<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: How to find your voice, Part&#160;3</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.52novels.com/archives/how-to-find-your-voice-part-3/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.52novels.com/archives/how-to-find-your-voice-part-3/</link>
	<description>I counted them myself.</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 22:25:49 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Greg</title>
		<link>http://www.52novels.com/archives/how-to-find-your-voice-part-3/#comment-765</link>
		<dc:creator>Greg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:13:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.52novels.com/archives/how-to-find-your-voice-part-3/#comment-765</guid>
		<description>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 &lt;i&gt;Casual&lt;/i&gt; example can be described as a close narrator, distant author; the &lt;i&gt;More Formal&lt;/i&gt; example can be described as distant narrator and author; and the &lt;i&gt;Most Formal&lt;/i&gt; 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.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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.</p>
<p>Also, these are not strongly denotated words. Every person has their own connotation behind them that usually doesn&#8217;t match up quite right. </p>
<p>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 <i>Casual</i> example can be described as a close narrator, distant author; the <i>More Formal</i> example can be described as distant narrator and author; and the <i>Most Formal</i> 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. </p>
<p>A similar analysis can be applied to what is called &#8220;Attitude&#8221; here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
