"held" vs. "holds" in past-tense reference to an existing Art Museum

Michael Myers

Take a chance. Amaze yourself.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 28, 2012
Messages
5,581
Reaction score
882
Location
In the carpenter's shop eating oysters with the wa
Website
www.dancerandspy.com
I'm the middle of writing a story in past-tense. Then comes a need to write this line:

The Boston Museum of Fine Arts held some of the world’s most treasured pieces of art.

Except, of course, it still does. The above reads as if it "once held". Thus the edit:

The Boston Museum of Fine Arts holds some of the world’s most treasured pieces of art.

But I'm writing in the past tense, e.g. They arrived shortly before it opened to the public.

Thoughts, anyone?
 

Ari Meermans

MacAllister's Official Minion & Greeter
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
12,854
Reaction score
3,055
Location
Not where you last saw me.
Your reasoning is sound. This is about implicature—implying something not explicitly stated—and using the verb "held" implies the museum no longer holds some of the world's most treasured pieces of art or, possibly, the museum itself no longer exists. Without a rewrite or the omission of non-relevant details, using "holds" would be correct despite writing the rest of the text in past tense. Iow, one does not cancel out the other.
 
Last edited:

stephenf

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 29, 2008
Messages
1,199
Reaction score
335
It is my long time held belief, that my knowledge of grammar is lacking. The use of held doesn't mean it is no longer true.
 

Ari Meermans

MacAllister's Official Minion & Greeter
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
12,854
Reaction score
3,055
Location
Not where you last saw me.
It is my long time held belief, that my knowledge of grammar is lacking. The use of held doesn't mean it is no longer true.

You're comparing an adjective modifying the word "belief" with a verb. Not the same thing.
 
Last edited:

Sage

Currently titleless
Staff member
Moderator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 15, 2005
Messages
64,562
Reaction score
22,367
Age
43
Location
Cheering you all on!
This is one of those things that people get hung up on, and I don't know why. To me, saying, "The Boston Museum of Fine Arts held some of the world’s most treasured pieces of art," in a past-tense novel in no way suggests that it no longer does, the same way that me saying, "That girl I met yesterday was long-legged and tan," in no way suggests that today she is short and pale.
 

AW Admin

Administrator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
18,772
Reaction score
6,285
You want held.

You are writing about the past; you need to use the past tense.

The museum held those objects then, in the past, and it is the past that is your concern.
 

Ari Meermans

MacAllister's Official Minion & Greeter
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
12,854
Reaction score
3,055
Location
Not where you last saw me.
Michael, you might find Using Present Tense in a Story About the Past over at Grammar Girl's Quick and Dirty Tips helpful. It's about implicatures and whether a compelling case can be made for switching tenses. It seems it'll be up to you and your editor to decide if the case you made in your post is compelling enough. (I still think there's an elegant way to rewrite those two sentences to eliminate any unintended implication.)
 

AW Admin

Administrator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
18,772
Reaction score
6,285
(I still think there's an elegant way to rewrite those two sentences to eliminate any unintended implication.)

Yep. English is endlessly flexible. There's always another way, and often, a better way.
 

PamelaC

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 24, 2013
Messages
475
Reaction score
139
Location
North Carolina
I think "held" for sure. Writing a story in the past tense doesn't mean that everything you're describing is no longer true. Just because you write, for instance, that a house "stood" on the corner of Main and Water Streets doesn't mean it no longer does.

I think the confusion comes in because when we're telling a story about the past in spoken conversation, we will jump in and out of past vs. present, and that makes sense. But in writing a narrative in past tense, it should be consistent, IMO.
 

AW Admin

Administrator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
18,772
Reaction score
6,285
Let's go at this from another angle.

Is the story you're telling consistently in the past?

That is, you're not using flashbacks, for instance, or this isn't a story within a story (where, for instance a character tells a story about the past in the present of the narrative.

If it is consistently in the past, you would use holds as Ari suggests.

But as Ari also notes, there are many ways to suggest the same thing.

I am more troubled by the use of the verb hold than I am the tense of the verb. I'd re-write the sentence entirely.
 

Fallen

Stood at the coalface
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 9, 2009
Messages
5,500
Reaction score
1,957
Website
www.jacklpyke.com
I've seen both, too, especially if it's a reminiscient narrator, but I've also seen it in simple past narration, where it's describing events outside of the normal scope of the past tense narration (some authors do like to use present tense to describe ongoing states, like how they home the artwork).

I agree that if it's a consistent past tense pov, though, that keeping that consistency makes sense.
 

Ari Meermans

MacAllister's Official Minion & Greeter
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
12,854
Reaction score
3,055
Location
Not where you last saw me.
I did. :)
And what I often do when a single word or phrase gives me pause. I dislike using was. Replacing that single word forces a more active presentation.

Context, of course, is everything, but why would a more active presentation necessarily be a bad thing?
 

Fallen

Stood at the coalface
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 9, 2009
Messages
5,500
Reaction score
1,957
Website
www.jacklpyke.com
I did. :)
And what I often do when a single word or phrase gives me pause. I dislike using was. Replacing that single word forces a more active presentation.

There's nothing wrong with doing that: 'was' can be hard for the reader to picture (it's an abstract verb), where a more concrete verb: run, walk, hole/held etc instantly gives off an imagine that can associate with. But I have to admit, that question wasn't clear in your orginal post: abstarct v more concrete verbs. :)