Blog 6

"Voice not only drives the writing; it is, beyond the simple sharing of information, the very reason for writing" (9R, 128). Totally. Voice is really what distinguishes one writer from another and also what makes a piece of writing worth reading. When I read, I want finish feeling like I know the people who put those particular words on that particular paper, or at least like I've met them. It should feel like an interaction. It should feel like someone is speaking directly to me, not some sort of hypothetical reader. Not all readers will enjoy all writers, but they should still be able to make that decision one way or the other after reading their writing. Take Smith, for example. I can usually appreciate his points, but I'm definitely not a fan of his writing style, his voice. At least that says something about his writing, though. It would be much worse not to have any reaction at all. I totally cracked up trying to imagine FDR doing the Seinfeld bit, but it also made me think. When I read the three examples the first time, I wasn't immediately sure who those voices belonged to, but after I had three names to match them up to, I could figure it out because for the last two, I knew what their actual speaking voices sounded like, so I could hear them saying those words in my head. It made me wonder how much of a writer's voice comes from knowing what that writer's actual speaking voice sounds like, or what it would sound like reading those words. I'm not sure my own writing would sound exactly the way I intended it to if someone other than me read it out loud, unless that person knows me and knows how I would read it. I think if a writer's voice is strong, a reader should be able to come pretty close, but can it really be exact? Does it really need to be?