How to find your voice, Part 3
Hey... you're here! Get all the fun of 52 Novels as it happens and subscribe by e-mail or >subscribe using your favorite RSS feed reader. Might as well. Don't cost nothin. Not sure what RSS is? Click here to learn all about it. Just be sure to come right back.
So far in this three-part series on “voice” we’ve talked about choosing your pronoun (I, you, he/she/it, we, they) and building rhythm. Now it’s time to really nail some Jello to the wall. Let’s take a look at the elusive characteristics of “style” and “attitude.”
In fact, these traits are so tough to describe, I’m not even going to try. Instead, I’m going to show by example.
Style
Just as skirt lengths can be long or short (or somewhere in between), so too your writing style can range from formal to casual. Notice how a writer’s word choice and point of view will affect your perception of his or her style.
Casual: “One of the popular girls came home with me after school one day, to spend the night. We found my parents rejoicing over the arrival of my dad’s new novel, the first copy off the press. We were all so thrilled and proud, and this girl seemed to think I had the coolest possible father: a writer. (Her father sold cars.)” (Bird by Bird. Anne Lamott.)
More formal: “The eyes of the pioneers were set on this corner of old Oregon, their gazes measuring the dusty distance to the Willamette Valley as their oxen clopped out the miles, day after day, one hoofbeat at a time along the trail leading to the far lonely edge of the continent.” (Oregon: An Explorer’s Guide. Mark Highberger.)
Most formal: “Good writers craft every element of their work, down to the joints between the words. During this meticulous process it’s nearly impossible to step back and experience the text as a new reader would.” (Telling True Stories. Mark Kramer and Wendy Call (eds).)
Attitude
If you thought style was hard to pin down, brace yourself for attitude — it’s even more evanescent. But I think it comes down to this: Where are you, the writer? Are you at once everywhere — a bit like the God of my grade 1 catechism? Or are you an opinionated so-and-so who wants to persuade or sell or render judgment? Or are you a clever combination of the two previous types — on the one hand, removed and superior, but on the other, itching to deliver a punchline? Let’s take a look and see:
Detached/neutral: “The founder of the Methodist Church, John Wesley, was born in 1703 in the Old Rectory, where his father, Samuel Wesley, was the rector. The house was rebuilt in 1709 after a fire, and contains furniture associated with the Wesley family. American Methodists financed much of the restoration.” (AA Illustrated Guide to Britain.)
Persuasive/judgmental: “Almost the first sound we hear in Joe Wright’s Atonement is the tap of typewriter keys. Soon, the tapping becomes regular, like drumbeats, and it sets the tempo for the music that comes surging in. Later in the film, it rings out as loudly as gunshots. The implication is clear, words can stir us and set us dancing, but they can also kill. That mysterious double power infused Ian McEwan’s novel, published in 2001, and it lingers in Christopher Hampton’s screenplay, which displays immense ingenuity in facing a basic human conundrum: how do you film a story about language and not leave it reeking of books?” (Movie review by Anthony Lane in the Dec. 10, 2007 New Yorker.)
Ironic/comedic: “The problem at Starbucks, the thing I call the Starbucks Paradox, is the assumption that we, the customers, have sophisticated enough palates to tell the difference between Aged Sumatra coffee (tenderly stored for five years in a warehouse in Singapore, shipped green and then roasted to perfection) and Columbia Narino El Tambo coffee (juicy, with intriguing floral notes, a citrus complexity and a chocolaty sweetness so rarely found in Narino region coffees) whilst simultaneously counting on us being unable to tell the difference between a piece of Italian biscotti and a biscuit-shaped wedge of drywall.” (Column by Tabatha Southey in the March 1, 2008 Globe & Mail.)
When you write, you can pick your attitude. Just make sure you chose wisely — selecting one that suits your own personality and the subject you’re covering.
This is the third, and final, part of a series from writing coach Daphne Gray-Grant. If you found this post this useful, go sign up for Daphne’s newsletter. You won’t regret it.
© 2008 by Daphne Gray-Grant
Tags: Daphne Gray-Grant, Power Writing, voice
Sphere: Related Content
The reason style and attitude are elusive is because they are meant to be descriptive of a finished work. You cannot write with style or attitude, but a finished work can be described in these terms.
Also, these are not strongly denotated words. Every person has their own connotation behind them that usually doesn’t match up quite right.
The aspects that are mentioned here are aspects of perspective and not something independent. In both cases, poor analysis is used. The analysis under style can better be understood in terms of author and narrator distancing and reliability. As a simplification, the Casual example can be described as a close narrator, distant author; the More Formal example can be described as distant narrator and author; and the Most Formal example can be described as both close narrator and author. My description is still simplistic because I ignore reliability and other issues important to perspective.
A similar analysis can be applied to what is called “Attitude” here.
Wednesday March 12th, 2008 at 9:13 am