“Conflict and its diminutive forms tension and contrast abound in every one of these introductions. There’s some character-introducing, table-setting, and mood-setting, but all of it is infused with conflict-setting, all of it subtle, none too overt or in the reader’s face.”
These qualities, in a very quiet unassuming way, were precisely what made the beginning of your novel so engaging: that sense of a spell being cast. I share your appreciation of Russo, too, especially Straight Man and Nobody’s Fool, and especially because he seems to get shortchanged in the literary appreciation department.
I love that you spent time on names. Names have an outsized impact on my view of a character and I spend way too much time choosing my own. Truth is, if I find the right name, I immediately have a sense for the character. Haven’t heard anyone else talk about this.
I see that you’re passionate about your subject and that it’s a worth-while one—and that you’re prolific in connecting with people!—but I’m pretty full-up at the moment and my attention has been too divided. I’m actually trying to cut back on my subs, uncrowd my inbox, and focus on teaching, fiction, and writing subscriptions right now!
This is excellent Peter. So much to chew on. I'm really glad you're combining you two great loves (teaching and writing) with these essays. Do you plan to compile your essays into a book on writing?
Excellent little essay from you Cousinbrother Peter. I myself have very many thoughts on both voice, style, and whether they are one and the same. However I would now ask of anyone, look at every single example you use, what are the exact systemic similarities structurally and narratively that you seem to be drawn to. Zoom out to the meta and name the parts, not the particulars, but the parts of the systems that make up the stories, particularly the first page or few paras. Label those things and I can probably predict whether you'll like a book, style or voice regardless, within a margin of error beyond statistical chance or guesswork.
(Sorry, pattern recognition is my jams.)
However, this is enough that I do not feel the need to immediately go and write a companion piece, only to say that, I think I will send you a postcard at my next available moment.
Voice is a such a paradox as it is nearly impossible to teach because it is ultimately unique to each individual writer.
I wonder, too, why we've moved away from that rubric line as teachers? I use, and used, the same rubrics as you, and while the AP one has some merit, much is lost in how mostly devalues voice and style (which, of of course, is also a byproduct of prioritizing timed writing).
Some superb analysis here, I'll have to read it more than once!
I understand the difficulty of distinguishing voice from style. I'm not sure I can do it myself. I tend to think that voice is what a character has, while style is what a narrator has. But there's obvious overlap. This means that 1st-person narratives have more of a voice, while 3rd-person ones have more of a style. The latter being true because of the way narration has to accommodate different voices of characters, while in the former case, style and voice are the same thing. But maybe that's just my way of thinking.
FWIW in my experience, agents and editors are more responsive to the concept of voice than to that of style. They are more likely to accept or reject an MS based on voice alone (or on what they think of as voice). I am not sure why, but maybe they think style is something that can be more easily fixed or modified, should it be necessary to do so.
A rec for the reading list, if I haven't made it already: "Bird By Bird: Some Instructions on Writing & Life" by Anne Lamott. Intelligent discussion of craft questions and common writer-dilemmas, relayed engagingly through personal lenses.
Put me in mind of your work, for obvious reasons 🤝
This is a fantastic analysis, Peter. Thank you for this.
Your core question... "is this a voice I want in my head?"... is everything. It's the whole reason we fall in love with a book.
It makes me wonder... what about a voice that's deliberately inhuman? A voice that's not a person, but a system?
I'm obsessed with this idea. My novella, "What Was Here," is an experiment in just that. The "voice" isn't a traditional narrator. The 'voice' is the logbook of a 'Ministry' built by a child in a Gaza camp.
It's a world told only through his "cold" procedural entries: "Log Entry #," "Status: Pending," "Protocol Violation."
It's a gripping (and profound) read, about an hour. As a fellow "cruel and ruthless observer" and a professional analyst of how voice works, I thought the 'voice' of this novella might be something you'd want to see.
“Conflict and its diminutive forms tension and contrast abound in every one of these introductions. There’s some character-introducing, table-setting, and mood-setting, but all of it is infused with conflict-setting, all of it subtle, none too overt or in the reader’s face.”
These qualities, in a very quiet unassuming way, were precisely what made the beginning of your novel so engaging: that sense of a spell being cast. I share your appreciation of Russo, too, especially Straight Man and Nobody’s Fool, and especially because he seems to get shortchanged in the literary appreciation department.
Hand to my heart, I deeply appreciate this, Working Man—thank you. And I agree entirely about Russo and literary appreciation.
I love that you spent time on names. Names have an outsized impact on my view of a character and I spend way too much time choosing my own. Truth is, if I find the right name, I immediately have a sense for the character. Haven’t heard anyone else talk about this.
Incredible piece 👏🏽
Deal!
Thank you 🫂.. sending you blessings all day 💕
Saving—thank you for the reads and encouragement!
Keep the connection with me and subscribe 🫂
Hi Saving,
I see that you’re passionate about your subject and that it’s a worth-while one—and that you’re prolific in connecting with people!—but I’m pretty full-up at the moment and my attention has been too divided. I’m actually trying to cut back on my subs, uncrowd my inbox, and focus on teaching, fiction, and writing subscriptions right now!
Thanks for reading and thinking of me!
Peter
Okay. I understand. You're still awesome. Hit the follow button.
This is excellent Peter. So much to chew on. I'm really glad you're combining you two great loves (teaching and writing) with these essays. Do you plan to compile your essays into a book on writing?
It’s crossed my mind, but if I did, these would be early drafts. I’m having a good and productive time writing g them!
Excellent little essay from you Cousinbrother Peter. I myself have very many thoughts on both voice, style, and whether they are one and the same. However I would now ask of anyone, look at every single example you use, what are the exact systemic similarities structurally and narratively that you seem to be drawn to. Zoom out to the meta and name the parts, not the particulars, but the parts of the systems that make up the stories, particularly the first page or few paras. Label those things and I can probably predict whether you'll like a book, style or voice regardless, within a margin of error beyond statistical chance or guesswork.
(Sorry, pattern recognition is my jams.)
However, this is enough that I do not feel the need to immediately go and write a companion piece, only to say that, I think I will send you a postcard at my next available moment.
Voice is a such a paradox as it is nearly impossible to teach because it is ultimately unique to each individual writer.
I wonder, too, why we've moved away from that rubric line as teachers? I use, and used, the same rubrics as you, and while the AP one has some merit, much is lost in how mostly devalues voice and style (which, of of course, is also a byproduct of prioritizing timed writing).
Voice is the embodiment of one’s personality. A strong sense of the latter is necessary to have the former. Great read.
Some superb analysis here, I'll have to read it more than once!
I understand the difficulty of distinguishing voice from style. I'm not sure I can do it myself. I tend to think that voice is what a character has, while style is what a narrator has. But there's obvious overlap. This means that 1st-person narratives have more of a voice, while 3rd-person ones have more of a style. The latter being true because of the way narration has to accommodate different voices of characters, while in the former case, style and voice are the same thing. But maybe that's just my way of thinking.
FWIW in my experience, agents and editors are more responsive to the concept of voice than to that of style. They are more likely to accept or reject an MS based on voice alone (or on what they think of as voice). I am not sure why, but maybe they think style is something that can be more easily fixed or modified, should it be necessary to do so.
A rec for the reading list, if I haven't made it already: "Bird By Bird: Some Instructions on Writing & Life" by Anne Lamott. Intelligent discussion of craft questions and common writer-dilemmas, relayed engagingly through personal lenses.
Put me in mind of your work, for obvious reasons 🤝
This is a fantastic analysis, Peter. Thank you for this.
Your core question... "is this a voice I want in my head?"... is everything. It's the whole reason we fall in love with a book.
It makes me wonder... what about a voice that's deliberately inhuman? A voice that's not a person, but a system?
I'm obsessed with this idea. My novella, "What Was Here," is an experiment in just that. The "voice" isn't a traditional narrator. The 'voice' is the logbook of a 'Ministry' built by a child in a Gaza camp.
It's a world told only through his "cold" procedural entries: "Log Entry #," "Status: Pending," "Protocol Violation."
It's a gripping (and profound) read, about an hour. As a fellow "cruel and ruthless observer" and a professional analyst of how voice works, I thought the 'voice' of this novella might be something you'd want to see.
You can read it for free here: https://silentwitnessin.substack.com/p/what-was-here?r=6r3orq