# "Finding your own voice" Advice



## Nero (May 11, 2011)

Hello. I have just joined this forum because I wanted some advice, and this seemed like a perfect place. I know it's pretty early for someone to start thinking about writing non-fiction seriously, but I can't imagine myself doing anything else (career wise).

Anyway, I have been hearing a few people advise me to "find your own voice". The problem is that I am not sure what this means exactly.

Also, I have began to notice that when I write, I'm usually rather brief & short. I notice other people tend to be copiously long-winded ...

I am not sure what to expect, but I just thought maybe a few people can put me on the right track.

Thanks a lot.


----------



## Candra H (May 11, 2011)

All I can say is, I'd be careful about the "advice" handed out on internet forums.


----------



## JosephB (May 11, 2011)

Heh. You could say that about all advice, I suppose. Anyway, I suspect that the folks who are telling you to find your own voice probably don't know any more about it than you do. It just sounds like a good thing to say to an aspiring writer. As far as I'm concerned, it just means something in the way you write that makes it unique -- or at least identifiable as yours. A certain style maybe. There are probably fancier ways to put it. Perhaps brevity or getting to the point might be your thing. Otherwise it's hard to say. 

Most of the useful advice that I've gotten on this site has been in the form of critiques. The rest of it is often too general to be of much use. I suggest that you post some work and see what people have to say about it. That and practice may be the best way for you to develop your own voice and style. 

Otherwise, welcome to the forum!


----------



## Candra H (May 11, 2011)

Yeah, seconded about practising and putting your work up for critique. It's what I do. I don't really go in for asking people for general advice on things because writing is so subjective and anything people say in a general sense is either them just trying to be nice or helpful or of course, show off their "writing knowhow", or is too vague to be any use.

Also, welcome to the forum. I'm a bit distracted today so apologies for being forgetful about that in my first post...


----------



## ppsage (May 11, 2011)

It means write for two hours every day and never stop.


----------



## Bruno Spatola (May 11, 2011)

I thought it came naturally. That's what I like to believe, anyway.

If you're comfortable with the way you write, I wouldn't really worry about what other people say. If you aren't happy with what you're outputting though, writing more often wouldn't hurt. Maybe try and change it up a bit, see what works and what doesn't; try coming at it from different angles.

That's very vague advice, sorry; wish I could be more helpful. I think sometimes, it's best to just get on with it and write. Good luck .


----------



## SilkFX (May 14, 2011)

Candra H said:


> All I can say is, I'd be careful about the "advice" handed out on internet forums.


 
Yeah. That said...



ppsage said:


> It means write for two hours every day and never stop.


 
In other words, just do the work. After you've got a couple of published books under your belt some literary critic will probably tell YOU what your voice is.


----------



## Nero (Apr 10, 2013)

ppsage said:


> It means write for two hours every day and never stop.



I can't just write. What do you do? How do you concentrate the mind in a narrow enough sense to produce something?


----------



## patskywriter (Apr 10, 2013)

Nero said:


> I can't just write. What do you do? How do you concentrate the mind in a narrow enough sense to produce something?



Your original post was two years ago. What have you done since then, writing-wise?

Why can't you "just write"? Pick a subject and type out or write a short piece on something that interests you. If I had to do it, I could write about:

•  the summer I broke my foot and had to drag around a heavy cast for 6 weeks
•  being called a "Yankee" and getting used to new dialects and customs while attending college in rural Alabama
• the ghost stories my granddad used to tell us kids

Write something and see how you like it. I don't think it takes intense concentration—you just need the desire to tell a story. If you've only been thinking about writing for the past two years, get going. Nobody can tell your stories but you.


----------



## Nero (Apr 10, 2013)

patskywriter said:


> Your original post was two years ago. What have you done since then, writing-wise?



I've only ever constricted myself to non-fictional essays, reviews, and extended pieces of writing of this kind. I don't have a blog as such, but I do frequent this site. 

For reasons I can't honestly explain, I can't write fiction or poetry. I have no discernible difficulty in appreciating them; and since my post 2 years ago, I have grown to recognise beautiful writing and poorly written drab. I'm sufficiently aware of 'how' to write, and what a perfect piece of work should entail and exhibit. But I have never ventured into fiction and wouldn't know where to begin. Bizarre as it may sound, I don't feel I have ‘_it’_. Presently, I am ensconced in my bed with books and papers around me. I certainly feel a craving to write something; even as I am typing this; and would absolutely revel in its creation. 

However, should I now steadfastly shut my laptop, confine myself to my table and simply write; I would feel embarrassed of whatever silly nonsense I would put to ink. Mostly because I can distinguish good literature, I don’t want to write about my day or some memory. I am not sure if I am making sense even?


----------



## patskywriter (Apr 10, 2013)

Don't worry about being silly. Just write. Eventually, you'll discover what you're good at, but you can't if you don't get on with it.

Who says you have to write fiction in order to become a writer? Most of my writing is nonfiction. I read fiction for my own enjoyment, but nonfiction writing appeals to me more. I publish my own community newspaper, but I was just hired to write stories for another local paper. My latest story was about the old guys who hang around the senior center, shoot pool, and talk smack. It was fun to write and everyone involved, including the senior-center administrators, is loving the publicity. My style is now evolving—suddenly, I'm using elements of fiction, which is making my articles more fun to read. I'm further developing my voice. My writing style isn't changing drastically, but I can tell that I'm flexing new writing muscles. I can't emphasize enough the importance of getting in there and seeing what you can do. Type up something, wrestle around with it, and see what you can come up with.

If you don't want to write about your day, tackle a problem like bullying. Think about it from your point of view as a kid, your childhood friends' experiences, and/or how bullying can follow you into adulthood. Give some advice. It's a huge subject. Write about some aspect of it and let us know if you like what you've done.


----------



## ppsage (Apr 10, 2013)

> However, should I now steadfastly shut my laptop, confine myself to my table and simply write; I would feel embarrassed of whatever silly nonsense I would put to ink. Mostly because I can distinguish good literature, I don’t want to write about my day or some memory. I am not sure if I am making sense even?


Yeah, I'm not so sure either. My advice before concerned how to find your style, it assumed you'd already commited the basic crimes of fiction writing. So what good literature have you distinguished lately? Maybe that's your problem. Maybe you're a bad fiction writer, like a lot of the rest of us. If that's the case, and you're not one of the lucky ones who can just bag it at that, then you'd better write some nonsense and post it up where the rest of us can be amused too. That's what we do. You'll probably like it.


----------



## Morkonan (Apr 10, 2013)

Nero said:


> ...Anyway, I have been hearing a few people advise me to "find your own voice". The problem is that I am not sure what this means exactly...



On the thirteenth day of summer, in the heat of midday, walk to the crossroads just outside of Dockery Plantation in Mississippi. Bring your pen...


However, your "voice" as a writer is your "style." Ever hear someone discuss an author and say "That sounds like Shakespeare" or "That surely sounds as if Hemmingway wrote it"? Well, there ya go - Voice. (There's also a bit more, including the affectation of certain sorts of storytelling mechanics and plotting styles.)

You will not find it - It will find you. It will develop over the course of your writing. As you work at developing your skill, you will find a style that comes naturally to you. It just "feels right." It's not about what you're saying, but how you're saying it that makes it your "voice." 

Finding your "Voice" isn't critical. In fact, it's mostly hogwash, meant to be mysterious sounding to the uninitiated... For some writers, they may develop a style that they carry through with them during their entire careers, not only because they find it more fulfilling, but because their fans demand it. Others may be comfortable writing in many voices, either never settling into one or never having the luxury or skill to be able to stay in one.


----------



## Angelwing (Apr 11, 2013)

Honestly, in this day and age, it's probably very difficult, if not impossible, to really come up with a new voice/style. A lot of literary greats have come before us. You have Shakespeare with...Shakespeare for theater, Charles Dickens and Jane Austen for social critique, Tom Clancy for the technological thriller, etc. 

Now what's common between these? They can and/or do serve as mouthpieces for their time. I just finished an essay on Tom Clancy's techno-thriller style: I came to the realization that his writing actually reflects the time he was alive, and the time he wrote in: the Cold War. Clancy was old enough to understand what was happening when the Cuban Missile Crisis scared the S outta everyone. The US and USSR getting close (even just a few seconds away!) to all out war occurs a few times. He wrote The Cardinal of the Kremlin at the same time as people would've been hearing about Strategic Defense Initiative. The story involves laser technology being developed for Anti-Ballistic Missile use. 

Now, can I say for certain that Clancy intended this? Like he was thinking "Oh, people in thirty five years are going to see me as a mouthpiece of the era if I write about *this*"-maybe he did, maybe he didn't know he was reflecting that way. However, years later, I'm able to see how he does reflect the period. 

SO, choose a "path," or genre really, and write. Like the quote says: "Every writer expresses himself through his work, whether he realizes it or not." You may know, you may not. 

Many blues, jazz, and rock musicians were mentored by other musicians. They would emulate their masters' style, but then eventually become something more personalized. I wouldn't be surprised if Stevie Ray Vaughn actually learned the Blues from a different artist.


----------



## Leyline (Apr 11, 2013)

I'm no expert on anything, the following is all IMO, etc. And I'll stand by that. But I have been giving this a lot of thought recently, since I've seen the question asked in various threads several times recently. So, here are some of my thoughts!

You find your voice by writing about yourself, rather than just describing other people and places and things. With every aspect of the story, concentrate on what it means to you. With every character, no matter how minor, consider how you might have acted if placed in the same circumstances, with the same options. This might make the character, in your consideration, more than a narrative device and increase your empathy for them.  It will also give your characters decisions more thought, and allow them to sway the plot. 

*EX:* _You planned to have your MC run for the malfunctioning nuclear plant even though he'd just heard his wife had had went into labor, showing both his hard-headed steeliness and his gooey emotional center (because he was extra-psyched to stop the meltdown because: love). But writing, and considering his options, you realize that you yourself,even knowing the grim nuclear danger that hunkered near, would at least tell your wife and unborn child goodbye before getting hard-headed and steely. And he comes off as sort of a jerk. So, you have him head for the hospital. But! He's assaulted and captured by the Emergency Militia, before he gets there. They're taking him to the nuclear plant as a captive..._

Ahem. Sorry, got a bit out of hand. Anyway, you see my point? Putting yourself in place of characters at every decision helps identify clunky 'she did this because the plot needed her to' moments. What would motivate you to make that choice, even though it's dangerous or risky? This makes the decisions (and the character) seem more organic and human because they are, at base, organic and human. Reasoned and considered.  What's more, it gives even the smallest of roles a tiny or small or large aspect of you. This can extend to other aspects of the book, like style and tone and...

I think that pretty much is a writer's voice. 

Trying to write in the voice of our heroes and idols is imitative and limiting (despite it being the way many of us learned to write. There's a time to put it away). Trying to guess what a reader wants to hear is tough enough, trying to guess how they want to hear it is probably impossible. So that just leaves you to make decisions, so make the voice one you want to hear.  It's called 'your' voice after all, pretty easy bet that you'll be discovering it somewhere in the vicinity of you.


----------



## Bloggsworth (Apr 11, 2013)

Write what you write when you write it; do it often enough for long enough and a distinctive voice may emerge, but a singular voice may also be restrictive, it depends on what you wish to become. I am happy when someone both compliments a poem I have written while, at the same time, saying that had they not known, they would not have thought it written by me; as far as I am concerned that means that I am being as original as I can be.


----------



## luckyscars (Apr 11, 2013)

''The Voice'' is nothing but a pile of lofty, art school claptrap conceived for no other reason than to instill a sense of elitism to what is - after walking, sneezing and talking - the most universally accessible of skills. 

Your voice is not something to worry about. Worrying about it is as likely to ruin your writing as improve it. If you can write, you already have a voice. Whether its one a great many people care to enjoy is another matter.

The day I stopped worrying about how I 'sounded' and started worrying about what I was actually saying was a good day.


----------



## Sam (Apr 11, 2013)

You don't find your voice by looking for it. After you've spent enough time writing, it'll develop on its own. There's no need to worry about these sorts of things. No publisher in their right mind will turn you down because "your voice wasn't good enough".


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Apr 11, 2013)

I read this article a while back and thought it gave a decent overview of the topic of voice. 

It's true that everyone has a voice whether they think about it or not. The question is really whether that voice is strong, consistent, and effective. You get an idea of who the writer is based on the voice. Sometimes that's fascinating, you get to feel like in some way you really know that mind, or at least want to. Sometimes it's off-putting, a voice that I just don't like, one that's showy or arrogant, for example. And then some are weak or imitative and that's a turn-off, too. It's good, I think, to know what kind of voice you're projecting; to look at style, rhythm, word choice, narrative distance and position, among other things.


----------



## JosephB (Apr 11, 2013)

I think that article sums it up fine. It's just one of those you know it when you hear it things -- like if you're familiar with author, you could recognize his writing unattributed. Raymond Carver has a very distinct voice -- if they found some lost story and I read it without knowing the author, I'm betting I could recognize it as his. It's very real, but hard to define. It certainly isn't "art school claptrap."


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Apr 11, 2013)

You know what we should do is have a voice game. Find a way to post anonymously--maybe everyone PMs 300 words to an organizer--and see if people can tell whose text is whose. If they can't identify you, maybe your voice isn't very distinct.


----------



## Nickleby (Apr 11, 2013)

My opinion is that your voice is what you have left after you unlearn all the bad advice you've gotten (and by _bad advice_ I mean _things you don't like_ or _things that don't work for you_). Unless you are very talented, it won't happen quickly or easily, and it may never happen at all. One day, without any fanfare, you'll realize that you know how to write something before you start. You still have to do the writing, of course, but you won't struggle with the style issues.

Look at it another way. No one else thinks the way you do. No one else has had the same set of experiences or the same way of interpreting those experiences. Once you find the most natural way of translating your thoughts into words, you will have a unique style. That is your voice. Whether you write space operas or grocery ad copy, nobody else will sound exactly like you.


----------



## Sam (Apr 11, 2013)

I don't see the point of worrying about it. If your voice becomes honed through years of writing, as Joe is alluding to, what of it? It's certainly not elitism. I don't set out to write in a particular voice, so how can I be accused of trying to show off if it happens?


----------



## JosephB (Apr 11, 2013)

lasm said:


> You know what we should do is have a voice game. Find a way to post anonymously--maybe everyone PMs 300 words to an organizer--and see if people can tell whose text is whose. If they can't identify you, maybe your voice isn't very distinct.



That would be fun. Grant it, it's a small pool, but I've been told by people here who have been reading my stuff for a good while that they could recognize one of my stories if my name wasn't on it. I've recognized a style etc. in my work -- or "voice" if you want to consider other things like themes or "personalty" -- like your article said. Most of it's natural, but I have cultivated it to a degree -- if it's transparent and doesn't feel contrived to people reading it, there's nothing wrong with that. 

I'm also betting some people start off with a distinct voice from the get-go -- it may change over time, but it's not necessarily something that takes years or whatever to develop. I'm sure it varies a great deal and comes more easily to some people that others.


----------



## patskywriter (Apr 11, 2013)

Hopefully, now, Nero has heard what we've all had to say about voice. I trust that he'll now gather the confidence to write something instead of worrying how it'll read.  :cookie:

Mouth fulla cookies; that's _my_ voice.


----------



## Rustgold (Apr 11, 2013)

Nero said:


> I've only ever constricted myself to non-fictional essays, reviews, and extended pieces of writing of this kind.
> 
> For reasons I can't honestly explain, I can't write fiction or poetry.



Well write something you feel you can write about then.


----------



## KRHolbrook (Apr 11, 2013)

For some writers their voice comes naturally. Think of several books from different authors you enjoy reading. Each one of those books has a different style to the writing that comes from the writer's voice. It's what makes their writing unique.

I'm one of those people that read a lot of different books, and for a while I tried writing in the styles that I read of all kinds of different authors. A friend of mine stated that I should create my own voice. Don't think so hard about how other people write and write how I want to.

So I've developed somewhat of a style of my own. I use sentence fragments a lot when I feel they have greater impact, and some people have often told me I have a poetic way of writing description. I'm a kind of person that likes for the reader to be in the moment of my writing, so descriptive writing is what I like when I put pen to paper.

That's my thoughts on a writer's voice. :]


----------



## Kyle R (Apr 12, 2013)

The best voice you have, in my opinion, is the voice you use every day when you open your mouth to speak. Those words, your sense of humor, your sarcasm and your curiosity, that's your voice, and it can, and usually does, translate very well to the page. The trick is learning to get out of the way and not mess with a good thing.


----------



## luckyscars (Apr 12, 2013)

JosephB said:


> I think that article sums it up fine. It's just one of those you know it when you hear it things -- like if you're familiar with author, you could recognize his writing unattributed. Raymond Carver has a very distinct voice -- if they found some lost story and I read it without knowing the author, I'm betting I could recognize it as his. It's very real, but hard to define. It certainly isn't "art school claptrap."



I think you misunderstood me a little bit. It isn't that the voice does not exist, its more that it shouldn't exist as something to be conscious of. In fact, I'd suggest making a deliberate effort to contrive ones own voice is a handicap. Wanting to identify yourself in such a distinctive way is natural but it isn't useful. Leave it to others to tell you what your 'voice' is. Its no small irony that those who worry about it tend to be far worse writers than those who don't.

KyleColorado got it spot on. Anything that differs from what he just said is, well, claptrap.


----------



## Jon M (Apr 12, 2013)

Tend to think of voice as something distinct from style, changes from story to story. Or maybe the opposite is true. Hm. 

At any rate, my voice (when I choose to think about it, i.e., 'not often') is heavily influenced by whatever POV I choose to use. In my brain these two concepts are all tangled together in a mess.


----------



## JosephB (Apr 12, 2013)

luckyscars said:


> I think you misunderstood me a little bit. It isn't that the voice does not exist, its more that it shouldn't exist as something to be conscious of. In fact, I'd suggest making a deliberate effort to contrive ones own voice is a handicap. Wanting to identify yourself in such a distinctive way is natural but it isn't useful. Leave it to others to tell you what your 'voice' is. Its no small irony that those who worry about it tend to be far worse writers than those who don't.
> 
> KyleColorado got it spot on. Anything that differs from what he just said is, well, claptrap.



So no successful writer ever with a distinctive voice recognized then cultivated or refined it. And you know this how? Sounds like guesswork to me.

And Kyle's point sounds nice -- but a little off if style has anything to do with it.


----------



## Rustgold (Apr 12, 2013)

I agree with JosephB, to a point.

Yes, once a writer discovers what type of writer's voice they have, they'll work on refining it for the rest of their life.  But that voice has to be discovered and recognized in the first place.  And here lies part of the challenge.


----------



## JosephB (Apr 12, 2013)

I think you have to suppose that no writer has the ability to look  objectively at his own work and simply recognize what's working as far  as style or tone goes -- or how his personality is reflected -- and then refine or exploit those things in some way. Or as you suggest -- maybe even someone else recognized them first, a teacher or editor etc. 

Maybe there's an element of false humility in saying a voice can't be cultivated -- to say that you can refine your voice, you're also saying that you believe it's unique and there's something worth refining. Maybe that sounds egotistical to some. It also seems like there  might be some mythology around this -- like if you try  to examine your  voice you'll somehow ruin the  magic or lose your  mojo. Maybe that's true for some, and maybe some writers "worry" about it and screw up -- but I can't get into the head of  every writer and say definitively that you can or can't successfully and  consciously develop a distinctive voice. That's a pretty big leap.


----------



## luckyscars (Apr 13, 2013)

JosephB said:


> So no successful writer ever with a distinctive voice recognized then cultivated or refined it. And you know this how? Sounds like guesswork to me.
> 
> And Kyle's point sounds nice -- but a little off if style has anything to do with it.



That's different. 

When you have a distinctive voice established that 1) You are comfortable with and 2) Readers like then yes, by all means, run with it. But it is clear from the post that the OP is not there yet and neither, I would contend, are most writers. So talk about 'successful writers' and 'refining' is not all that relevant to this particular discussion, is it? 

Finding any kind of distinctive voice takes a long time. Sometimes an eternity. An aspiring, beginning or fledgling writers fretting over something so abstract as 'what is my voice?' is no less absurd than an actor in a high school production trying to decide if they'd rather do TV or Movies. Yes, down the line all such things may become important and, if and when they do, cultivation and refinement may be called upon. But not at this level. You can't expedite the process and, when it comes to something as vague as a voice, I believe it can be counterproductive doing so. Because it is distracting and unneccessary.

Best way to find a distinctive voice is to let it find you. The voice will conjure itself through practice, dedication to the craft and hard work. Not by dwelling on it. That's where the claptrap comes in...


----------



## JosephB (Apr 13, 2013)

I could have worded that better. I didn’t suggest any timeline or say that it takes a rubber stamp from readers for a writer to recognize a distinctive voice. I meant to ask -- are there no writers who later attained success who recognized and consciously developed a voice to some degree early on or prior to publication?  And if you say no -- how do you know that?

And it's kind of amusing how you use the words "dwelling" and "worry" --  as opposed to words that suggest the possibility that there's something  distinctive a writer can recognize and refine without it being some  kind of obsession that somehow holds him back.

Otherwise, I’m not an agent who looks at umpteen manuscripts a day. I don’t teach creative writing or run workshops and see enough new writers to form a definitive opinion on this or make any claims like it takes a long time or “eternity” to develop a distinctive voice -- I just see what’s repeated on the internet and on writing forums -- pithy statements like “the best way to find a distinctive voice is to let it find you” that sound good on the surface but aren’t anything more than opinions based on who knows what.

At the very least, I question the notion that it always takes a "long time" to develop a unique voice -- and I would contend that the reason some new authors are published in the first place is that some agent or editor recognizes something unique or special in the way of a voice -- even if it's just something that sets the author apart from everything else that comes in. It's far more likely that it varies a great deal depending on the writer. Where do these ideas come from anyway? Maybe it's soothing for some to believe that if you don't have any kind of distinctive voice that no one does early on -- and that one will come eventually if you just keep plugging away at it for heaven knows how long. 

So -- in the absence of evidence, I’d say it’s just as likely that some talented or successful writers have the ability to recognize a distinctive voice from the get-go and refine and take advantage of it somehow. And since we’re guessing -- I’d say my guess is as good as yours.


----------



## Rustgold (Apr 14, 2013)

KyleColorado said:


> The best voice you have, in my opinion, is the voice you use every day when you open your mouth to speak. Those words, your sense of humor, your sarcasm and your curiosity, that's your voice, and it can, and usually does, translate very well to the page. The trick is learning to get out of the way and not mess with a good thing.



What happens when your everyday speaking voice is humourless, sarcasm is more like a flying brick which has been tarred & set alight; and every time you speak your tongue ties itself up?


----------



## JosephB (Apr 14, 2013)

Sure -- I suppose there haven't been any successful writers who are socially awkward or inarticulate or whose humor only comes out when they write -- they're all glib and it just naturally flows out onto the page. I sure wish I could see into the heads of so many writers and know definitively what it takes to be a good one. What a gift.


----------



## KRHolbrook (Apr 14, 2013)

JosephB said:


> Sure -- I suppose there haven't been any successful writers who are socially awkward...


Oh thanks! I'm a writer who's socially awkward!


----------



## Staff Deployment (Apr 14, 2013)

Pretty sure he's being sarcastic, Krholbrook, judging by his other posts. His point is that nobody here is a powerful enough psychic to make those kinds of sweeping judgments about all writers.


----------



## Kevin (Apr 14, 2013)

Rustgold said:


> What happens when your everyday speaking voice is humourless, sarcasm is more like a flying brick which has been tarred & set alight; and every time you speak your tongue ties itself up?


 That's not the only route. There's no humour written into most books. And as far as your everyday versus your creative self, they could be totally different. Example:   Benny Hill - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## JosephB (Apr 14, 2013)

KRHolbrook said:


> Oh thanks! I'm a writer who's socially awkward!



The Staffmeister is correct -- sarcasm. Right about the reason behind it too.

How about this:

If you find your voice, set it free -- if it comes back to you, it's yours. If it doesn't, it never was.


----------

