Creative Thoughts

Paper #2 - Final Draft

Voice as Style

            Why do you never find anything written about that idiosyncratic thought you avert to, about your fascination with something no one else understands? Because it is up to you. There is something you find interesting, for a reason hard to explain. It is hard to explain because you have never read it on any page; there you begin.  You were made and set here to give voice to this, your own astonishment. - Anne             Dillard

            In a paper of either academic discourse or creative writing, voice is a stylistic technique.  In the quote above Anne Dillard states, “you were made and set here to give voice to this.”  I believe that in all writing, the writer gives a voice to their piece of writing, whether they want to or not.  Writers put in voice unconsciously; they use voice as opinion or thought to put their own special touches of personal belief on their writing.  So I guess in this instance, voice can be interpreted of as ones thoughts on a page.  Some say that papers of academic discourse are “thoughtless” and just written through quickly, but in all the classes I have been in whether it was biological science or creative writing, my personal opinion still gets put in somehow. 

            Now I’m not saying that all the other elements of a paper get dismissed.  The assignment guideline criteria also play a major role.  The writer takes the terms of the assignment and puts his/her own beliefs into it.  If a writer is writing about that mathematical equation history of Einstein, the writer is going to use mainly facts they find elsewhere.  However, I think that even in a paper that is so factual, there is voice where the writer gets to pick which facts they choose to put in the paper. The tone of the paper doesn’t have to be parallel with the voice. The tone fits in if you want to persuade an audience or truly and deeply get a point across.  The theme and the tone don’t necessarily always have to run together in a paper for voice to be present, but since they both promote different elements of voice, I don’t see why you wouldn’t use both!  In the following section, I will be imitating a section from Frankfurt’s On Truth and show how beliefs play a role in the use of voice in writing.

II.            In Frankfurt’s On Truth, he discusses the argument of whether our thoughts are guided by our individual point of view or socially authoritative point of view.  I see the individual point of view as being the voice as style.  If we go with my opinion that voice, as style can be unconscious, then the person is only seeing the “inside of the box”.  They see what they are writing and their beliefs on their writing only.  They don’t see another person’s point of view or even another view for that matter.  Here I will rewrite a passage that shows an individual point of view using voice. 

             On the doctrine of individual point of view, a person cannot consciously see that their personal perspectives are clogging what society wants them to see, or what they in essence should see.  These “clogged” viewpoints can be made because of the conditions of economical and political requirements on society. Postmodernists rely on the fact that social pressures and even individual pressures restrain a person.  Whether that restraint is merely because the person won’t “open their eyes” or if they can’t open their eyes, is what postmodernists are trying to figure out. Some see what postmodernists are saying and think they are reaching too far.  Whatever viewpoint you stand on, it doesn’t really matter, because it should always be correct.  An engineer and architect can strive to succeed by avoiding obstacles that are inherent, however, they cannot believe that their “individual” perspective or even social discipline will make them correct. A person most be correct, whatever the circumstances.  

III.            After doing this imitation exercise, I realized that voice is much more complicated than I originally thought it was.  At first I argued that no matter what a writer is writing about, there is a voice behind it.  I still believe that to be true, but now the term “voice” seems more complicated.  After putting my own voice into the passage above, I think that my voice somewhat altered what Frankfurt was trying to get across. My interpretation of Frankfurt’s ideas isn’t necessarily other’s interpretations of his work.  When I read and someone else reads the same piece, we get different interpretations.  So will my interpretation change the meaning for other people?

            Voice isn’t supposed to make a piece of writing confusing it is supposed to provide enough personal viewpoint matched with fact to make a piece have more clarity.  After I did the imitation however, I only felt that I confused Frankfurt’s words rather than made them clearer.  In my mind I felt that I didn’t fully understand everything that Frankfurt was saying, so I tried to move past certain concepts and ideas that obviously were vital to what he was saying, but I didn’t bother covering them.  More than that, I think that it was his vocabulary versus my vocabulary that completely threw me off and might have changed the text.  That right there can alter and mess up what an author is trying to say. 

            Obviously a writer’s opinion and thought is going to only be theirs.  Not all authors have to believe that, according to Frankfurt, an individualistic view taken on their writing is bad.  Maybe they want their work to be “inside the box.”  A person can choose to take what the writer is saying, and by putting their voice into it, make it their own.  This is another instance where the term voice gets confusing.  If a person is imitating another’s writing, then the original author’s point of view and voice are already attached to the piece.  Now if someone like me comes along and interprets their writing to make it my own with a twist of my own voice, is it possible to have multiple uses of voice in one piece of writing?  Can a person put their own stylistic twists of voice on TOP of another author’s writing, where that author has already established their voice?

            Without knowing what Frankfurt, or any author for that matter, had in mind while writing, a future imitator of their writing will never know if the meanings will get tangled and a new meaning will arise.  But in reality, I guess that is what is supposed to happen: take little bits of others writing, in their voice, and write your own work, in your own voice.  The mixture of stylistic uses of voice will formulate new ideas, new opinions.  Isn’t that what it’s all about anyways? After doing all of this imitation and uncovering what voice actually does to a piece of writing, a writer must take others ideas and imitate them to find your own voice.  You find your voice through others.