value and becoming a burden of routine and disillusionment rather than a celebration of love.

This symbolic decay is mirrored in the lives of the characters, particularly in Susan’s story. She endures a sexless, emotionally neglectful, and physically abusive marriage, yet remains trapped by societal expectations of propriety and the shame attached to admitting failure. Her inability to confront the legal system and document her suffering highlights how deeply ingrained social conventions prevent women from escaping unhappy marriages or even acknowledging their pain. Susan’s situation also reflects a broader truth about middle-class respectability: many people suffer in silence, maintaining appearances while privately bearing the weight of unspoken trauma.

Paul’s growing disillusionment with marriage reinforces this critique. As he watches Susan struggle to break free, he comes to see the institution less as a bond of love and more as a social contract rooted in control, power, and compromise. His moral absolutism, especially in the face of Gordon Macleod’s abuse, underscores a key theme in the novel: that marriage, as it is traditionally constructed, can often serve to preserve appearances at the cost of personal freedom and emotional authenticity. Through these interwoven narratives and reflections, the novel condemns the idealized vision of marriage and instead portrays it as a flawed and often damaging institution.

By juxtaposing the expectations of middle-class dignity with the harsh realities of domestic abuse and moral compromise, Barnes sharply critiques the institution of marriage. The portrayal is unflinching: marriage is not a sanctuary or a romantic idyll but a complex web where emotional alienation, societal pressure, and personal shame converge, leaving its participants damaged rather than fulfilled. This critique is woven through the narrative, not only through the characters’ dialogues and reflections but also through the narrator’s internal conflict as he grapples with the disparity between the ideal of romantic love and the pragmatic cruelty of marital life.

Conclusion

In conclusion, The Only Story offers a layered critique of marriage by exposing its emotional, social, and psychological complexities. Through its shifting narrative voices, fragmented structure, and vivid metaphors, the novel reveals how marriage can often mask control, silence suffering, and constrain individual freedom. Characters like Susan and Paul embody the struggle between romantic idealism and societal expectation, showing how love, once entangled in the conventions of marriage, can become compromised. Barnes ultimately challenges the reader to question the authenticity and sustainability of traditional marital roles, emphasizing the need for honesty, autonomy, and emotional truth in human relationships.

References

Barnes, Julian. The Only Story. Jonathan Cape, 2018.

Barad, Dilip. “The Only Story - Julian Barnes.” Dilip Barad | Teacher Blog, https://blog.dilipbarad.com/2022/02/the-only-story.html. Accessed 8 February 2025.

Chavda, Aakash. “The Only Story | Flipped Learning Activity.” Blogger, 7 February 2025, https://aakashchavda.blogspot.com/2025/02/the-only-story-flipped-learning-activity.html. Accessed 16 April 2025.

"Theme of Marriage | Critique of Marriage Institution | The Only Story | Julian Barnes." DoE-MKBU, YouTube, 3 Feb 2022, https://youtu.be/SCrSyV2jXzI?si=iLvkpeE_LlO67jpC