# A Matter Of Voice



## Chessie (Feb 20, 2016)

Hi, my fellow Scribes. So given certain discussions on this site and some other articles/books I've read recently have me thinking about author or creative voice. We hear this a lot: _you just have to find your voice_. 

So what the heck does that exactly mean?

When I first started writing, I just wrote. I was young and didn't understand crap about anything. I didn't understand grammar, story structure, plot, setting, character development, etc. I just wrote whatever came from my heart and the sentences just flowed. Over the years I learned more and improved my craft. There came a point where I didn't know exactly how to construct a story but I _tried_ my best to copy what I saw in fiction books. 

I've been writing for a wicked long time, and can just now say that I finally recognize my "voice".

So what is it? How can we recognize our creative voice? 

First off, it takes practice. Years of practice. Sorry. A lot of beginning writers don't like to hear this crap. I can't tell you how many wannabe writers have told me that they just write when they're inspired. They don't try to improve. They don't make writing a habit. Well, all of our writing goals are different, right? Some of us want to sell big time. Some of us just care that a few people read our work. Others of us want big publishing contracts and thousands of fans. It doesn't matter what your goals in the writing business or not are─what matters is that we improve with every manuscript we finish. And how do we do that? _Practice_. 

Write daily or write often. There's no way around that.

So back to author voice. A realization came to me just recently thanks to this article by Kristine Kathryn Rusch. She got me really thinking! Voice is how we talk. We don't recognize our own voice because we hear it all the time when we speak. She's so right! (at least I think so lol)

The concept of author voice has escaped me all of these years but I think that I finally understand. It's always there through the way we construct words, through the way we tell our story, through the type of stories we tell. Author voice is YOU telling a story! Simple. Listen to yourself talk. That's it. We are storytellers using paper to entertain others. Our voice is there from the beginning but it's only through practice (writing daily or often) and by learning HOW to construct a story and use language to our advantage that we begin to recognize it within our work some time later.

My voice is straight to the point with pieces of layered description. I have always preferred to focus on character emotion vs heavy description. I like stories laced with sadness, broken human spirits that find hope, sex, passion, and love that is very, very bad for us. My voice conforms to that. It's how I tell those stories.

Your voice is different than mine. And different from other writers. So yes, language and grammar and spelling are all tools we use to tell our stories but HOW we tell those stories, our choice of words and how we construct the sentences and paragraphs is our voice. 

Sorry for the super duper long post, but what do you guys think?


----------



## Heliotrope (Feb 20, 2016)

There was a post about this a while back, so I'm basically going to cut and paste: 

I agree. Voice is tricky, but I think of it like the personality behind the writing. If I were to sit in a pub with Hemmingway, Martin and Atwood and swap fishing stories, they would all have a different way of telling the story. You can pick up each of their books and see how wildly different their voices are. This is very hard to develop.., but what I have found even harder is having confidence in my voice. 

When Donald Maas speaks about author voice he states that a good author voice demands your attention in some way. You know when you are at a party and there is some one there who is just a great story teller? They can tell you all about their truck accident and it is hilarious and engaging and you want to drink beers with that person all night? Then you end up trapped with someone's old aunt who tries to tell you about her truck crash, but she is dry and boring and waffles around the details and keeps going on and on about her sore back? Author voice is like that. Engaging, demanding your attention. Standing tall and saying "I have a story to tell." 

He says "it isn't words alone that do that, I find, but rather the outlook, opinions, details, delivery, and original perspectives that an author brings to his tale." (Fire in fiction, pg 130).

There are some members on this forum that have a very distinct voice. You can tell who is 'speaking' just based on the way the post reads. You can tell a Caged Maiden post because it is very long and chatty and sort of has a casual conversational tone. You can tell a Nimue post because it is usually insightful and has a sort of wise etherial tone to it. You can tell a Skip.Knox post because it is short, concise, and usually funny, you could tell a Brian Foster post because it had an edge to it that was distinctly Foster. 

I find this really interesting. THAT to me is author voice. Some people have a very distinct voice when they write. For others it takes a while to find that distinct voice. Trying to apply that voice to writing is why we get so many variations of style, from Hemmingway's short, unadorned sentences, or George RR Martin's long, heavily descriptive prose, to Rothfuss' poetic prose, to Rowling's silly casual tone.


PS (Major guilt trip now with not writing every day! lol. But yes, my goals are very different than yours for sure.)

END CUT AND PASTE. 

So, what happened in the other post was a conversation between me and FifthView about how do you critique author voice? Or can you even critique voice? And at what point does "author voice" become a crutch for bad writing? 

And I love how she mentions all the 'rules' of writing now. How everything has to be so standardized in order to be 'good'. What is that?


----------



## Mythopoet (Feb 20, 2016)

Ah, you read KKR's blog too? Isn't it brilliant? 

I loved that post and agree with everything in it. I also recommend this post from a few years ago on the same subject. This is the one that made me wake up to what voice really is. 

And this is why it is so, so, so dangerous to take advice from beta readers or people in writing workshops or even editors. Because everything that they suggest is what _*they*_ would choose. It's _*their*_ voice, not yours. The more you accept suggestions from other people, the more you are eliminating your voice from your work. Your work might still be good. But it will never be _great_. 

Serious Writer Voice is a real problem these days. Everyone coming into the industry these days hears all the same advice, the advice that makes you think there's *one right way* to write stories. But this is false and leads to everyone practicing Serious Writer Voice and making every single book that comes out dull, dull, dull to read. I've been reading Elantris by Brandon Sanderson and it's good. But he's got a bad case of Serious Writer Voice. It reads like basically every other fantasy book written these days. Different setting, characters and plot, but same voice. I had to force myself beyond chapter one. And even after the plot and characters managed to grip me, I still find myself tempted to give up when he lapses into a particular dull passage of Serious Writer Voice. And the problem is, it could be so much better. 

The truth is that every writer needs to be encouraged to write in their own way. With their own voice. This just means that you don't put stupid arbitrary outside limitations on how you express yourself naturally. Embrace how you express yourself naturally. As KKR says, it will sound boring to you, because you listen to yourself all day long every day and you're used to your own voice. But other people aren't. Your voice is unique to them. Not everyone will like it. But do you really want to be one of those writer who writes with the kind of prose that everyone agrees is good but no one gets excited about? If you're doing it right there should be people who *hate* your voice and people who *love* your voice. Because your voice causes people to _feel_ things. That's the essence of storytelling.


----------



## skip.knox (Feb 20, 2016)

Here's another instance where we really need critique groups and beta readers. I would have sworn I didn't have a voice, or hadn't found it yet, however you'd like to phrase that. But, some months ago, having submitted maybe three or four pieces to the group, one of the commenters said something in passing about "Skip's voice" and specifically how that voice led her to have certain expectations in the reading.

"Huh," I said to myself, so as not to startle my neighbor, "I have a voice."

I still don't know what that voice is, and doubt I could either write it deliberately or deliberately avoid writing it. Thinking about it makes me a little queasy, as if were I learn know my own voice, I'd never be able to speak naturally again. More likely, I'd be able to hone it better.

Meanwhile, I'll just keep talking (writing) and see if someday I'll be able to pick myself out in a crowd.

It does raise the mildly interesting question of whether critics (the professional kind) can really recognize authorial voice or whether they're as scattergun on that as they are on themes and hidden meanings.


----------



## Heliotrope (Feb 20, 2016)

I also wanted to add that I love that she mentions these 'rules' that we tend to see on forums and crit groups and how that is creating a very bland voice. 

I wanted to post two examples of great voice: 

"It isn't as bad as all that; here I am and it is now the short a.m.'s. The short a.m.'s. I await the water boiling for a final cup of tea. Probably only drink the stuff in order to pish. Does offer a sort of relief. And simply strolling to the kitchenette and preparing this tea: the gushing tap, the kettle, gathering the tea-bag from the crumb strewn shelf - all of this is motion. (Kelman, 1995)".

"Spandau smoked, and thought the city gliding past was like an overexposed film, too much light, all depth burned away and sacrificed. All concrete and asphalt, a thousand square miles of man-made griddle on which to fry our sins. Then you turn a corner and theres a burst of crimson bougainvillaea redeeming an otherwise ugly chunk of concrete building. Or a line of tall palm trees, still majestic and refusing to die, guarding a side street of bungalows constructed at a time when L.A. was still the Land of Milk and Honey." (Depp, Loser's Town). 

This sort of gorgeous writing breaks all the "Show don't tell", "Don't repeat words or phrases" BS that I hear at crit groups.


----------



## Chessie (Feb 20, 2016)

Heliotrope said:


> Or can you even critique voice? And at what point does "author voice" become a crutch for bad writing?


Sure. You can critique author voice. It's either you like it or you don't. Period. About it being a crutch for bad writing...I think only the audience can decide that. If someone asks for feedback then as a beta reader or crit partner, we can tell them which parts weren't clear so they can improve on that. But voice has nothing to do with clarity...at least I don't believe so. Voice is just your choice of words and how you construct your tale. Bad writing is subjective and we can only truly say something is awful if we hate the prose or can't understand the story.

For example, I've had crit partners tell me that I use too much of these: 

-And (to start sentences).
-But (to start sentences).
-himself, herself
-major adverbs
-action as dialogue tags
-a lot of ellipses and em dashes

Okay, I write this way on purpose because it's the way my thoughts are constructed, the way that the story is best placed on the page from my internal voice. Is it proper? My old English teacher would tell me no. But it's how I talk in real life and how I tell a story. It is different for everyone.

@Mythopoet: I agree that her article is brilliant.  I read her and Dean's blog often and although I don't agree with everything they say, on this particular subject I'm with them 100%. And to tie this in with Skip's thoughts on needing beta readers, I think at the beginning yes, new writers need feedback and guidance. But there comes a point where writers can drop all that and need to start fostering a real respect for their craft. 

Not everyone is going to like the way we write. Hell, I would even go far as to say that the majority of people who have read my stuff absolutely detest it. Or they love it. Or get mad anger about it. Why? Because I just write the way that feels right to tell the story. 

We should honor our artistic side and the story we're telling. Voice is something we recognize after years of writing practice and we always build on that.


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Feb 20, 2016)

Heliotrope said:


> I also wanted to add that I love that she mentions these 'rules' that we tend to see on forums and crit groups and how that is creating a very bland voice.
> 
> I wanted to post two examples of great voice:
> 
> ...



I don't think they really break the rules as much as you seem to think they do, aside from the fact there are no rules, you can do whatever you want just do it well. A novel is show and tell, difficult to find one that isn't, I'd suspect. 1st POV is clearly going to prone to this, because people "tell" stories when they talk, and people tend to speak about their internal thoughts rather than show externalizations. And the second one is very showy to me. Extremely visual even if there is some telling. Again, you can't escape telling when telling a story of any length, in many cases its poetic or even expediency. 

Both of these pieces also demonstrate very tight prose, very much within "guidelines" oft called rules, heh heh.


----------



## Heliotrope (Feb 20, 2016)

Totally with you on the tight prose. That is true. 

But the "show don't tell" guideline is something that has been bothering me for some time… Perhaps because I just don't really understand the concept in regards to 'voice'. 

So for example, I'm reading my son James Harriot's Animal Stories right now. It _is_ written in first person. All the stories are a wonderful example of voice. 

_Christmas can never go by without my remembering a certain little cat. I first saw her when I called to see one of Mrs. Pickering's much-loved Basset hounds. I looked in some surprise at the furry creature moving quietly down the hall..._ (The Christmas Day Kitten, James Harriot). 

There is no question that we are being "told" this story… that sitting around that camp fire feeling. And I feel like many of the strongest narratives have that sense of _telling_ to them… like you are sitting with the author himself. 

_It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen..._ (1984 George Orwell)

_We were the Mulvaneys, remember us? You may have thought our family was larger..._ (We Were the Mulvaneys Joyce Carrol Oates) 

_Robert Cohn was once middleweight boxing champion of Princeton. Do not think that I am very much impressed by that as a boxing title, but it meant a lot to Cohn._ (The Sun Also Rises Hemmingway). 

Notice how all of these examples sort of force you sit up and pay attention? They don't start in action, they don't start with a car crash or alien landing or anything interesting happening… but they start with a distinct voice that says "Hey! I have a story to tell here, you better sit up and pay attention." 

On the flip side (and I find this an issue with fantasy in general), you find _this_: 

_A simple spell brought him unnoticed past the guards, out from the main gates of the greatest city in all of Avonsea, mighty Carlisle on Stratton…._ (The Dragon King R.A. Salvatore). 

He is _showing_ us what is happening. Yes, there is mystery, intrigue, action, someone doing something… all the things you hear you are supposed to do in crit groups… but there is no voice! It is like the speaker is going "wah wah wah" with a trombone… it is action on a page with no story teller. I didn't finish the book. It sucked.


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Feb 20, 2016)

I've never actually worried about nor considered writer voice, so reading that article was interesting but seems a little obvious to me, but then I didn't grow up in the age of internet and writer workshops. And I will be honest, I am not a voracious reader of published works anymore. I read unpublished segments (not too much) to train myself to find things I don't like so I notice them better when revising my own work. I am against another "rule" of writing, the "read the classics" and "read read read" rules. Maybe when young, maybe when in between novels, but humans tend to be mimics. One piece I wrote years ago, I could immediately tell when I finished one book and picked up another because I started sounding like them. Outside of finishing off GRRM's upcoming books, I don't really care to read much. I know, anathema to so many. 

I have no problem with blanding everyone's writing because it shuts down the competition, heh heh. 

More seriously, writing is not simply the voice in your head or your speaking voice. It is your perfected (or purposely imperfected) voice. Perfection is different for every person, it is whatever engages the reader. 

In this vein, when somebody says show don't tell, consider the notion, then buy into it or don't, or do both, whatever works, but think about it. When somebody says you have an echo, don't immediately delete, but think about it. When I hit on my pet words, that, had, was/were, don't immediately change them, but do think about them. Always think about any comment someone makes, just realize it may not be for you. That is one of the fun tricks in critiquing writing, I try to point out red flags, and often offer up suggestions, but I try not to step on voice. But my main targets are worthless words, most everybody could do with fewer worthless words, heh heh.


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Feb 20, 2016)

Salvatore and most fantasy, frankly, blow. I've literally only read GRRM for fantasy in the past 10 years. And he is a flawed writer, but a great story teller.

Telling can absolutely be as or more powerful than showing. Either way works, they simply must work. 

I really think a lot of times when someone says "show don't tell" they're picking up on something else: it isn't working, and show don't tell is the easy analysis. Sometimes it might be working but they identify it because they are hyper analyzing, but most times, it isn't working. A good tell can do the work of a helluva lot of showing and do it beautifully.

And we all hyper analyze. Which is why all critiques should be taken as not "do this" but "think about this".


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Feb 20, 2016)

skip.knox said:


> It does raise the mildly interesting question of whether critics (the professional kind) can really recognize authorial voice or whether they're as scattergun on that as they are on themes and hidden meanings.



My money is on the shotgun, just a matter of choke, gauge, and shot size for the pattern, heh heh.


----------



## Nimue (Feb 20, 2016)

Demesnedenoir said:


> Salvatore and most fantasy, frankly, blow. I've literally only read GRRM for fantasy in the past 10 years. And he is a flawed writer, but a great story teller.



Wow, your tastes are so superior that they preclude an entire genre (...that you're trying to write in?).  Try Guy Gavriel Kay, Lois McMaster-Bujold, Steven Brust, and a little less generalization next time.

Edit: Sarah Micklem is also similar to Martin, low fantasy, and her writing is amazing.


----------



## Heliotrope (Feb 21, 2016)

Amen to Guy Gavriel Kay. 

1) Canadian.. Yes, yes, I love my country  

2) alternate histories are my favourite, so I'm partial to him for that.


----------



## Russ (Feb 21, 2016)

I have a unique perspective on voice.  I do two or three discoveries a week (Americans call them depositions) so I get to see a transcript of the way I am speaking and the way my clients are speaking and get to read it.  I have also done this thousands of times now and read thousands of transcripts of me and others speaking.  It is a wonderful educational experience.

The first thing I will tell you is that you often don't speak the way you think you do.  I used to think I was speaking in a certain manner to convey things in a certain way and I wasn't doing it as well as I hoped to.  Reading those transcripts and consciously changing my way of speaking in discoveries (and in court) has been good for my career.

That is why critique groups and editors etc are very valuable.  They are a real world check on whether or not you are communicating in the way you want to.  If you sit around and write "your way", for "yourself" with only yourself as judge and jury there is no doubt that you will make yourself happy.  But writing is a form or communication and except for very narrow reasons does not reach its highest form in writing to amuse yourself.

Good beta readers, editors and critiquers don't bland your voice out they help you find it and enhance it.  They make you a better writer.  If your writing is good enough to withstand some challenge it can get better.  If you think your writing is not fit for people to critique, or is perfect or sublime just because you wrote is and you don't think anyone should tell you to change a coma...then I suspect you are either writing for only yourself (which is fine I guess) or you are unrealistic in your assessment of your writing.

Good courageous writers recognize this fact and realize that the right input can make their writing better.  Much better.  Good writers embrace criticism, they don't adopt all of it but they certainly are not afraid of it.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Feb 21, 2016)

I admit I don't have time to read all the posts on this thread right now, so I'll be brief and promise to read them all later. I just wanted to add one thing, and hope it isn't already mentioned.

I have a lot of voices. When I wrote my zombie thriller modern work, I had a very short and snippy voice, because it suited the character.  He's a no-nonsense sort of guy and he's jaded and confused, pondering things as a thug might. I realized when I sent that chapter to two critters that it was a polarizing voice. One of my toughest critters told me to not change a thing, he loved every minute of the read, and the other told me it was okay, but would become tedious for him over the course of a novel. Well, shit. But at least I had a strong viewpoint, I guess I'll have to simply admit it isn't for every reader, right?

In my fantasy series, I tend toward a middle of the road voice. I try to state facts and use my character lens appropriately, but admittedly, the voice of the work is meant to be less styled after a feeling and more appropriate for each given scene of the work. As in--it's blander in a way, but in effect, less polarizing. Less particular and more "typical". I did that to appeal to a wider readership and to the fantasy genre that draws many different kinds of readers. I don't know whether that's been effective, but it was the choice I made. I'm still in there, but I've toned down my natural instinct to "cut to the chase".

Some of my short stories show off my voice more than my novels, and I've been contemplating why they feel so much more successful to me, and the main reason I credit my personal feeling of success on them are simply that I didn't care. I didn't have time to belabor things, change a bunch of things, or otherwise tamper with the writing because I had deadlines for challenges or word count restrictions. For me, as I chose to deal with only one character and show a small story through only one POV, I could settle fully on a style, tone, and voice without worrying about how many parts would feel mashed together. 

In short, some of my most successful voices were in stories I wrote in a hurry, in which I didn't overthink anything. And when I have a novel with multiple PsOV, I found it harder to distinctly create that feeling of individual voice for each character section because it could easily feel incongruent, as an overarching narrator voice took precedence to tie the whole book together. Basically, my talking voice took the front seat to the character's own voice, because I wasn't dealing with a single POV. 

My favorite voices were my Clichea entry, The Diablarist (published in the ezine), my 10th fantasy novel Warrior's Heart, and my MC in Written in Red, Daniela. Those were most successful because I was really in the character's heads. And while my voice changes from work to work, some POV characters just speak louder to me than others. I think really understanding your character helps with voice, even in paragraphs of exposition, because they include exactly what the character observes in their own unique way.

I love talking about voice, because enough can't be said about the positive effect of a great writer's voice. But it changes for every work for me, personally.


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Feb 21, 2016)

Nimue said:


> Wow, your tastes are so superior that they preclude an entire genre (...that you're trying to write in?).  Try Guy Gavriel Kay, Lois McMaster-Bujold, Steven Brust, and a little less generalization next time.
> 
> Edit: Sarah Micklem is also similar to Martin, low fantasy, and her writing is amazing.



Nope, my tastes aren't superior. Nor inferior, they are just my tastes. Most of every genre isn't very good, that's just my opinion. You can love or hate or disregard as much you like. It's a free world. I've read Salvatore books, and I see why they appeal to certain readers. Not just me.

I will stick to most (as I define most) fantasy not being all that good, I did not say all. I am certain there is plenty out there worth reading, I just don't take the effort to waste my time reading much these days. You are the one that stuck entire genre in my mouth, not me.


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Feb 21, 2016)

Russ said:


> I have a unique perspective on voice.  I do two or three discoveries a week (Americans call them depositions) so I get to see a transcript of the way I am speaking and the way my clients are speaking and get to read it.  I have also done this thousands of times now and read thousands of transcripts of me and others speaking.  It is a wonderful educational experience.
> 
> The first thing I will tell you is that you often don't speak the way you think you do.  I used to think I was speaking in a certain manner to convey things in a certain way and I wasn't doing it as well as I hoped to.  Reading those transcripts and consciously changing my way of speaking in discoveries (and in court) has been good for my career.



That sounds rather fascinating actually. I expect I speak just about as well as I expect I do.. very poorly, heh heh. I might discover it's even worse than I think... ewwww. I hope to heavens I write better than I speak, LOL. Reading my own transcripts might make me glue my mouth shut.

Readers are vital, I agree with that. Consider everybody's input, while realizing not every bit is right or wrong.


----------



## Chessie (Feb 21, 2016)

Russ said:


> That is why critique groups and editors etc are very valuable.  They are a real world check on whether or not you are communicating in the way you want to.  If you sit around and write "your way", for "yourself" with only yourself as judge and jury there is no doubt that you will make yourself happy.  But writing is a form or communication and except for very narrow reasons does not reach its highest form in writing to amuse yourself.
> 
> Good beta readers, editors and critiquers don't bland your voice out they help you find it and enhance it.  They make you a better writer.  If your writing is good enough to withstand some challenge it can get better.  *If you think your writing is not fit for people to critique, or is perfect or sublime just because you wrote is and you don't think anyone should tell you to change a coma...then I suspect you are either writing for only yourself (which is fine I guess) or you are unrealistic in your assessment of your writing.*
> 
> Good courageous writers recognize this fact and realize that the right input can make their writing better.  Much better.  Good writers embrace criticism, they don't adopt all of it but they certainly are not afraid of it.


I respect your perspective, Russ, and also the fact that you have some insight on what traditional publishers seek. However, I disagree with the statement in bold simply because that's totally not what I'm proposing. 

I did mention in my response to Skip that yes, feedback is important when starting out writing. Fresh into the game, we need to learn how to build the house, right? Or like the artistic kid that goes to college, learns how to hone their skills, and then continues painting with the knowledge they learned. I see crit groups in the same way. It's important to learn the structure of storytelling because there is such a thing. It's important to have your work read and edited before being sent to a publisher or putting it up on Amazon. Yes, this is a must.

However, I resent the fact that we writers who choose not to critique our work aren't courageous. LOL because I can't think of anything more courageous than putting my work out there for people to read and comment on! It's like baring my heart to the world! 

My critique group experiences have been tough, hella tough. I've cried. I've wanted to throw in the towel because I sucked. One of my harshest reviews was on this site and it left me emotionally wounded for weeks. That's okay. I picked myself back up and continued writing. I never quit. It takes grit to be in this business but we can't just say that because someone can't handle that they aren't being brave. 

The point is that there comes a time when, as artists, we have to let go of other people's opinions about our work if they aren't helping to get us anywhere. But that's not what this thread is about. It's about recognizing your own author voice. About honoring that. It's not about changing a sentence here and there or using proper grammar. It's about something that many other writers in critique groups don't even recognize in their own work! I'm not saying feedback isn't important, because it is. But I am saying that as we deepen our understanding of the craft we should trust ourselves more and it should be obvious to us what our voice is after years of practice. 

This thread wasn't meant as a way to get people past editors and betas. It's meant to help my fellow writers think about what their voice is/might be so that they can strengthen it through writing daily or often and have faith in themselves as artists.


----------



## Nimue (Feb 21, 2016)

Demesnedenoir said:


> I will stick to most (as I define most) fantasy not being all that good, I did not say all. I am certain there is plenty out there worth reading, I just don't take the effort to waste my time reading much these days. You are the one that stuck entire genre in my mouth, not me.



All right, not all fantasy, just everything except for Martin.  I hope you don't mind if I express some skepticism on judgment passed on the majority of fantasy fiction from someone who doesn't bother to read it?


On the actual discussion, though:  I guess I'm a little doubtful about glorifying voice for those folks who aren't yet professional or haven't been truly tested by their writing.  If, like CM or Chester, you've written many novels, I can see that you'd understand and be confident in your voice.  But for somebody like me or many others, with few unfinished projects under their belts and not much else, I think the advice to follow your heart might be a little misplaced.

My style right now, to be honest, is pretty rubbish.  There may very well be some Voice in there, but I think there's also an awful lot of bad habits, inexperience, laziness, and stuff I've talked myself into thinking sounds good. Spice with the occasional misused word.  

While it's nice to hear broad encouragement and all, I'm not sure if, in this case, for me, that's going to lead to the quickest progress.  Rather, I'd like to hear from people who've found their voice: how do you tell that from the bad habits, etc?  When and how have you decided to listen to your writing over the voices of critique, and has that paid off?  Is the answer literally just time and experience?  The "how you talk" angle doesn't quite ring true to me, because I talk very differently than I write, and that's probably a good thing, because otherwise my friends and coworkers would be completely justified in whacking me over the head.

Anyway.  Is there pragmatic advice for me, or do I just need to trust in practice and brain-fermentation?


----------



## Chessie (Feb 21, 2016)

Nimue said:


> Is the answer literally just time and experience?


Yes. This is the answer. Lots of writing practice. Lots of reading. Lots of learning through workshops, craft books, youtube videos, etc. Your voice is there now, you just have to hone it. And one day when you recognize it just stay true to it but keep learning. 

And by the way, the advice isn't to follow your heart. It is pretty concrete. Practice and learning and improving are the only things that have paid off for me, and continue to do so. Bad habits? Sloppy writing. Telling yourself that you'll rewrite that section later. Notice how CM said that her best work has come from not rewriting anything, from getting it right the first time. Imo, getting it right the first time is something that takes time to get used to, which is why you need to keep writing. 

EDIT: I wanted to add that you must finish your projects. Must. And what you learn from working on a specific project you then add to the next, and the next, etc. If you don't finish what you start then how can you write better work? Finishing is just as important as anything else, probably more so.


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Feb 21, 2016)

Nimue said:


> All right, not all fantasy, just everything except for Martin.  I hope you don't mind if I express some skepticism on judgment passed on the majority of fantasy fiction from someone who doesn't bother to read it?



You don't need to doubt my opinion, you should declare it wrong from your perspective or agree with it from your perspective. There is no need to be wishy washy. But at the same time, you can't claim it is truly wrong because it is... opinion, therefore neither of us is right or wrong in a pure sense. I'm only reading Martin now, I've read plenty over time. Some good, some not so good, mostly entertaining. Heck, I understand why people hate Martin, or hate Tolkien, or CS Lewis, Tad Williams, or you name it... even me! Gasp. Heck, I'd love to be hated by most of the fantasy lit world, it would mean they know my name, LOL. I also understand why people like Salvatore and all kinds of pulp fantasy from D&D... but I will continue to not be wishy washy, and potentially over-judgmental, and say that most of it isn't very good. 

I do flip through a lot of beginnings to fantasy books, they are most often disappointing, although when I get the time to actually sit and read instead of working on my own stuff, some of those you mentioned are on my short list of things to check out.


----------



## Nimue (Feb 21, 2016)

It's not wishy-washiness, it's sarcasm. xD I have my own overabundance of opinions, certainly don't worry yourself about that.  While I understand that from a practical perspective, "most books aren't good" is statistically correct as far as that kind of statement can go, the expression of that opinion seems far more likely to be aimed to rile or make a statement of superiority than to actually point to a dull truth.  If that really, really wasn't your intent, and your response was truly surprise and not defensiveness, you're something of an unusual breed for an online forum...

Those are genuine recommendations, though.  Kay and Micklem are probably closest to Martin--Tigana or Song for Arbonne for Kay, Firethorn for Micklem.  The last one has the additional similarity benefit of being an unfinished series that I have absolutely no idea where it's going.  None of those authors are actually one of my favorites, though (I've never cared to read past Game of Thrones), but McMaster-Bujold absolutely is.  The Chalion books for her, and Paladin of Souls absolutely.




> Notice how CM said that her best work has come from not rewriting anything, from getting it right the first time. Imo, getting it right the first time is something that takes time to get used to, which is why you need to keep writing.


This is the sort of conflicting advice, aimed at different people and different situations, that rubs me the wrong way, though.  Do you mean to say that no one should rewrite things, and that you can only ever work with your first draft?  Or just that after a certain point, you learn to write things correctly the first time?  Is, then, rewriting something the sign of a bad writer and weak writing, and how on earth can that be true, during the necessity of drafts and editing?  See, I always wonder in threads like this about what's observation of someone's personal experience and what actually is generalizable advice.  It can be confusing.



> EDIT: I wanted to add that you must finish your projects. Must. And what you learn from working on a specific project you then add to the next, and the next, etc. If you don't finish what you start then how can you write better work? Finishing is just as important as anything else, probably more so.


Okay, I understand the general application and goodness of this advice.  But quite frankly, the slavish devotion to finishing something is what trapped me in an awful, slagging project for the last four years.  At a certain point I no longer liked it, I no longer had a vision for it, and it was far, far too large in scope for me to plough through, but I continued to intermittently slap writing on it for a long time.  The second I put it down for good, I found a much, much better story that I am currently slicing through.  The old project literally made me depressed.  This one makes me happy.  Isn't that learning, too?

I might modify that advice to say: Finish what you write, and if you realize that you can't, write something you can finish.


----------



## psychotick (Feb 21, 2016)

Hi,

Just an aside - how to recognise your own voice? Get an editor. Then as they send you back their edited version of your draft sit there and think about evey change they make. Those changes that you can't make because they feel wrong to you are fairly much your voice. So for example they may hate run on sentences. You can't change them? That's because that's how it feels right to you - and that's your voice.

Cheers, Greg.


----------



## Chessie (Feb 21, 2016)

I'm not saying that rewriting is the sign of a bad writer. But I am saying that it destroys the original creative voice you put into that first draft in the first place. However, that's my opinion. I'm not alone in that opinion. But that's not what this thread is about, it's about trusting your own voice once you discover what that is.

If what I'm saying is rubbing you the wrong way, Nimue, then that's not something I have control over. I started this thread to get a good discussion going and help inspire others. Get people thinking about their own writing journeys. What works for you and I doesn't work for anyone else here. We're all different. I wouldn't spend 4 years on a novel and never have. I've never rewritten a book in my entire life. Still though, I've learned a lot and continue to do so. If you believe that rewriting has helped you learn, then that's awesome and I'm glad for you. But I'm trying to genuinely help others have more faith in themselves, not telling them to do things the way I have.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Feb 21, 2016)

I noticed practice is the best way to get it "righter" the first time, too. My Clichea entry isn't a style many folks probably love to read, but it works for a short.  it would be a terribly tedious read for a novel-length work, though. But that's why I loved it so much. It had a really distinct POV and the only reason I had the balls to do it was because it was probably the hundredth short story I wrote. I was secure in my decisions, though I know the writing style won't be palatable for a large amount of readers. 

When I look at other people's work, I feel more drawn into the stories that feature a strong POV. Simple as that. I'm less inspired and engaged by the typical "voice' most newer writers use, and indeed the one I use when I vanilla down my work into an edited copy. but the thing with that voice is that it will appeal to a wider variety of readers. The trick I think with using a more "normal" tone and voice is to then write creatively. Putting in deep POV details and letting the cleverness of the story and style shine through not only in the voice, but also in the choices we have to make as writers of what to include and what to omit. 

A middle of the road voice is simply the best choice for stories with multiple PsOV, in many cases, and i'm not one to argue that. If I wrote Written in Red with really strong viewpoints for each of the POV characters, I'd soon have a sloppy and confusing mess. Each chapter from Yvette would be heavily slanted to her jaded outlook. Each scene with Rafe would be broody and over-emotional, tinged with dread. Each Dani section would be comparatively light and self-centered. Vincenzo would bring too much dry contemplation. While I think it's fine to hint at each of those, going in with both barrels on every scene and hammering home each unique POV's intimate details would soon be an overkill. It might be great for each character, but the greater story would feel like a pit fight with no rules. If I instead tone down each POV so it sits comfortably within the scope of a more powerful narrator's interpretation, and merely give a respectful nod to each individual character, I hope it'll keep the work from appearing schizophrenic and unmanageable. 

I think in the case of this particular work, my goal needs to be in line with letting each character add their own spice, but gently remind them that we're all cooking the same pot of chili. If I don't watch each character and keep him in line, I'll soon have a tragic meal no one will want to eat. And since the goal of a work firstly needs to be palatable to a reader, I can't presume to delight anyone by giving the characters' voices top priority. I need to use my own voice as the narrator to accomplish what must be done, or this thing will get away from me. I have often compared this work with The Lies of Locke Lamora, which I think has a wonderful voice, but the main difference between the two is that I chose a deep third MPOV for my own story, and Scott Lynch chose an omniscient narrator. That alone allowed one voice to shine foremost, as he was the narrator, whereas in my story, each character is narrating their own scenes, but I have to be the driver with the reins in a way. SO yeah, I'd love to give each character voice more weight, but since there are no sections in which a narrator truly takes over in place of the characters, I don't have the same options. I guess by that i mean that in Lynch's book, whenever a scene is set, it's obviously told by a narrator. It isn't from Locke's POV when he opens with: "On the night Locke Lamora came to live under the hill..." That's all narrator. Whereas in my book, when I set a scene, it's directly through the perspective of the character entering the room. I suppose my book might be better from an omniscient POV, in a way, but I feel like using so many characters as the POV is the right choice because it segregates each scene more and keeps the intimacy I feel more confident in and more comfortable with. Basically, that choice I made because my story has a whole lot of secrets. I would find it terribly difficult to maintain the secrets if I were an omniscient narrator. Perhaps that's just because I lack Lunch's greater perspective and talent, but omniscience wasn't the right POV for me to take on this work. but I can see the benefits of using a single writerly voice and telling whatever needs to be told. 

Something I don't think a lot of newer writers give a lot of thought to is POV and how that affects voice. It's easy to understand the voice choices in FPOV, because you are seated perfectly squarely within only one POV for the length of a story, and a reader will expect the voice to belong to the character (as my favorite PsOV stories show: Clichea, A Winter to Remember (published in Iron Pen Anthology), and The Diablarist). In those, since they were FPOV and short stories, I only had a character voice to deal with. In Warrior's Heart, I have two main POV characters, a teenage boy and a teenage girl, and then I show a couple remote scenes from a narrator POV and those scenes are there only for reader benefit. I intentionally stepped away from a unique voice for those because they weren't part of my MCs' perspectives.

POV is a great factor in how your writer voice will translate the material appearing on the page. When you select a first person character narration, you can go in guns blazing, because we all know as the reader that we're in the one head. But as soon as you choose multiple PsOV, you have to try to mitigate the negative side-effects in a way, and I think the easiest way to keep a work from appearing confused to a reader, is to tone down your writer tone of voice and allow the characters a loose leash, still imparting their lens, but controlling it with one stronger writer voice that will keep the characters in line so the work can feel cohesive.

I hope that makes sense. I read a lot for other people, and I write a shit ton of my own stories, and the one thing I think sets great writing apart from good, is whether the writer has made strong POV choices and where those strong PsOV are tamed down just a touch to incorporate strong characters, but within the constraints of a single compelling story-telling voice, given solely by the narrator...in most cases just the writer conveying the tale. When that balance gets too skewed, it becomes a bit of a mess for the reader. 

On the other hand, I can say without question, that in the novel i mentioned, Written in Red, some of the scenes I got the most positive feedback on are the scenes in which I allowed the characters and their voices to shine a little brighter. So maybe I'm just talking out my ass and my decisions to vanilla down some of the other passages were the wrong choice.  I'm still learning, and editing is really hard work. Maybe I'll look back at this story in ten years and wonder what in the hell I was thinking, not using an omniscient narrator to tell the tale from 5 people's POV?


----------



## kennyc (Feb 22, 2016)

Heliotrope said:


> .....When Donald Maas speaks about author voice he states that a good author voice demands your attention in some way. You know when you are at a party and there is some one there who is just a great story teller? They can tell you all about their truck accident and it is hilarious and engaging and you want to drink beers with that person all night? Then you end up trapped with someone's old aunt who tries to tell you about her truck crash, but she is dry and boring and waffles around the details and keeps going on and on about her sore back? Author voice is like that. Engaging, demanding your attention. Standing tall and saying "I have a story to tell."
> 
> He says "it isn't words alone that do that, I find, but rather the outlook, opinions, details, delivery, and original perspectives that an author brings to his tale." (Fire in fiction, pg 130).
> ....



That's ONE writing book I don't have. LOL! Just checking it out on Amazon and am intrigued by the introduction where he talks about "Status Seekers vs Storytellers"

I guessing you would recommend reading this book? Did it provide you with additional information/tools/insight?

Thanks!


----------



## Heliotrope (Feb 22, 2016)

Yes, all of his books are really good, but that one was my favourite.


----------



## kennyc (Feb 22, 2016)

Heliotrope said:


> Yes, all of his books are really good, but that one was my favourite.



Thanks!
I'm gonna hold you to that!


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Feb 22, 2016)

kennyc said:


> That's ONE writing book I don't have. LOL! Just checking it out on Amazon and am intrigued by the introduction where he talks about "Status Seekers vs Storytellers"
> 
> I guessing you would recommend reading this book? Did it provide you with additional information/tools/insight?
> 
> Thanks!



I recommend the book, but it depends on if you have his others. In general it's useful. But I've heard, if you have all the others, it might get a bit repetitive. I didn't have the rest of his books, so found it good.


----------



## kennyc (Feb 22, 2016)

Demesnedenoir said:


> I recommend the book, but it depends on if you have his others. In general it's useful. But I've heard, if you have all the others, it might get a bit repetitive. I didn't have the rest of his books, so found it good.



Thanks. I know that repetitive thing way too much....so many of the 'how to write' books just parrot one another and single authors seem to cut and paste almost from one book to the next -- this can be particularly bad in those 'Writer's Digest Books' of which this is one and the impetus for my question.

For what it's worth, after many many years of pursuing this 'learning to write' thing I seem to have 2 or 3 favorite/best books at this point - The Making of a Story - Alice LaPlante, Reading like a Writer - Francine Prose, and Writing Fiction - Janet Burroway....


----------



## Russ (Feb 22, 2016)

kennyc said:


> Thanks. I know that repetitive thing way too much....so many of the 'how to write' books just parrot one another and single authors seem to cut and paste almost from one book to the next -- this can be particularly bad in those 'Writer's Digest Books' of which this is one and the impetus for my question.
> 
> For what it's worth, after many many years of pursuing this 'learning to write' thing I seem to have 2 or 3 favorite/best books at this point - The Making of a Story - Alice LaPlante, Reading like a Writer - Francine Prose, and Writing Fiction - Janet Burroway....



Donald is not the kind of guy who simply parrots or reflects the general market of "how to" books.  He is a thoughtful, well spoken guy with a very good track record of success.  I recommend his books as well.


----------



## Russ (Feb 22, 2016)

Chesterama said:


> I'm not saying that rewriting is the sign of a bad writer. *But I am saying that it destroys the original creative voice you put into that first draft in the first place. However, that's my opinion. I'm not alone in that opinion. But that's not what this thread is about, it's about trusting your own voice once you discover what that is.*
> 
> If what I'm saying is rubbing you the wrong way, Nimue, then that's not something I have control over. I started this thread to get a good discussion going and help inspire others. Get people thinking about their own writing journeys. What works for you and I doesn't work for anyone else here. We're all different. I wouldn't spend 4 years on a novel and never have. I've never rewritten a book in my entire life. Still though, I've learned a lot and continue to do so. If you believe that rewriting has helped you learn, then that's awesome and I'm glad for you. But I'm trying to genuinely help others have more faith in themselves, not telling them to do things the way I have.



I do agree with you that as a writer matures they often get a better handle on their own voice and that recognizing your own voice and making decisions about what you want your voice to be are very important things.  

But I do have to disagree with your approach about rewriting.

Firstly, good rewriting should not destroy your original creative voice that you try to project in the first draft, it should enhance it.  The presumption behind your position is that the first draft is the best and purest version of your voice possible.  I think that is simply incorrect.  The first draft is a raw product.  For virtually everyone it is not the best version possible of their work in voice or any other aspect.  Many pros call the first draft the "vommitt draft" and for good reason.  Many pros tell you the real work does not even begin until the first draft is done.

Now you say you are not alone in that opinion, but if I put you in a hall with a large number of working professional writers and you asked them if they adopt your approach to rewriting you would be very, very, very lonely indeed, perhaps alone.

People also talk like one's writing voice is something genetic or mystical and it is what it is and you have to "discover" it.  I am not sold on this either.  I think an inexperienced writer who does not have mastery of their skills and craft may find that they write or sound a certain way that can be called their voice. They may discover they have tendencies that can be called their voice. The question then becomes is that voice what they want?  Just because you have developed tendencies does not mean that they are good tendencies that make you a better writer. 

Voice can be developed and changed and improved.  I think the way that CM expresses the fact that she writes with different voices for different works shows a wise philosophy in this regard.  A writer's voice is not fixed and is just another tool in the story teller's toolbox.  Different voices work better with different stories, and a more developed writer can deploy more and better voices in their goal of writing a good story.

I am sorry you have had some bad experiences with critiquing, but I am a firm believer that a writer gets better by receiving thoughtful feedback and adopting the good parts of it.  I have owned some very crappy cars, but I have not given up on the automobile as a means of transportation.


----------



## Chessie (Feb 22, 2016)

Russ, I appreciate your opinion. However, I don't believe in the vomit draft. I edit as I go, meaning I write and cycle back to check the work, fix things, continue writing and cycle back only to do it over again. By the time I'm done my draft is the cleanest I can make it before it goes out to get checked by whoever is editing my work. You're assuming that I'm throwing paint on the canvas and calling crap good. Not at all. 

And no, I'm not alone in that view. Ever heard of pulp writers? They didn't have time to rewrite. I cheat on Mythic Scribes by hanging out on another site with professional writers...yes...the kind that make a living from their writing and the majority of them don't rewrite. True story.


----------



## kennyc (Feb 22, 2016)

Chesterama said:


> Russ, I appreciate your opinion. However, I don't believe in the vomit draft. I edit as I go, meaning I write and cycle back to check the work, fix things, continue writing and cycle back only to do it over again. By the time I'm done my draft is the cleanest I can make it before it goes out to get checked by whoever is editing my work. You're assuming that I'm throwing paint on the canvas and calling crap good. Not at all.
> 
> And no, I'm not alone in that view. Ever heard of pulp writers? They didn't have time to rewrite. I cheat on Mythic Scribes by hanging out on another site with professional writers...yes...the kind that make a living from their writing and the majority of them don't rewrite. True story.



And editing and re-writing are different things to me. Editing is changing/clarifying a draft or even a finished piece, whereas re-writing would be restarting completely from scratch and tell the same story in a different way, from a different perspective or point of view (i.e. completely changing the presentation).

Editing should not substantially change your voice/narration, though it could if done extensively. Re-Writing could completely change the voice. 

For me voice is not something inherently associated with an author, but with a story/narrator of that story. 

Sure some authors have an identifiable voice that they use over and over in story after story or novel after novel, but some so not and some parts of that voice might or might not be the same. 

And while this thread is not about it, style is another of those authory things that is difficult to define/identify as associated with an author or story and it is different than voice.


----------



## Russ (Feb 22, 2016)

Chesterama said:


> Russ, I appreciate your opinion. However, I don't believe in the vomit draft. I edit as I go, meaning I write and cycle back to check the work, fix things, continue writing and cycle back only to do it over again. By the time I'm done my draft is the cleanest I can make it before it goes out to get checked by whoever is editing my work. You're assuming that I'm throwing paint on the canvas and calling crap good. Not at all.
> 
> And no, I'm not alone in that view. Ever heard of pulp writers? They didn't have time to rewrite. I cheat on Mythic Scribes by hanging out on another site with professional writers...yes...the kind that make a living from their writing and the majority of them don't rewrite. True story.



Actually my favourite writer used to be a virtual king of pulp fiction, Michael Moorcock.  But pulp writing, such as it now still exists, is considered a lower standard of fiction and quality of writing.  There are a few exceptions but  most of that material was fairly exploitative and forgettable.  There are plenty of journalists who don't have time to do many drafts either, but that doesn't mean that their work is the best version it can be.  

I think if you took a survey of novelists today who make a living at writing, and ask how many don't rewrite or edit heavily you would find that they are a tiny minority.  In fact it sounds like you are doing virtually that, just not all in one go at the end.


----------



## Chessie (Feb 22, 2016)

Russ said:


> But pulp writing, such as it now still exists, is considered a lower standard of fiction and quality of writing.


And who gets to decide that? Readers? Because there are authors out there writing several novels a year and earning a living from it thanks to the support from their readership.

Let me clarify. To me, rewriting is moving things around in an existing manuscript. A few sentences or paragraphs here, a dialogue scene there, taking scenes in and out, putting new ones in, redoing an entire beginning, etc. Editing as I go is fixing typos, clarifying the narrative if even I'm having a hard time understanding it, fixing things my betas or critique partners point out, spelling, etc. I don't redo existing scenes, take things out, put new scenes in, none of that. I do, however, go back and add details in to enrich the setting since I tend to get straight to the point (bad habit) instead of giving readers something to chew on.

But I don't want to take the thread into a different direction than the original intention. All I can end with is this: everyone writes differently and we're all at different levels/goals in our craft. As I've said before, there is no way that I'm telling everyone to do it like this. From the beginning, I just wanted others to think about where they are in their craft and have faith in themselves. But of  course, things are never simple on the internet, are they?


----------



## Caged Maiden (Feb 22, 2016)

Okay, I've caught up with all the posts on the thread.





> Notice how CM said that her best work has come from not rewriting anything, from getting it right the first time. Imo, getting it right the first time is something that takes time to get used to, which is why you need to keep writing.





> This is the sort of conflicting advice, aimed at different people and different situations, that rubs me the wrong way, though. Do you mean to say that no one should rewrite things, and that you can only ever work with your first draft? Or just that after a certain point, you learn to write things correctly the first time? Is, then, rewriting something the sign of a bad writer and weak writing, and how on earth can that be true, during the necessity of drafts and editing? See, I always wonder in threads like this about what's observation of someone's personal experience and what actually is generalizable advice. It can be confusing.





Okay, I just wanted to address this, because I think there was a bit of miscommunication. What I meant to say was that my best "voice" came from work I didn't tamper with overmuch. I edit everything. Usually a short story will have three or four editing passes, but what I mean to say (because I don't want Nimue to get the wrong idea and be more confused), is that I don't care. I literally don't care like a crazy person cares about their novel. When I work on my novel, this is how my thought process goes:



> "Hm, this section with Yvette and Claudia attending the garden party looks good to me, but four betas have said it doesn't really draw them in. What could it be missing? What's going wrong?"
> 
> Later: "Okay, I've now put in more details about why they're there, jazzed up the dialogue so it's snappier and the rollercoaster really gains momentum quick and if that doesn't snap a reader's neck, I don't know what will."
> 
> ...



Okay, so that's a glimpse of crazy. Here's the exact editing process I undertook for Clichea:



> Sent a half-written draft to my writing friend who has a certain tolerance for a belabored, thesaurus-pounding version of story-telling, the perfect person to read the very atypical example of my writing. I didn't think many people would like the way I used big words and twisted the cold and calculating POV into something so self-serving and animalistic (I mean, it was a dragon, after all). So I sent it to this one person and asked what he thought, because it was half finished and I wanted a quick opinion on whether I was headed in the right direction. Here were his comments:
> 
> "I think the idea for the Clichea challenge is about using the world as a prompt. You had a lot of mentions of places, but you didn't use them in a meaningful way. Maybe you want to do that?"
> 
> ...



And that was it. No rounds of betas. No worrying whether I had all the important background information spelled out in notebooks. It was a short story, and I didn't care. That's not to say I didn't do my best. I absolutely did my best. I gave it a few passes of my best, and I decided on a unique voice and a belabored way of expressing the dragon's thoughts, as if it thought itself a terribly complex and interesting individual, and I just owned that. 

When i look at my novels, I overcomplicate the writing and especially the editing to an extreme degree. It's easy to do. Multiple main settings in two discrete worlds (city and country), two distinct stories bridged with a single character caught between two lives, themes that carry throughout 150k words? Forty-two chapters, five POV characters, a failing marriage, a plot to convict the religious leader of the republic of treason, a murdered son, a murdered neighbor, a selfish girl who lies to get what she wants and thinks herself terribly clever? Holy crap, it's so much more than a hungry dragon with a self-importance problem and a paranoia that the humans will run out and it'll have to start working for food.

And that's what I suppose I meant. I didn't care about the dragon (though I love the story, now). I didn't care about its world, or the details, because I could make anything up on the fly that I wanted. It was only a challenge, a game. If the voice was haughty and polarizing, all the better, because some folks will love it (like me) and some folks will hate it, but i'm only making them sit through it for about ten minutes. So not true with my 150k word novel. Or my fantasy series. With those, I have to give careful thought to how I present information and how I use my writer's voice. I have to create a comfortable environment for a potential reader. 

Some folks think that a novel would be a great place to wow a reader with one's creative visuals of their extremely detailed and unusual world. Or to impress a reader with how hard they can hit with the thesaurus. Or that it's an opportunity to show how clever one is in creating their own fantasy language, or making characters that are so unique no one's ever seen anything like them before, or that great writing is choosing shocking subjects and showing them in vivid detail (how many of those threads appear on this site?). But great writing (to me), is nothing more than practicing with the microscope and the telescope, getting really good at determining what to show big and what to show small, and then showing it in a way that it's obvious to the reader it has passed through the character filter.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Feb 22, 2016)

If you (not anyone specifically, just a general "you") don't have a lot of work written, it's harder to understand the full spectrum of what you can be capable of. For example, I never knew what existed until I started competing in challenges here. When you write something like thirty or forty shorts in a year, you quickly become bored with yourself and your tool box if all you do is pick a bounty hunter on the trail of a unicorn molester (I got handed that prompt, not from my mind), a soul-collector who talks to ravens, an ex-pirate who uses his crew to sink ships, a thief looking for a stolen jewel, a treasure hunter who tries to outsmart a goddess. You start to do weird things, to keep yourself interested in what you're doing. A non-believer tasked with returning the gods to the world, Odin's raven's brother is missing and their master is afraid Ragnarok has begun, a story written in reverse order, inanimate objects as POV characters, stories that are unrelated but share themes and sort of tell a bigger story, a collaborative world project with a friend or on a forum, etc. an so on. 

Every time you do something you "don't care about," you have this amazing opportunity to get so much better, because you aren't hemming and hawing over every little thing. You just write it, experiment, and if it doesn't work out, you get over it in like two seconds, and go on to the next thing. With novels that we have dreamed up big and then did a bunch of background on, fell in love with, or have been writing for years, the luxury of not caring simply doesn't exist. And that's why it's so hard to get better at it.

One more little anecdote before I run. There was a woman in Britain that my friend told me about as we were talking about our own journeys (mine was that I wrote 100k words in 8 weeks, and it was crap beyond crap, and technically, I still haven't edited it and have spent too much time working on it, but it's my REAL learning project, so whatever). Anyways, this woman had an idea for a novel. She spent some years writing it, and then she decided to be a career writer. She quit her job and stayed home, learning all she could about writing and working on her novel, and striving toward her goal of being a self-sufficient writer. 

It took twelve years to reach her goal, but in the end, she was a published author. She had written her book and it was complete, and it found a publisher, and she had met her goal. 

But...it took twelve years and she had one finished novel. If that was time well spent...well...I don't even have an analogy because I'm so blown away with the thought of it. Technically, I wrote my first book in 2001. But you have to understand, I wrote it because I hated my job. I had to fill the long hours at a car dealership while we waited for clients. I wrote to stop from slitting my wrists from boredom and to avoid talking with the sharks I shared an office with. And for about six years, I wrote for fun, churning out about 100k-125k word novels every year, not worrying about a darn thing, just having fun. When I had eight novels "finished", I thought maybe some of them were good enough to think about sharing. I joined up here in 2011, when I had ten books done, and I had changed course, from a hobby writer who entertained herself while staying at home and writing during baby nap times, to a person who genuinely wanted to learn about the craft and see if she had what it takes. 

And holy crap, I'm not sure I do! It's darn hard, writing and editing, and staying on track, and churning out words. It can be soul-crushing when you're tired and just need a solution to your plot problem. It can be exhausting when you've sent a six-month revision to your betas and they still complain about all the same things as the first round reads and you just want to bash your skull in with your laptop and quit forever. This is a hard task to accomplish for any normal person (not taking those asshole prodigies into account). And practice is the only way to get good at it, and practice isn't rewriting the same material, because it doesn't get you to stop caring. What it does, is makes you care even more, to a crazy level. And you become that woman with 12 years on one novel, rather than a person who has 12 novels in 12 years, and the first four are complete garbage, but the last three or four are pretty good, and the middle ones are perhaps salvageable. The thing is, when you look at those two people (and no, I'm not advocating doing this the way I did, because I recognize I knew ABSOLUTELY nothing about writing when I began, and I've had to overcome a huge amount of challenges as the horse that got stuck in the gate, so don't be like me, be better than me), if you look at those two scenarios, the person who will have gotten more out of their journey, is the one who wrote more. Took more risks. Experimented with different types of characters. Etc. etc. etc. More writing=better odds of getting good, being publishable, and overall feeling successful for the time vs. output equation. 

Writer voice is one of those things that comes easier when you try using a flea as your POV character (told you it got weird). Or you write a really jealous brother. Or a wolf allowed to participate in his pack's spiritual tradition for the first time. Or a hungry asexual agender sea dragon because you couldn't decide whether to make it male or female based on its voice. I think when I start writing shorts, it's so easy to pick a voice, because all I usually have is a snippet of character concept and a voice. No world, no background. Just the here and now of what I need to accomplish, and short story writing forces you to get into a head fast and make every word count. I was just talking with a trusted writing partner about this the other day, about how much I suck at beginnings. Why can't novels be as easy as short stories? It's so frustrating, but often the beginning is where you have to make your choices for your voice, and it's glaringly obvious when you edit into a polished draft, that you've dropped the ball in that department. And I have. And beginnings can bite my butt. 

Best wishes to all those who are trying to find their voice. I know critique isn't the easiest thing to do if you have had bad experiences with it, but I'd encourage everyone to try it again if they can benefit from it. When i read for my partners, I totally have their voice in mind and every suggestion I make contains my best attempts to preserve their voice while also accomplishing what I think needs to be accomplished. Not all crit partners will insert themselves into their suggestions. I mentioned this in my Critique How-To article. A good critique partner will tell you what can be improved, a great critique partner will help you pick out missed opportunities. The only way you can get a partner like that is by fostering a relationship and finding someone who shares your commitment level. But if you can find one, they'll help you to improve your voice and make it into a centerpiece on the dining table of your novel. not everyone wants a huge floral centerpiece. Maybe your novel needs an antler centerpiece, or a lantern made with soy candles and recycled paper. Each novel needs its own thing, and great crit partners will help you to move toward YOUR goal and in YOUR voice. Here's some of my comments I've made: "You have such a knack for descriptions that are short and sweet, and this paragraph feels jarring in the way it meanders and doesn't say much. Is that a choice you made for a reason?" OR, "...a sound like a dozen dogs running on a hardwood floor...I really felt this metaphor described a sound I could immediately picture, and the words you chose to use SO convey to me the life experiences of the POV boy. Awesome." Look for crit partners or groups that understand voice as you understand it. It doesn't do anyone any good if you don't mesh with the group. And don't feel like you ever have to frequent a group that doesn't share your ideals. There are online forums like this one where people can meet or begin groups. You are never limited by geography in the internet world.

Hope my very long rambling might help someone who is struggling to find their voice. This took me like two hours to write.


----------



## Russ (Feb 22, 2016)

Chesterama said:


> And who gets to decide that? Readers? Because there are authors out there writing several novels a year and earning a living from it thanks to the support from their readership.
> 
> Let me clarify. To me, rewriting is moving things around in an existing manuscript. A few sentences or paragraphs here, a dialogue scene there, taking scenes in and out, putting new ones in, redoing an entire beginning, etc. Editing as I go is fixing typos, clarifying the narrative if even I'm having a hard time understanding it, fixing things my betas or critique partners point out, spelling, etc. I don't redo existing scenes, take things out, put new scenes in, none of that. I do, however, go back and add details in to enrich the setting since I tend to get straight to the point (bad habit) instead of giving readers something to chew on.
> 
> But I don't want to take the thread into a different direction than the original intention. All I can end with is this: everyone writes differently and we're all at different levels/goals in our craft. As I've said before, there is no way that I'm telling everyone to do it like this. From the beginning, I just wanted others to think about where they are in their craft and have faith in themselves. But of  course, things are never simple on the internet, are they?



I say "pulps" are generally an inferior form because that term refers to a period in literary history and a certain type of writing and publishing that via many decades of study, reflection and consideration has been adjudged to be an inferior or mass production form with little focus on quality.  If you mean something different by the word "pulp" than I am happy to consider it differently, but pulp fiction is a term with a meaning.

There is no doubt there are people making a living putting out several books a year with minimal editing.  I think the place where you see this the most is category romance.  I have a friend you raised her children by banging out 4-6 category fiction books a year.  But it is not that person's best work, nor do I think it is for the other authors.

Everybody does write differently and have different goals.  I have many times on this site expressed how difficult it is to give people writing advice without them clearly articulating their goals. Until they tell me otherwise (like someone who says they are writing a world for their RP campaign or some different form) I operate on the assumption that people are striving to do their best work that will someday be destined for the consumption of others.

I would suggest that the level of editing you have adopted is "lighter" than most successful novelists publishing these days.

And from time to time we all give our opinions about the path to writing success.  Even this might fit that category:



> First off, it takes practice. Years of practice.* Sorry. A lot of beginning writers don't like to hear this crap.* I can't tell you how many wannabe writers have told me that they just write when they're inspired. They don't try to improve. They don't make writing a habit. Well, all of our writing goals are different, right? Some of us want to sell big time. Some of us just care that a few people read our work. Others of us want big publishing contracts and thousands of fans. It doesn't matter what your goals in the writing business or not are─what matters is that we improve with every manuscript we finish. And how do we do that? Practice.
> 
> Write daily or write often. There's no way around that.



I am not sure if nothing is simple on the internet, but I am quite convinced nothing is simple in the field of writing!


----------



## Chessie (Feb 22, 2016)

Caged Maiden said:


> If you (not anyone specifically, just a general "you") don't have a lot of work written, it's harder to understand the full spectrum of what you can be capable of.


This +1. I'm really glad you mentioned it.


----------



## Velka (Feb 22, 2016)

I've read, and skimmed over this thread, and the thing that stuck out was the blurring of lines between character's voice and writer's voice/style.

I'm still discovering my writer's voice, but there are a few characteristics of it that I have identified: prose teetering on the edge of purple, poetics, and lots of dialogue. It's just how I write and tell a story. I also believe, feel free to disagree, that a writer's voice is closer to an innate trait. It's how I speak and how my imagination works and how I naturally put words together to create meaning. 

I believe a writer's voice can change organically, much in the same way as my cousin, from Canada, now has a natural sounding British accent after living in London for almost 20 years. I don't believe it is something that can be forced, or even should be, as it would sound off-key and inauthentic (like faking a British accent). I've refined my voice over the years; scraping off unnecessary adjectives here and there for clarity's sake, balancing my love of assonance and alliteration because, while they make me rosy, they usually don't add much to the story. Could I ever assume Faulkner's stream of consciousness voice and make it work? Heaven's no, I don't think like that or tell stories that way.

Character voice is much more malleable. To me, it's putting the reader into the character's mind as they speak and act, a mind presented in a precise, deliberate, and unique way. Different characters have different minds/lives and therefore different voices. This is where you can play with nuance and performance.

If you look at Hemingway as an obvious example, he has a very distinct writer's voice: clear, unadorned, a lesson in brevity and journalistic detachment. His characters, however, all have their own voices within the canopy of his writer's voice. Some are longing and nostalgic, some are subversive and flippant, some are tender and wounded, but all of them are presented with their own identities within his particular style.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Feb 22, 2016)

So when I began writing, way back in 2001, as a bored-stupid car salesperson at the shittiest dealership on the highway, I had no voice. OMG, I still have a transcript of that horrible novel--printed out on a home printer or something and slammed into a 3-ring binder. The funniest part is that a few years later, I opened it up at some point, evidently, because there are red pen marks in the margins of the single-spaced tragedy. HA! As if a red pen could make  dent in the awfulness of what exists on those pages! What was I thinking?

If I had to sum up the "voice" of the manuscript, I'd place it squarely between my 10th grade geometry teacher (in whose class I would fall asleep about every day...that is when I didn't skip it entirely), and a pretentious fourth grader who thinks he's cleverer than his teacher. It's really a travesty, and it wasn't my intent to sound clever or be cheeky, or dull for that matter. I simply didn't understand what story-telling was. I tried to tell a story I thought was interesting, through the POV of a character I felt was unique and compelling, but OH HOW WRONG I WAS! and honestly, I've participated in a number of challenges, critique groups, critters.org, scribophile, and so on, and I've read hundreds of manuscripts for shorts and novel-length works, and I've read my pile of refuse locked in the cabinet of my "Misc. Writing" folder on my computer, and all I can say is that even with experience, and having a good solid understanding of what we like and don't like when we read it...we can still get it OH SO WRONG at times. 

That's why I say I'm still learning. I'll always be learning. I may have some skills pretty, but I have many more that are rusty, greasy, or otherwise unfit for showing off. I think the main point of experimenting with voice is to test limits. If all a writer ever does is write one fantasy novel in their best attempt at say, a Tolkein style, and then they rework that one thing, the voice can get muddled in revision. If their next three attempts to complete work is merely turning that work into a trilogy and an appendix for their series, or whatever, they never really get to test their own limits. 

In the challenges here, I took it as an invitation to do weird stuff. Maybe because of who my friends were at the time and still, or maybe because I get easily bored and can't do the same thing for any amount of time without either quitting or taking it to some other place. But anyways, I would encourage everyone who feels like they're actively seeking a voice, to step away from any work that's been their main focus, and do something completely different. In fact, since we're talking about reinvigorating the challenge section, I'm recalling my last big challenge I hosted, in which I asked my competitors to rewrite a single passage in a different style. It was really awesome to see folks stretch their comfort level so far, and I couldn't be prouder of what they produced. 

Want to know more about your voice? Do something weird. Then follow that up with something else weird that goes in a completely different direction. Then find a person you trust to read them both and see what they think. Ask how the tone and voice of the pieces affected your reader. You might be surprised at the responses you get! I had a serious self-loathing for my repeated failures as a newbie writer about three or four years ago. I didn't like anything I produced and didn't have any confidence. Just a pile of shit I had written but felt no pride in. Anyways, one of my long-standing crit partners, a guy who has supported me relentlessly for four years, told me one day, "Hey, I don't really think this fist fight worked (or something to that effect). Since you're so good at character interactions and dialogue, why don't you turn this into an argument instead?" And I was like, "Wha??? I'm GOOD at something?" It was a really eye-opening moment. Voice comes out best when you're good at something, when you aren't constantly worrying about whether you performed well as a dancing monkey. When you feel in your element. When you don't worry about stuff and simply let yourself go a little. 

Ok, I'll be back for more later, because I love this subject. I've got eat, though.


----------



## SteveW (Feb 23, 2016)

I still remember the first novel I wrote. If you thought yours was awful, Caged Maiden, you should try mine.  I hardly bothered with characterisation beyond "He's an angry man" or "She wants to do this or that", I introduced places or groups because I thought they were cool without thinking how they would actually fit in with the world I (thought I) had built. And I blatantly stole ideas from series like ASOIAF and Wheel of Time. I wouldn't inflict the reading of that on my worst enemy.

Since then I would like to think I have matured as a writer, though that remains to be seen. In terms of voice, I have found a way to write that works for me. I have started different stories, in different kinds of worlds and cities, but I have noticed that my structuring of sentence and paragraphs has remained pretty steady in general. An early critique partner I had told me I am significantly better at dialogue than I am at action scenes, so I have worked hard to improve my dramatic writing while at the same time acknowledging that I am stronger at character-based stories. The one I'm working on now is very much character-driven rather than action.

So I guess I'm just repeating what others have said - try different styles and voices until you find one that fits you, then just work at making that one as good as you can.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Feb 23, 2016)

Oh man, Steve, as much as this sounds like a challenge to out-awful each other, all I have of mine is paper in a binder, so I can't even show the dreadfulness. Well the only solution is to call us both winners here and now, because we're able to recognize the tragicness of those early works and have risen above their torturousness. Well done! We might want to keep these manuscripts a secret tightly hidden behind lock and key, lest we be called upon in the future to release them in a tide of pain upon those who deserve public punishment. In fact, that's not a bad idea. Agents are constantly bogged down in slush pile reading, right? I say we turn America's penal system (I see you're from England, but they don't have enough criminals there to my understanding to properly undertake this task) and turn the incarcerated into slush pile readers! Not only will repeat offenders decrease, but those poor downtrodden souls will be preforming a valuable service--reading horrible manuscripts until their eyes bleed and they adopt more socially acceptable behaviors. 



> "That's it, asshat! You're going to solitary to do some reading."
> 
> "No, please! Have a heart, warden. I won't mess up again. I'll be on my best behavior from now on, promise."
> 
> ...




Yeah, and rather than waterboarding, which has apparently outlived its usefulness (since I'm not really up on my modern torture methods), we can sell those first manuscripts to the CIA for use in domestic terrorism interrogations.



> "You sure you don't know who is planning to bomb the federal building? Smith, hand me back that manuscript. A few more hours of reading Caged Maiden's first book ought to loosen this sorry sucker's lips..."
> 
> "Sir, do you think he can take any more? He's green around the gills and looks to be in shock already."
> 
> ...



P.S. Like my post if you think your first novel is awful like mine and it might as well be a torture device!


----------



## Ireth (Feb 23, 2016)

Caged Maiden said:


> P.S. Like my post if you think your first novel is awful like mine and it might as well be a torture device!



This is giving me flashbacks to the first novel I tried to write, back when I was still using our parents' desktop PC rather than a laptop of my own. It was the most cliche-ridden thing I've ever conceived. Let's make a list... bearing in mind that I only ever got to chapter four in the actual writing process; the rest is just how I'd planned it out.

> Two kingdoms at war; the "good" kingdom was ruled by a white family, the "evil" kingdom by a POC family
> Heir to each respective throne is a Chosen One, destined to come together and save their kingdoms from disaster by fighting to the death on the day of an impending solar eclipse
> "Good" CO, Corin, is not only white, but albino, and ostracized for looking weird
> "Evil" CO, Nedara, has an abusive uncle (the king), and her aunt sends her away from him in secret
> Corin and Nedara each wield a sentient magical weapon (Corin has a shield, while Nedara has a sword) for use in saving the world
> said shield and sword are imbibed with the souls of the two who first began the conflict between the two kingdoms; they haven't been in each other's vicinity for hundreds of years and thus have a lot of emotional baggage to work out
> Corin and Nedara inevitably fall in love throughout the course of the book
> when the fight to the death arrives, both refuse to kill each other and instead want to get married and join their kingdoms to prevent more war; the souls within the sentient sword and shield likewise work out their differences and are freed from the weapons

I mean, yeah, there's some salvageable stuff in there, but _really._ My favorite part of the story was the fact that the son of the "evil" king and queen (Nedara's cousin) was actually a bastard but didn't know it, so everyone (including him) thought he was the heir to the throne until he found out and did not take it well at all. I still have this creepy mental image of the poor guy lying on his bed, with the equivalent term for "BASTARD" carved into his leg by his own hand. *shudder*


----------



## FifthView (Feb 23, 2016)

Ireth, that's really not so bad, in bullet form, but as usual, so much would depend on execution.

The white/POC thing might have to go, though.


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Feb 23, 2016)

Ireth said:


> This is giving me flashbacks to the first novel I tried to write, back when I was still using our parents' desktop PC rather than a laptop of my own. It was the most cliche-ridden thing I've ever conceived. Let's make a list... bearing in mind that I only ever got to chapter four in the actual writing process; the rest is just how I'd planned it out.



Young pup! You had a hard drive! LOL. One of the few kindnesses of being old is that my first novel in high school is long lost, except perhaps a hidden hard copy... somewhere. I'm quite certain it was a masterpiece, if only it could be found, heh heh.


----------



## Ireth (Feb 23, 2016)

Demesnedenoir said:


> Young pup! You had a hard drive! LOL. One of the few kindnesses of being old is that my first novel in high school is long lost, except perhaps a hidden hard copy... somewhere. I'm quite certain it was a masterpiece, if only it could be found, heh heh.



Indeed. XD Sadly, that old PC died long ago, so whatever progress I've made on that story is lost too. I do recall printing out the first four chapters or so, but those have been gone for a long while as well.


----------



## Nimue (Feb 23, 2016)

First novel--if you want to call it that, I'm not sure of the word count, it was very short but it was finished, so something intended to resemble a novel?--was about a magical school, the main character had pretty white hair and pretty white wings and fought some kind of balrog-type race?  Jesus Christ, it was the absolute worst, pure boiled cliche, and I'm pretty sure it made no sense at all.  I was eleven, though, which is an unfortunate age.  Eleven-year-olds probably can't be prosecuted for crimes against literature.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Feb 23, 2016)

AHAHA! See now, aren't we all working on our voices? What progress we've made!


----------



## Heliotrope (Feb 23, 2016)

Mine was a fanfic of Luthien Tinuveil.... So basically just copying JRRT's voice. 

Had some nice poems though....


----------



## Chessie (Feb 23, 2016)

Mine wasn't even fantasy. It was a Renaissance style romance set in Florence. I wrote it at 17 and sent it off to a lengthy list of agents and publishers. We all know how that ended.  I did write a lot of shorts before that, since grade school but my first actual book was that one and it was freaking terrible.

I still remember my parents sleeping with the printer going off one night while the manuscript printed.


----------



## Ireth (Feb 23, 2016)

Heliotrope said:


> Mine was a fanfic of Luthien Tinuveil.... So basically just copying JRRT's voice.
> 
> Had some nice poems though....



Oh, if we're talking fanfic... oy vey. My first fics (thankfully, long since lost to the depths of cyberspace) were a Pokemon fic about Mewtwo, and a LOTR fic starring my first Mary Sue. She was an amnesiac elf-maiden named Erial, who washed up randomly on the shores of the Bruinen, wound up being adopted by Elrond, and joined the Fellowship with him. She had the power to create illusions, kinda along the lines of Luthien or Finrod. I don't recall much about what happened to her, but Elrond wound up joining Frodo and Sam at Mount Doom where they destroyed the Ring. And one of his sons later attempted suicide for some reason I can't recall. And the whole thing was chock-full of completely gratuitous songs (and not original songs, mind you; actual songs written by actual singers with actual albums and stuff). Oh, and Elrond's twin brother Elros was immortal and a captive in Moria, for some reason. Yeah.

It also spawned a sequel, which was if possible even worse. The three Ring-keepers were summoned back to Arda about ten years after sailing to Valinor, because Elros had turned evil and was trying to control the world like Sauron and Saruman before him. Other disjointed plot elements that I barely remember include:
> Elros kidnapping Denethor and holding him prisoner in Isengard
> Grima being a good guy and teaming up with Elrond to help free Denethor
> Elrond's mother also returning to Arda to help fight evil
> an evil Faramir almost burning Galadriel at the stake for being an "elf-witch"
> Pippin and Erial saving Galadriel from the aforesaid burning
> something about the Eagles?

Thankfully, that one died before I could finish it. (Technically so did the original, because I started the sequel when I thought I had the original all planned out but never got to finish writing it. My muse was very wise to abandon me.)

I am cringing in shame just remembering all this. My word.


----------



## Nimue (Feb 23, 2016)

I found it.  For some godforsaken reason I got the password right on the tenth try.



> On the winding granite shod path leading to the Meinerass, Palace of Yiridcont, the silver hooves of a solitary horse clicked softly.  Soon the horse and rider came into view.  The horse was fresh and not sweating, despite the twenty-mile ride to Meinerass.  The horse, White Starlight, was strong, white, and had a silver mane and tail and a capacity to run at breakneck speeds.  The rider will take more time to explain.



Now there's a stonking great argument against omniscient openings.  I'm not even making these names up.  Mein ass indeed.  The main character is named _Alluviia_ because I read the phrase _alluvial plain_ which is a type of _silt deposit_ and I don't even know anymore.

I couldn't make it further than the first page.  Looks like it was only 16k, so definitely not a novel.  I'm going to run crying to my current manuscript and try to reassure myself that at least I now know that pATHS CAN'T BE SHOD THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.


----------



## Ireth (Feb 23, 2016)

Nimue said:


> I found it.  For some godforsaken reason I got the password right on the tenth try.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I am so sorry that I'm all out of thanks to give. That... that just... wow.


----------



## Nimue (Feb 23, 2016)

The worst part is that I made people read it.  I think it was just immediate family, but still.  Pretty soon after that I began the stage of never showing anything to anyone, which must have really been a blessing.


----------



## Velka (Feb 23, 2016)

> On the winding granite shod path leading to the Meinerass, Palace of Yiridcont, the silver hooves of a solitary horse clicked softly. Soon the horse and rider came into view. The horse was fresh and not sweating, despite the twenty-mile ride to Meinerass. The horse, White Starlight, was strong, white, and had a silver mane and tail and a capacity to run at breakneck speeds. The rider will take more time to explain.



Urrggghhh, this is so making me wish I kept my tween/teen journals. This could have been a page torn from one.


----------



## Heliotrope (Feb 23, 2016)

^^^^^^^ for me too. 

I burned all my journals and poetry when I lost my brain at 14. So sad. It would have been just like that.


----------



## Nimue (Feb 23, 2016)

Unfortunately, I have almost all of my old, old writing.  Like, since age 7.  A few stories were journal-based, but I grew up typing them out.  So it's all accumulated and haunting my hard-drive as we speak.  At least fire is a pretty good exorcism...


----------



## Ireth (Feb 23, 2016)

Nimue said:


> Unfortunately, I have almost all of my old, old writing.  Like, since age 7.  A few stories were journal-based, but I grew up typing them out.  So it's all accumulated and haunting my hard-drive as we speak.  At least fire is a pretty good exorcism...



I have the original copy of the very first story I ever wrote, back when I was six. Dad found it when he was cleaning out the basement a few weeks ago. I have it in my bedroom for nostalgia's sake. XD


----------



## Caged Maiden (Feb 24, 2016)

Oh man you guys...don't make me pull out the binder. You've been warned. Reading that book might just be like taking up bulimia as a hobby... 

And thanks for sharing, folks. I know we're laughing at ourselves right now, but I'd just like to point out how much we've grown, to even be able to share the beginnings of our beloved pursuit. High fives all around to anyone brave enough to laugh at their first work. There shall not be shame in acknowledging where we came from. These first works are like our werewolf battle scars--part of proving ourselves capable and earning a proper place in the pack. Some of us might be a little gnarlier than others, but if we were standing back, having a gander around the room at each other, I'd like to think we'd not look at these battle scars as, "Holy crap, dude, you got beat all to hell, didn't you?" But we'd say, "That one looks like it still smarts, friend. You must really be a survivor, to have come out of it alive. Good for you!"

Never give up, never surrender!

I'll wear every one of my scars like a badge of honor. They made me stronger (though that growth process might have been a touch slower than I would have preferred), and I'm more cunning, more clever, and more prepared than I ever was in my youth. In sticking with my werewolf image (because I can't think of any other creature right now that is proud of battle scars), I really do need a whole pack to test myself and to count on when I'm down and don't think I can get back up. And you scribes are it. You're my companions who commiserate, my feedback friends, and my amazingly talented allies (of alliteration, it appears, or maybe I just got bit earlier by Incanus' bug?). 

I know this thread is about voice, but I love how it organically grew into the beginnings of our writerly voices, and then the present, where we have limitless opportunity to continue to improve our skills. I'd almost like to see a side-by-side of our first "voices" and the current example of how we use a voice in our work. I don't want to hijack the thread, but since we have some challenges in the works, I might have to take this inspiration and make a voice challenge in some similar way. Like show your first work's voice and then your current voice, and then write a short story and send them all to me in email, and I'll post them all up as entries, and members can try to guess who wrote which, based on voice alone.  I'll have to think about that and whether it's possible.

Until then, keep owning your past and know that what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. And it looks like we're all survivors, though it appears some of us had a close call or two 

Wolfs Rain least of my kind - YouTube


----------

