A favorite strategy to share with a group of student writers
you judge yourself to have got on well with comes from you asking them at
random to name building blocks of story.
You suggest a few as examples:
character, scene, dialogue, suspense.
They, tentative at first, chip in the likes of tension, reversal,
denouement. You encourage them. They throw in subtext, plot, point-of-view.
Okay, you say. Here’s
the deal: list as many as you can, then
assign each one a place in the hierarchy, your vote for the most important as
number one, your personal candidate for the least being assigned the bottom
rung.
Once again, you provide examples, admitting that for you,
plot always comes at the bottom because you are so poor in its use as a workable
tool. (This confession gives you another teaching opportunity when the
assembled students ask you how it is you can write story without plot. “I thought you’d never ask,” you tell them,
launching into your explanation.)
For the longest time, your pick for the top candidate was
character, a choice you believed was—for you—unquestionable, on a level, say,
with the unquestionable rising of the sun in the east to begin its arc toward
the west, whereupon it will appear to set.
Then a moue of doubt set in. The
sun rising in the east is only an illusion.
If you were seeing the phenomenon of the sun’s orbit from a strategic
remove, the sun would neither rise nor set; the sun would orbit.
That’s how point-of-view elbowed its way to the head of the
line for a few moments. POV—Who’s
telling the story? And why that person
or those persons?
After those moments came the one to knock character and POV
out of the picture, thanks to what seems impeccable logic but nevertheless is
as fragile in its logic as the certainty of the sun rising in the east.
What in the final analysis draws you in beyond the words and
characters and plot? Regardless of the
genre, the time of publication, the subject matter, voice—no, Voice—grabs you
every time, draws you beyond the “in” you were supposed to be when an
instructor assigned the work. Putting
things at that level, why would you have to go out and buy your own copy of
everything Claude Jones read aloud in his lectures. Why was it that when he read portions of The Golden Ass, you knew you had to have
your own copy, when, a semester earlier, the same book in another class meant
nothing to you?
Why now are you still bristling at a recent news story in
which you discovered the Irish writer, John Banville, is about to resuscitate
Raymond Chandler’s detective, Philip Marlowe?
You like Banville well enough, buy and digest everything he
publishes. The reason devolves to the
fact of you resonating more to Raymond Chandler and his narrative voice.
Annie Proulx.
Margaret Atwood, Jane Austen.
Elmore Leonard. Daniel
Woodrell. Gaylord Dold. James M. Cain.
To name a few.
Others, who write nonfiction, speak in a voice that nails
you to the wall. Joan Didion. Barbara Tuchman. Loren Eisley.
Mark Twain.
Do not forget the voices of the poets.
Before you were aware of voice as a specific tool in a
writer’s toolkit, you had no words or standards to describe what you think of
now as narrative voice. For a one-word
approach, attitude works pretty well.
Indeed, voice, or attitude influences the choice of stories
and the characters to help dramatize them; it informs the narrative tone of
nonfiction.
Voice is the same news story being read by Walter Cronkheit
and Jack Nicholson, with the appropriate interpretations attendant on each
version.
Voice is you, reading your material aloud before you decide
the time has come to send it off. Voice is you listening to yourself to see if
you stumble over a word or phrase or, for that matter, the overall pace.
Voice is you coming back from an evening’s walk, satisfied
because you’ve raised a sweat. Voice is
hearing a character say something, then wishing you’d said that, before you
realize you had.
No comments:
Post a Comment