Subject: Re: Voice versus Action
From: Jim Rovira (jrovira@drew.edu)
Date: Fri Nov 02 2001 - 11:46:55 GMT
A couple of things to keep in mind --
If you're in a creative writing program or class, they have to teach you
Something. Like you said, it's hard to teach someone how to create a
uniquely individual character like Seymour (or Buddy). It's relatively
easy, though, to teach plot development. It's more formulaic.
So I wouldn't think that what they're teaching has anything -- necessarily
-- to do with good fiction writing, and everything to do with the context
in which fiction writing is being approached. I've found that writing good
characters -- creating a voice that hooks a reader -- is something like
acting (I think Salinger saw this connection too). You have to become, in
your mind, this other person...then start talking like them and thinking
like them on paper. Let it go. Don't even think about it. Let the
character take over. Then go back and look at it critically and see what
you may want to fix.
I agree with Will, though...voice and action (plot) aren't necessarily
opposed to one another...
Good luck :)
Jim
Matthew Cole wrote:
>
> Hey everyone. I've noticed that in the creative writing classes at the
> university I go to (Appalichian State University in Boone, NC) both the
> professors and the students seem to be pretty hung up on the idea of plot.
> When workshoping stories students seem to get very nervous that their
> stories aren't moving along fast enough or that there's not enough going on.
> This frustrated me and I couldn't completely figure out why but tonight I
> started re-reading "Seymour an Introduction" and it got me thinking. I
> really enjoy "Seymour" and it's always felt cozy to me and I'm pretty sure
> that it's because of the voice. It feels like a comfortable old friend and
> it never bores me. Generally before reading I have to prepare myself for
> some action and it takes awhile to become comfortable with the setting or
> the situation before I get fully involved in what I'm reading. With
> "Seymour" (and to a lesser extent other Salinger stories as well) I find
> myself hyptonitized by the voice and I'm wrapped up in no time. I think that
> part of the reason that I love Salinger so much is because of the
> distinctive deliberately paced voice that's consistent in every single one
> of his stories. But I'm seeing a scary trend in my writing classes. The
> teachers are intent on spending the majority of the class time lecturing on
> formulas that can be used to create effective plots. I've read so many
> stories that were written by obviously tallented people who get so tangled
> up in the notion that there has to be visible forward progress that they
> forget to make sure that they're creating convincing interesting voices in
> their stories. It's easy to write a story. It's not easy to create
> characters like Buddy Glass. Students who don't care or simply cannot create
> any worthwhile characters rely on death, drugs, and sex to create
> streamlined stories that are close to worthless. I would love to see more
> emphasis placed on the creation of voice in narratives, but maybe that's
> just me. So I was curious to know how everyone else fee;s. What's more
> important, voice or action? Would you rather read a plot heavy novel or
> listen to the off-topic ramblings of a narrator who doesn't rely on
> "action?" Thanks in advance for your opinions.
>
> Matthew
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
> -
> * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
> * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Wed Mar 20 2002 - 09:23:09 GMT