![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I just read the best little metaphor thingie in the New Yorker about writing. It's in the review of "Eats, Shoots & Leaves: The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation," by Lynne Truss. The review is by Louis Menand. It gets onto the subject of "voice" and talks about how many writers say they don't ever write anything they wouldn't say. But this is ridiculous, since everyone knows the difference between writing and speaking. So why is it unfunny people can be funny writers or neurotic people can sound wonderfully pleasant? He says
"What writers hear when they are trying to write is something more like singing than like speaking. Inside your head, you're yakking away to yourself all the time. Getting that voice down on paper is a depressing experience. When you write, you're trying to transpose what you're thinking into something that is less like an annoying drone and more like a piece of music. This writing voice is the voice that people are surprised not to encounter when they "meet the writer."
Isn't that true? There's nothing more awful than the clunkiness of just getting stuff down and trying to figure out how it's supposed to *sound* because you know when it's wrong. And there's no way you can really teach it--well, that is of course you can teach the basics so that someone can find it. It's like dancing, I guess. Yes, some people might be born or develop something unique that will give them an edge if they work at it, but everyone can learn to be competent enough so they can express themselves competently. Then it's up to the audience to decide whose self-expression they prefer.
But damn, it's frustrating when you feel like you're just all over the place. Still, isn't that a great way of describing it? And a perfect explanation for what people think they're going to get from an author and don't in person--it's like the difference between a singing voice and a speaking voice. That's what's always so exciting about a regular person starting to sing and turning out to have this incredible voice--not necessarily technically perfect, but a voice that fascinates you.
I guess, thought, that makes you wonder again about fanfic and whether you can find your own voice through it. Certainly different authors have voices--nobody can say that UL doesn't have a different voice than LUW. Perhaps the author's voice comes through more clearly there because the worldbuilding is done for them, for all I know. Like...I'm trying to think of a singing metaphor. Like maybe somebody is good singing with a choir or is great singing in the shower but onstage wouldn't be. Someone else is great both places. Or maybe it's like when you write fanfic you're singing a familiar song so people are already smiling and tapping along before they pay attention to the singer. I don't know. I guess finding the perfect metaphor isn't that important.
But I've always been kind of fascinated by the idea of writers who have voices you wouldn't expect--the unfunny person being funny in print being a great example. It's just...sitting down and writing a whole original story is both exciting and intimidating when you don't know what will come out. Most writers start out doing some form of imitation, of course. If it's not fanfic you're still probably going to be imitating your favorite writers just as a singer would want to sing like their favorite singer. But it's funny how you almost don't know what's going to come out until you open your mouth. You might try to write one thing and--what do you know? It turns out your wacky comedy is filled with longing and regret. Or your warm nostalgia piece is satirical. Maybe that's less likely to happen when you're dealing with established worlds and characters because you're more focused on what you're saying about them or what you want them to do rather than just what you have to say.
"What writers hear when they are trying to write is something more like singing than like speaking. Inside your head, you're yakking away to yourself all the time. Getting that voice down on paper is a depressing experience. When you write, you're trying to transpose what you're thinking into something that is less like an annoying drone and more like a piece of music. This writing voice is the voice that people are surprised not to encounter when they "meet the writer."
Isn't that true? There's nothing more awful than the clunkiness of just getting stuff down and trying to figure out how it's supposed to *sound* because you know when it's wrong. And there's no way you can really teach it--well, that is of course you can teach the basics so that someone can find it. It's like dancing, I guess. Yes, some people might be born or develop something unique that will give them an edge if they work at it, but everyone can learn to be competent enough so they can express themselves competently. Then it's up to the audience to decide whose self-expression they prefer.
But damn, it's frustrating when you feel like you're just all over the place. Still, isn't that a great way of describing it? And a perfect explanation for what people think they're going to get from an author and don't in person--it's like the difference between a singing voice and a speaking voice. That's what's always so exciting about a regular person starting to sing and turning out to have this incredible voice--not necessarily technically perfect, but a voice that fascinates you.
I guess, thought, that makes you wonder again about fanfic and whether you can find your own voice through it. Certainly different authors have voices--nobody can say that UL doesn't have a different voice than LUW. Perhaps the author's voice comes through more clearly there because the worldbuilding is done for them, for all I know. Like...I'm trying to think of a singing metaphor. Like maybe somebody is good singing with a choir or is great singing in the shower but onstage wouldn't be. Someone else is great both places. Or maybe it's like when you write fanfic you're singing a familiar song so people are already smiling and tapping along before they pay attention to the singer. I don't know. I guess finding the perfect metaphor isn't that important.
But I've always been kind of fascinated by the idea of writers who have voices you wouldn't expect--the unfunny person being funny in print being a great example. It's just...sitting down and writing a whole original story is both exciting and intimidating when you don't know what will come out. Most writers start out doing some form of imitation, of course. If it's not fanfic you're still probably going to be imitating your favorite writers just as a singer would want to sing like their favorite singer. But it's funny how you almost don't know what's going to come out until you open your mouth. You might try to write one thing and--what do you know? It turns out your wacky comedy is filled with longing and regret. Or your warm nostalgia piece is satirical. Maybe that's less likely to happen when you're dealing with established worlds and characters because you're more focused on what you're saying about them or what you want them to do rather than just what you have to say.
Tags:
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
no subject
I'm often paranoid about not being as funny in person as I can be in writing (I'm not, am I, ahahah) and I'm actually less funny in writing the more "real" I think I am; the less... sarcastic and silly or droll and ridiculous or whatever. But of course, why would you be droll or sarcastic within your own head? You wouldn't-- I think it's because you're speaking to an audience-- the way singing almost intrinsically implies an audience even if there is none-- that you become -more- than you are while speaking/thinking.
You would think that people would speak with an audience in mind, and there is some change of mental pattern there, of course, but I think most people speak without thinking, so in a way it's yet another form of thinking, actually-- a reactive, extraverted sort, if that makes sense. I think introverted people (like a number of writers) maybe just have a difficult time with the extraverted version of thinking (that being speaking)-- sort of the frenetic energy and immediacy of it, along with the stresses of actually interacting with a person (unlike the relative serenity of writing) can be a bit much.
Even so, I always am unpleasantly startled that people -aren't- the way they are in their writing. For some reason, I'm always looking for "the writer within" in the writers I either meet or read the mundane journals of, and it's so frustrating because damnit, even the most wonderful, fascinating writers are so -boring- when they're just being (writing about) themselves :/ It's like, they're not -singing-, yes. I myself often 'sing' in my more 'personal' writing, but then, I rarely write directly about myself even in my journal.
I think style ('voice') has a relationship with content (fanfic or original or whatever), but for me, the type of content is more to do with mood and amount of plot and genre and stuff than whatever specific characters I'm talking about (mine or whoever's). Since I make the characters -mine- even if I'm writing about someone else's. I do find I'm less dreamy/fantastical in fanfic and I explore more styles of writing since I feel less limited by my own preferences somehow. I allow myself to "let go" of my ego and of my own subconscious dreams and desires being as controlling-- suddenly, I just have more room to experiment while retaining some "anchor" by way of canon.
SO I find I've experimented with -loads- of very different 'voices' since I've started writing fanfic (humorous and angsty voices both). A number of writers (most, even) seem to have a more constant voice than I do, though, and experiment with pairing or theme more than voice (and some just write to their kinks all the time and that's why they choose to do fanfic in the first place, but I don't see them as serious writers and also they tend to suck, MUWAHAHAH SO THERE).
I myself never wind up writing what I intended to, but I rarely intend anything because of the separation between linear writers (i.e., ones who plan ahead) and nonlinear writers (i.e., ones who make things up as they go along and always surprise themselves). I'm definitely in the second category :> :> I imagine the linear, plot-focused ones surprise themselves too, but... uh... not as often. *coughs*
Anyway, a nonlinear writer is just as nonlinear in fanfic, I think, because... it's just how they (we) think :> :> Um.
Not that I'm the authority or anything.From:
no subject
Ooh! Yes, that's so true. You really do think differently when you write, maybe just like when you sing you're not speaking. In fact, I met somebody once who was a speech therapist or something like that and she said we used a different part of our brain for singing than we did for speaking--and the same is probably true of writing.
I think it's because you're speaking to an audience-- the way singing almost intrinsically implies an audience even if there is none-- that you become -more- than you are while speaking/thinking.
Yes, it's that weird way that with singing it's both more revealing and less. I forget what book it is--maybe "Singing on Stage?" where the author says that you honestly can't sing in character. Like, of course you're playing the character in a musical but you can't sing in character the way you act in character. Once you start singing it's in some way you in ways acting doesn't have to be (not that acting isn't you pulling things out of yourself as well). But still, it's not you in the sense that anybody meeting you would recognize it. Just the opposite, in fact. People often seem literally transformed when they sing--sort of like the example anamirza gave below.
For some reason, I'm always looking for "the writer within" in the writers I either meet or read the mundane journals of, and it's so frustrating because damnit, even the most wonderful, fascinating writers are so -boring- when they're just being (writing about) themselves :/ It's like, they're not -singing-, yes. I myself often 'sing' in my more 'personal' writing, but then, I rarely write directly about myself even in my journal.
Yeah--and at the same time you think, well, there's no reason they should sing in their journals. In fact sometimes, the ones who always sound the same aren't the better writers, sort of like actors who are always "on" but can't really play anyone but themselves. It doesn't have to be that way, of course, but I guess I'm always sort of interested in the idea we have of what artists are supposed to be like and what they really are like (which is kind of what I was wondering about in my last post). There's this idea that the person is larger than life and they often are, but sometimes they're just ordinary people who work hard in their drudging way and aren't exceptionally except through their work. The people who aren't like that, the ones for whom life itself seems to be part of their self-expression, are probably just like that. Like, it's not connected to their writing anymore than the other person's boring persona is connected to theirs, they just happen to be somebody who thinks you should live that way or act that way...you know?
I allow myself to "let go" of my ego and of my own subconscious dreams and desires being as controlling-- suddenly, I just have more room to experiment while retaining some "anchor" by way of canon.
That definitely make sense. And also it's cool to think how somebody can have the same voice while writing very different things. Maybe we just think it's easier to recognize the voice of a person who writes stories that are superficially similar--like F Scott Fitzgerald always writing about the world he wrote about. But really you can write in different genres and still be the same writer...everybody's got the one thing that makes them "them" only it's just more obvious with some writers than others, I think.