Advice to writers and other “word nerds”:
There’s a difference between active voice and action. It is possible (trust me — I’ve seen it) to use passive voice to write a scene that’s all noise and commotion and ninjas on the front lawn blowing stuff up.
Never assume that a placid or boring verb is passive voice; never assume that, just because a lot of pew! pew! pew! happens, the sentence/scene is written in active voice. (Irony: The sentence is written in active voice is actually passive voice.)
The zombies were all destroyed by the guy with the cross-bow. Meanwhile, the little makeshift fort was guarded by the woman in the red jacket, who was kept supplied with extra ammo by a gaggle of badass grannies, and the youngsters were all sent to hide in the root cellar.
That’s all passive voice; you could follow each of the verbs with by zombies instead, and the sentences would still make grammatical sense.
The zombies were all destroyed by zombies with cross-bows. Meanwhile, the little makeshift fort was guarded by zombies, who were kept supplied with extra ammo by a gaggle of badass zombies, and the youngsters were all sent by zombies to hide in the root cellar.
(Looks like one of those Mad-Libs things as completed by zombies… I mean, by someone obsessed with the ambulatory deceased.)
However, there’s a fair amount of “action” in that paragraph. I could even have written a better version of this scene — more specific detail, etc. — while still keeping it almost entirely passive voice. I’m not saying I should have, only that it’s possible. What happens isn’t the same as how the events are narrated.