Voice? How and how much?

[Jabrosky]

Going back to the whole rules discussion, I don't think there's any disagreement here that the English language has certain conventions that every competent writer must acknowledge and respect, even if they defy those conventions once in a while. What I believe is causing the real tension here is confusion between genuine grammatical rules and stylistic preferences.

Additional comments removed by moderator.

 

[Ankari]

This debate was never meant to be specific. In fact, I am one of BWFoster's beta readers, and he is mine. I value his input, and continuously seek his feedback whenever I have something new. He has made me a better writer.

This is where BWFoster and I agree. In the end, it is up to the writer to determine whether the advice given is applicable to his style of writing. Writing is the freest form of expression. No one can make you do what you don't want to do.

My argument isn't meant to destroy conventional ways of beta reading, it's meant to have us consider our true understanding of our mastery, and whether we are capable of achieving the next level in our craft by doing exactly what Feo suggested. To b e able to understand the voice/narrative/tone/theme of another writer is an achievement that places an individual on another level. To be able to write in that voice/narrative/tone/theme is when someone becomes a master of the craft.

Let us return to the debate, and stay away from specifics.

 

[Chessie]

Going back to the OP, I do think that although cleaner writing strengthens a piece, there is a chance to draw away from voice. Do I think of my voice as a writer when I'm typing my stories? Not really. I prefer style, which comes through in the setting, plot, characters, etc that I create. Stylistic choice seems the more defining term. Perhaps voice and style are the same thing to some people. Our styles can' t be taken away by cleaner writing, but they can be improved so others understand our intentions with story more clearly. Plus most of us here write fantasy so what we choose to put in our worlds and stories stand out.

 

[Helen]

I haven't read the whole thread. I just hope someone's mentioned theme.

the more active and efficient your prose is, the less room there is for narrative voice

I think it's the opposite. The more efficient, the more narrative voice.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

I think it's the opposite. The more efficient, the more narrative voice.

It can go either way, I'd say, as long as there is consistency. Maybe that's what you meant by theme?

Efficient, lean writing can be one component of voice. The same could be said for a more elaborate style. Neither defines voice. They are merely additive bits of the greater whole.

 

[Helen]

Maybe that's what you meant by theme?

Efficient, lean writing can be one component of voice. The same could be said for a more elaborate style. Neither defines voice.

Voice is a function of theme.

Language, action, everything is designed around theme.

The tighter it is, the more reflective of voice it will be.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

The tighter it is, the more reflective of voice it will be.

Are you saying tight writing leads to more voice?

There are plenty of great writers who don't employ a tight writing style that certainly have distinctive voice.

Don't get me wrong, I like tight writing. That's my preference as a writer but still, I don't see it as a requirement for a distinctive voice. If that were true, all great works of fiction would have been written with an economy of words. What we see in reality disproves that assumption.

I don't know, maybe we're not understanding one another.

 

[Svrtnsse]

Are you saying tight writing leads to more voice?

I'm reading it that the tighter it is, the less is needed to reach a distinctive voice.

Whether that's what's meant or not it's still an interesting thought. If something is very slick and smooth, then even very small details will stand out and it may very well be that the same thing can be said to apply to writing.

 

[Helen]

What we see in reality disproves that assumption.

I think you have to be careful. Because nothing is ever on-the-nose. It's always off-the-nose. So you're dealing with reflections. It's not what we see, but what is being referenced.

I'd say what we see supports what I'm saying.

Are you saying tight writing leads to more voice?

Not really. I'm not saying that all you have to do is write tightly and you'll automatically have voice.

To get to the bottom of it, we have to discuss how theme is executed. Which will lead us to the words that are chosen and their thematic purpose (which links us into "prose").

When it's done tightly, it will strongly reflect voice. When it's done loosely, it'll likely dilute voice.