Have Been

Question

"If inviting Khrushchev to the White House can be dismissed as a cosmetic act of public relation, there were nonetheless signs that the Eisenhower administration was serious in pursuing rapprochement with the Soviet Union."

Should I say "can be dismissed as having been a cosmetic act......" instead of "dismissed as a cosmetic act......"? Do both work? If yes what difference does it make?

Thank you.

Clive · Accepted Answer

Hi,

"If inviting Khrushchev to the White House can be dismissed as a cosmetic act of public relations, there were nonetheless signs that the Eisenhower administration was serious in pursuing rapprochement with the Soviet Union."

Should I say "can be dismissed as having been a cosmetic act......" instead of "dismissed as a cosmetic act......"?
Yes, it places the the condition more clearly in the past than the text as writtendoes.
Another approach would be to write it as
"If inviting Khrushchev to the White House could be / could have been dismissed as a cosmetic act of public relations, . . . "

Do both work? Not for me. 'Can be' focuses too much on the present.

Clive

SuperESL · Answer

Clive,

If I say, as per your advice,
"If inviting Khrushchev to the White House could be dismissed as a cosmetic act of public relations......."
would I be transposing the perspective to the past, as if I am saying someone at the time when all this was happening might reasonably or legitimately interpret the 'inviting' as a cosmetic act of public relations?

And, if I use "could have been dismissed as a........", would I be implying that someone at the time when all this was happening might reasonably interpret the 'inviting' as a cosmetic act of public relations, but since I have in fact no proof that such a person existed or that someone actually interpreted the event this way, therefore I employ the 'alternative/unreal past' construction of "could have been"?

Also, to follow up on your judgment that the use of 'can' in my original sentence focuses too much on the present, I was wondering if the use of 'can' might not be a good idea if my intention is to emphasize that the 'dismissing' is done by a present observer of that past act (i.e. the inviting)?

I tend to think that this sentence construction conveys what I want to say most clearly: "If inviting Khrushchev to the White House can be dismissed as having been a cosmetic act of public relations......"
The use of 'can' indicates that someone from nowadays looking back at that event might form the following opinion.
The use of 'having been' is correct because it concerns an event in the past.

What do you think? Thank you so much for your patience.
SuperESL

Clive · Answer

Hi,

If I say, as per your advice,
"If inviting Khrushchev to the White House could be dismissed as a cosmetic act of public relations......."
would I be transposing the perspective to the past, as if I am saying someone at the time when all this was happening might reasonably or legitimately interpret the 'inviting' as a cosmetic act of public relations? Yes

And, if I use "could have been dismissed as a........", would I be implying that someone at the time when all this was happening might reasonably interpret the 'inviting' as a cosmetic act of public relations, but since I have in fact no proof that such a person existed or that someone actually interpreted the event this way, therefore I employ the 'alternative/unreal past' construction of "could have been"? Yes, if I understand your question correctly.

Also, to follow up on your judgment that the use of 'can' in my original sentence focuses too much on the present, I was wondering if the use of 'can' might not be a good idea if my intention is to emphasize that the 'dismissing' is done by a present observer of that past act (i.e. the inviting)? Yes

I tend to think that this sentence construction conveys what I want to say most clearly: "If inviting Khrushchev to the White House can be dismissed as having been a cosmetic act of public relations......"
The use of 'can' indicates that someone from nowadays looking back at that event might form the following opinion.
The use of 'having been' is correct because it concerns an event in the past.
I agree.

What do you think? I think your English is good enough to trust your own judgement.

Clive

Have Been

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions