Thursday, February 11, 2010
Potatoe? Potatah?
It be the dawn a’ the pirate age, when the stylish thing ta wear be a fur tricorn and weave bones in yer hair. We find two stalwart Neanderthal pirates stompin’ about the deck a’ their giant, thick walled ship. It be near sunset and Og holds a carved wooden tankard a rum. (Because there was, and always will be, rum).
Tar, his second mate, holds a large orange, sliced in half and be slurpin’ away at the juice. It’s pretty disgustin’, as his beard is all sticky and all…
A sudden gust a’ wind caused both ta loose their footing… Og manages ta hang onta his tankard (somethings never change and spillin’ rum be heresy) but Tar’s wonderful juicy orange flies inta the air…
Only ta land with a large *kerplunk* in Og’s tankard.
“Ya got fruit in me rum!” he roars.
“Ya got rum in me fruit!” Tar roars back.
Og takes a cautious sip, grunts, takes another.
And so, on a blistery day, back in the time a’ the ancient ancestors, rum punch be born.
What does this have to do with my blog topic today? Well, what came first, the orange or the rum. (I know, I should have used a pineapple, that would have needed to be one huge tankard.) (And I like OJ in my rum.)
So, we did critiques at my last local RWA chapter meeting. I put forth a few pages of my latest grand scheme to rule the… Uh, I mean, I brought two pages of my pirates with i-pods epic. And read it aloud. (Which was very helpful for me personally and I may try this reading aloud stuff more…but I digress…)
Yeah, yeah, nothing new there…
Anyway!
One of my chapter mates has Donald Maass as her agent and I think she’s already pubbed, but I’m not sure. (I’ve been told, I’m certain, but per norm, it went in one ear and sped through my convoluted brain, got lost, found, lost again and then dribbled out the other ear.)
This lass said, (not a direct quote, btw…remember the convoluted brain?) “You have a very literary style. It’s very compelling, but distant.”
Crap.
Not because it’s compelling, or literary…but the distant sort of bugged me. I looked around at the others and they were all nodding in agreement. I asked for some clarity on exactly what is a literary voice and after some stumbling comments I left about as confused as I normally am.
Stop snickering!
I went home and thought about those comments. They touched on style, on an agreement that what I read was compelling. And even that a literary voice is very appropriate for my genre. So, I wasn’t hurting, just a tad…confused.
I said, stop snickering!
Blast.
I looked up style and then voice. Well, that was fairly useless. About as much help as what came first, the chicken or the egg. One source said… “Voice is the author’s style, the quality that makes the writing unique and which conveys the author’s attitude, personality, and character.”
Well, that was some help. Though it basically said style and voice were the same thing. Another definition said that style was “the way an author writes. The word choice, tone, syntax…”
Sigh.
Aside from my personal search for exactly what is meant by the term literary voice, now I’m bobbing about the sea, wondering about the entire concept of voice vs. style.
What does the crew have to offer? Any clue on the meaning behind what is to me a cryptic phrase — literary voice — or on the entire debate of what is which and which came first and if the two are the same? How do you define your voice? Your style?
And thanks to Terrio, who contributed another well earned kick in my ass when I worried if I needed to change my voice. Thanks, Ter. Whenever you need a swift kick, I’m yer pirate.
BTW, Tar wanted his orange back and Og wouldn’t share so a bloody fight ensued…all perfectly normal.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Books by the Crew
38 comments:
My guess is that by “literary voice,” your chapter mates meant that to them your voice sounded more like literary fiction than like popular, commercial fiction.
Of all the elements of fiction, I think voice is hardest to define. The definition I’ve seen used most often is “the writer’s personality.” Saul Bellow called it “the characteristic signature of a person, of a soul.” Barbara Samuel in a Writers Unboxed blog last month said, “Voice is the sum of all your parts—your passions and interests, the geography that most clearly resonates with you, the cadence of your ancestors and neighbors and your education, and the major events that have shaped your life-view.”
But not everyone agrees. Steven Pressfield (The Legend of Bagger Vance) insists that the author needs to get his/her ego out of the way and let the material determine the voice: “You the writer are not there to impose ‘your’ voice on the material. Your job is to surrender to the material–and allow it to tell you what voice it wants in order to tell itself.”
I think there’s truth in both views. I know my voice is Southern in its cadence and its discursiveness, but I also know that my voice in fiction is not identical to my voice in poetry and my voice in academic writing is different from both.
As for the difference in voice and style, I think style is the voice made visible/audible. Style is the articles of clothing; voice is the creative force that selects the fabrics and colors and cuts and drapes of the clothes and puts them together to create something that sets an outfit apart from others.
And I fear that often, as now, my voice is didactic. The teacher refuses to be silenced.
I think voice is hard to explain, but easy to "hear". The pirates here have distinct voices -- you know who is who by the things they post. :) Everyone has their own particular way of expressing themselves.
I think of a literary voice as being a little more elegant, longer sentences, maybe even a bit more poetic in word choices. It takes more words, and time, to get where it's going. It can seem "distant" to people who are used to reading genre fiction.
Commercial fiction can be quicker, almost more abrupt, because it's in a hurry to get to the action. :) It doesn't tend to linger over words.
It's kinda like the difference between email and texting. LOL Both are effective communication tools, but they have different methods.
And, they both come down to preference. :)
Hope this helps a little.
I think style is the voice made visible/audible.
Oh, I love this from Janga! It makes me think of what my lit instructor is saying about the Hemingway style -- short, simple sentences. If something is "nice" he uses "nice" and it's up to you to read between the lines. And that there are a lot of people (there's even a competition) of people who parody the Hemingway "style." But different people, with different backgrounds and personalities bring their unique "voice" to the parody using the Hemingway "style." I'd think it would be easier to copy style than voice. So this makes me think that your comment on having a literary "style" was really more "voice." Is that confusing enough? *LOL*
I don't think voice can be explained. My personal opinion (so take it for what it's worth) is that voice is the grand sum of every decision the author makes. It's a combo of your style, your word choices, your close or distant POV, etc. It's not something that can be pointed to or defined. It's what the reader hears when they read your book.
Jenny Cruise is the best example for me. If you read a book or two of hers, and then go read her blog, you *hear* her voice loud and clear.
As for the distance comment, in my opinion, that's something that you can easily define, examine, and see if it's something you want to change or not. Distance is usually referring to how close the reader feels to the character. Most literary fiction is very distant. You're not hearing the character's voice, you're hearing the narrator's voice describing the character. There's a middle man. Most genre/popular/commercial fiction (i.e. romance, mystery, high-stakes adventure, futuristic, etc) has a closer voice. Rather than a narrator describing a character, you're plunked directly into that character's head. Rather than having a character described by a narrator, you're hearing the thoughts and feelings of that character.
I have a chapter written by Orson Scott Card that for me explained this all perfectly, and might be more effective than a google search. If you want it, let me know -- totally cool if you don't!
Janga says: "Style is the articles of clothing; voice is the creative force that selects the fabrics and colors and cuts and drapes of the clothes and puts them together to create something that sets an outfit apart from others." This is perfect!
And I agree. Style is the specific things you use to accomplish your voice. The word choice and syntax, etc you use. Sort of the specifics. And the voice is the way your personality comes out through your personal style.
As for the distant part, I'm guessing she's talking about POV here (though I could be wrong). Generally, people feel like writing is distant when the POV is shallow. Like they're watching the characters instead of being the characters.
That is the best cartoon ever. LOL! That made my day right there.
It's obvious from the comments so far, voice is about a dozen things. :) And I know I have an answer to this when you first asked me, but I'll be damned if I remember what I said.
I think Melissa threw in the word I'd choose - it's your personality. You have a very open, almost other-worldly personality, and it comes through in your writer's voice. Everything that has entered your mind from your first breath gets processed and turned into something.
Each individual turns all the input into something different, and what comes out is our own unique voice. As Donna mentions, you can see this in blogs. But not just in blogs posted by writers. There are blogs on a million subjects that have nothing to do with writing, yet the blogger has a unique style and voice that comes through.
I guess I'm saying, your voice is your brain talking. And no matter how deep in POV you are, or far away with an omniscient narrator, the story will still be in your voice.
I agree with Janga about the term "literary voice".
I'm not sure how I would define my voice or style. Sarcastic, but I wouldn't think anyone would classify my writing style as literary. I could be wrong though. I don't take my work to a group of complete strangers, read a couple pages, and listen to feedback either. The ones who have read it have never said I sounded literary; and my English professors would certainly be shocked if I did--because they couldn't even get me to write my analytical papers in a literary or scholarly fashion. (But I wouldn't say about myself that my voice had commercial mass market appeal either. Maybe I'm a hybrid. Like a mule or something.)
I like to term my style as "irreverent" though. But I think that's a lot like being sarcastic...
Janga - the professor speaks! And after watching Project Runway last night, I probably get the idea of style/voice through the clothing image. Because you're so right. Give each designer the same fabric, even the same basic criteria, and they will all come up with very different outfits!
Use red, it's for a gala event, go!
From short to long and elegant, from tight to flowing...all different... I think I'd be the two-toned one with all the drapes...
Donna! I can also really wrap my head around the difference between blogging and texting. Wait, you said e-mail and texting... Well, same difference!
Not really...uh... I'll shut up now.
Though I've looked at tweeting, and since there is a real limit in the number of characters...never happen for me. I'm wordy. Even if it's just rambling, skipping and jumping!
And perhaps this is where the term literary voice comes in. I mistook the idea, initially, for vocabulary and depth of description. So I worked hard at being more approachable. Pirates with ipods seems to be as close as I can get to closer POV with my present voice.
And you know what? I've decided I really like what I'm coming up with. It's a wry, narrative sort of view. Loving and passionate.
I think the distance is... I'm the parrot on the shoulder, not in the head.
Hi, Melissa! Two days in a row we get to see you! I imagine Hemmingway is a good example of a very distinctive voice.
Jane had some contest judges say she has a very strong voice. She asked me, "What the heck does that mean?"
See, I'm not the only one who finds voice description confusing!
I answered her that I felt they meant she had a very distinctive voice, easy to identify as hers.
Hemmingway paradies are usually hilarious.
Hal - Sure! Pop the chapter in my e-mail if it's available that way. Always an interesting man to read!
I'm really going to need to pop an example of my current WIP into the blog to illustrate what I thought was Deep POV and being in the character's head...
Marnee - Maybe I'm a bit old school... Not always that comfortable with being the character.
It's very possible!
I wonder, just to throw another metaphor into things, if I write from behind a mask, knowing it's a mask...other authors are more into immersion writing...
I told Jane the other day that I learn - and possible write - like a rock skipping water. The sheer exhileration of flying and also surfing. She writes like a scuba diver...
I love mixing up metaphors!
*giggle
it's in your inbox!
Bo'sun - Otherworldly!? You've blown my cover, I'm actually an alien from the planat Bzar.
Now you have to die.
;-)
I love what you said... Everything that has entered your mind from your first breath gets processed and turned into something.
Now, if I can only mastering the selection of when to release all of this something...
And I really do agree with you, that I guess I’m saying, your voice is your brain talking. And no matter how deep in POV you are, or far away with an omniscient narrator, the story will still be in your voice.
And I like my voice. It's very me. Literary, distant, compelling...it's all me. Perhaps distant is simply part of why it is compelling...
Why do I keep hearing that commercial about the brain on drugs??? ;-)
Hellie - Not like a mule! Like a fabulous hybrid that roams free on the plains. Like that one they created between a zebra and a horse. (I think it was a horse.) Or the lion and the tiger...
My chapter mates are sorta like strangers. But not quite that strange. I'm likely the strangest of them... Just because my convoluted brain can't keep track of names or details...I still don't call them strangers.
Interesting way that name derives from strange, isn't it?
But I digress.
I really like that idea though...
Strangers are often the 'peer group' that can see your writing with a more - HA! - distant eye. Able to judge what you write without the oh, geez, we're friends, how do I tell her that... stuff.
Granted, I'm still super sensitive about hurting anyones' feelings and read everything like it comes from my closest friends. But that is me!
And Hel - irreverant fits you to a tee! Or is that tea? I've never tried to write it down! I'm not certain!
What we need to do is taking the negative connotation out of the word "distant". The deep POV wave has been riding high lately and it's gotten to the point that if you don't write that way, then you're not writing a good story. That's hogwash. I read where an epub editor said if she receives a submission that is not deep POV, she rejects it immediately. To me, that's insane.
There are a million ways to tell a story and no one way is the right way.
Yes, Ma'am.
And I do agree. No one should dictate how the reader is going to recieve every story on the shelf. Sort of makes me think of the black scifi author I met at a convention. Who wrote of a black hero...and they put a white guy on the cover.
"People won't buy it with a black guy on the cover."
Hogwash.
It's not like the publishers direct the market, or the readers direct the market...or the writers... Its' a combination of all of it. A real impressive sail boat needs more than wind. It needs wind, currents, crew...
Hey, I wonder how the America's Cup is going off the coast of Spain!?
I mean really, two bazillionaires who have built two of the most innovative, incredible sail boats in the world...but they need just the right wind and wave magic to get those babies racing. Or there just multi-hulls bobbing on the surface.
Uh...I had a metaphor in there somewhere...I think I lost it. Something about how the market works...
I don't know. If you put Will Smith shirtless on the cover, I'll buy it.
I prefer deep POV (though I am by no means any sort of master at it), but that's because that's how I prefer to experience the book/story. I'm critical of movies that don't seem to give deep POV. *shrugs*
But I agree it's not the only way to tell a story or the "better" way to tell a story. 30 years ago, the only way to tell a romance was if a hero date-raped her a few times in the book. Trends come and go.
And I prefer to be the mule. I think they're more attractive than a hybrid of the zebra and horse. I've seen pictures of both. And I have no desire to be a cat-animal. I prefer to be a horsey one in my analogies. You can be whatever hybrid you want--but I'm the mule variety.
Oh, and I meant to say acquaintances might be a better word than strangers--because you "know" them, but they're not your BFFs.
To me, acquaintances and strangers might as well be the same thing. I don't trust either as far as I could throw them. And a certain level of trust is needed to share yourself like that.
It's an interesting idea...I'm not sure I'd say I trust them. It's not they read my genre or would want to read what I write...
I'm going to be brutally honest with everyone and admit, it's a bit of an ego trip. I have enough confidence in my stuff to put it out there and wait to hear good words about it. Because even with the distant I got compelling and literary, which I am choosing to see as positive.
With any critique session, the goods are going to come with the bads, or not as goods.
I'm an egotistic little twit... It's not that I trust them, I trust myself and my words. Sure, I get a little confused with some reactions, but as long as I don't hear, this stinks then it's all good. (And that would probably have me examining them more than me.) It all sets me off on some new adventure to explore, ideally.
Like voice, style, and literary voice.
But...Hel... Mules don't reproduce!
Off to drop the dogaroo at daycare so I can play all day on the blog without the doggie guilts eating at me. Oh, and get some writing/editing done. Be back in an hour or so!
If anyone comes back...
It's not that hard of a topic...is it?
See, I haven't found a group of writers (in person) where I'd feel comfortable putting even two pages out there and letting them comment away. Too many experiences with people making sweeping statements of narrow views and I'd just get angry. Since I'm physically unable to refrain from telling the people off, it would just turn ugly.
I have confidence in my words, I don't have confidence that others would know good work from their elbow. LOL! Or know how to crit my stuff in an open, constructive way, since I'm well aware my stuff is FAR from perfect.
BUT, this is only based on my experience. If your group does this regularly you probably know them well enough to know if this would have been a complete waste of your time. Sounds like it was a positive experience.
But…Hel… Mules don’t reproduce!
Yes, well, neither have I.
And neither would a zebra/horse hybrid. They're sterile.
Mules are cute and funny, independent and stubborn. I wouldn't mind being a mule. Except I'm not carrying anyone's shit up the side of a mountain.
I bet in the animal kingdom, they're even considered sarcastic. And I love Eeyore, so I'm on the mule train. (The one where we don't carry anything.)
I pack around a lot of shit (emotional and otherwise) so I make an EXCELLENT mule. I am the Hermione Granger of Mules.
And I fit all the other criteria as well of cute, funny, independent, stubborn, and sarcastic. And I can mope like Eeyore. It's a shame my sun sign is a fish instead of a mule.
For me, style and voice are complete different things. Style is the type of writing I write while I'm working my characters. Short sentences. Action instead of description (ie: if I'm writing dialogue and my character says to someone- "How did you find another dead body?" Kiki took a long drag from her cigarette and crushed it on the bottom of her heel. "I'm starting to think you do this shit on purpose, Tory." Instead of, "How did you find another dead body?" Kiki asked, annoyed with Tory. "I'm starting to think you do this shit on purpose.") Style to me is the way you write to convey your story to the character. Voice is how you persuade people to your characters. It's how you see the world and show it to your readers. Voice bleeds into style, some, I will admit because your style is loosely based off your voice. But voice is showing your readers your characters.
Ah! I didn't know that zebra hybrids were sterile! Learn something new everyday...
I'm actually a big Eeyore fan. I think I split my personality between Eeyore and Tigger. Which says so much about me...
That would be an interesting way to present my style... ;/
I guess I do trust my RWA Chapter. Or maybe it's just I know what they write and what I see as the limitations of their visions?
Oooooh! Arrogance, they name be Chance!
Good example, Sin. One of the definitions I read did talk about style as the word choice, the syntax, etc. I'm not sure where or why the two became interchangable.
And I'm not sure they are or should be.
I think with the word I've been tagged with, literary...it can be both a style and a voice.
Two! Two! Two tastes that taste great together!
But I think I can tweek both with my unique personality (see Tigger and Eeyore commment above) into something...compelling! ;)
Eeyore's a mule? Seriously?
OMG, Donna...you're right. He's a donkey... Our bad!
That's my fault. LOL! I threw Eeyore in the mix.
Found an interesting take on voice from an agent's POV. Check it out.
http://tinyurl.com/yl73fcu
Thanks, that was interesting. What makes it unique...
I got Eeyore and Tigger...
And now I'm Foghorn Leghorn. How did that happen?
I wonder if being a minimalist makes me unique. Probably not, huh? LOL!
I am officially the only person in my office. That means I'm heading out. Three day weekend, yay me! The dining room will be painted and at least I'll say at least 8 pages written by Tuesday morning.
I shall report back.
Uh...why Foghorn Leghorn?
OK, I know probably no one will read this...but I went and saw Valentines Day.
Ok, I'm still grinning. No, it wasn't terribly original, wasn't brilliant, was full of cliches... But it was still fun and stay for the credits to watch all the bloopers.
...and at least I’ll say at least...
This would be my Foghorn impersonation.
The reviews are terrible for that movie. I'll wait and rent the DVD for kiddo to drool over wolf boy.
Wolfman was hilariously cheesy. At one point, a victim got his arm ripped off and flung to the ground, the gun in his hand going off, and we laughed hysterically.
And the guy playing wolfman LOOKED the part, but he is no good at delivering his lines. I mean, it was B dialogue to begin with but his delivery, yeesh. *LOL*
But it was a fun romp.
Glad the VD movie was fun despite the panning.
LOL -- I spent WAY too much time trying to figure out WHY I didn't know Eeyore was a mule. Now I feel better!
Post a Comment