Oh, really? Even when that opinion is demonstrably incorrect? Arguments advocating blind submission to authority on the basis of credentials are as unpersuasive, to me, as the rest of your post.

“It’s quite obvious that Struck and White are NOT introducing those four examples as illustrations of passive voice.”

Clearly, the point was whether the Elements of Style discussion is helpful, clear, useful, and correct.

The author of the present article provides at least one argument that the effect of Elements of Style is negative: even if the authors understood the difference between an active and a passive sentence, the example from the writing lab shows that their discussion did not clarify the issue.

Geoff Pullum’s grammar with Rodney Huddleston, “The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language,” is one of the most (and arguably the most) impressive and remarkable scholarly achievements in the field of grammar. It is one of the most comprehensive grammatical descriptions of any language, ever.

The professor can be regarded as an expert and his opinion should be taken seriously.

I was teaching a writing course last week. Again and again the participants asked, “Is that a passive sentence?” In each case it wasn’t–it was just weak writing, such as sentences starting with “there” as a placeholder for the rhetorical subject. Eventually, we had to stop and take some time to examine the structure of passive sentences.

I’m a fan of The Elements of Style, and I think most of the advice is useful: “do not overwrite,” “make the paragraph the unit of composition,” etc. The classic advice, of course, is “Omit needless words.” Most, if not all, of these so-called platitudes do offer valuable advice to those who wish to write well. I still recommend this book to my students and clients.

Let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

On the other hand, the 2 guides I read every year are Line by Line by Cook (published by the MLA) and Style: 10 Lessons in Clarity and Grace by Williams.