Have You Seen my Voice? a.k.a. Journal #6

Here we go again. I feel like Zinnser has already addressed the notion of voice in writing in a previous chapter. Yet chapter 20 is all about finding your own voice in writing. He says, "My commodity as a writer, whatever I'm writing about, is me. And your commodity is you. Don't alter your voice to fit your subject. Develop one voice that readers will recognize when they hear it" (231).

How can I avoid changing my voice to fit the subject when I do not know how my voice sounds? This idea of voice is closely tied to style in my mind and I am not sure that Zinnser is succesful in clarifying between the two definitions. He wants writers to put forth the effort to remain true to their unique voices but does not offer a distinct defintion to start from.

You know what I think is honesty? Toni Morrison talking about voice. The very last page of chapter 20 has a long quote from Morrison about how she feels about her own writing voice. In the last lines of her quote she says, "It had a certain style. It was inevitable. I couldn't describe it, but I could produce it"(240).

As an English major I feel that a lot of what I write and get graded on happens on accident. All this time I have spent in college and I do not think I have learned anything new that I have directly applied to my writing. Do not get me wrong, I have learned many new techniques and approaches to writing, I just do not apply them in the heat of the moment.

I think many students, not just fellow English majors, would agree with me here if they were honest. Like Morrison, I cannot describe what and why I write what I do. It just happens. More often than not I get a stellar grade as well. Teachers leave comments on stylistic choices or unique insights I brought to the literature and I think to myself, "Sure, that sounds like an excellent reason for me to have written that."

So, in the position I currently find myself, is it possible to write with my voice, not sacrificing its uniqueness for subject matter? Even now as I write this post I am asking myself if this piece has a voice. I feel, in some ways, like a blind person. Others see the beauty in what I write. Teachers say that even in a typed paper, they know when a piece of writing is mine. Yet I do not see what they see. In my mind, this makes me a counterfeit.

A counterfeit writer.

The Idea of Writing Reality a.k.a. Journal #5

"Ultimately every writer must follow the path that feels most comfortable. For most people learning to write, that path is nonfiction. It enables them to write about what they know or can observe or can find out. This is especially true of young people and students" (Zinnser 99).

For the most part I agree with Zinnser. (I know, shocking isn't it?)

I do think that writers must figure out what works for them; writing doesn't have to be some systematic process that produces a universal style. However, I'm not sure I can accept that whatever is "most comfortable" is the way writers should go. For me, I think writing is a process that needs to be able to push and stumble and climb through uncomfortable styles and forms. Sometimes working through the unfamiliar sharpens you as a writer.

I feel like Zinnser is oversimplifying the art of Nonfiction writing. As a student taking a Nonfiction class this semester, I have come to realize that not everything comes out great in the subject of nonfiction. Writing about the world, the human condition, etc. is extremely hard to do if the goal is to write it well. Anyone could put down an opinion or idea but it doesn't make it worthy of publication.

Nonfiction is great in that it does allow people to write about things they know rather than trying to impersonate an interest in some lofty concept. The problem here is that people often mistake their "knowing" of something as the end all observation. Nonfiction is not a fancy name for journal entry, people.

I have grown to love Nonfiction and I feel that it is actually as difficult to write as fiction. I also don't like how Zinnser equates the style of nonfiction with the simplicity of college students or "young people". Why is it especially well suited for us? Are older people incapable of writing about what they know? Or are students and young people so feeble minded that they must start out with what they know before attempting to try on the discourse of the educated?

Think on that Zinnser!

What I Want to be When I Grow Up a.k.a. Journal #4

I couldn't stop crying, it was totally embarrasing. Who cries over homework? Apparently that's me. Reading Jim Sheeler's piece on the Marine's who notify families of deceased military men and women was deeply emotional for me. That's what I want to be when I grow up. If writing is something that remains in my future, I want to write with the clarity, precision and emotion of Jim Sheeler.

When 9/11 happened, I really didn't understand what all of the hype was about. When I think about my reaction now, I shudder with disgust. Although I didn't understand the significance of who or why I still could have shown some compassion for the people killed in that moment of impact with the towers. As the war has progressed and support has decreased I have been on the fence, I admit this freely. Sheeler's piece however, put a different face on the war in Iraq.

I felt like I was there in the room with the families. The most chilling moments were when he was writing about the pregnant wife and her screams that passangers missed. I thought to myself, "This is so much bigger than I ever let myself believe." I have always been opposed to the armed forces and the need for them in the first place. I remember once in high school getting a call from someone in the military trying to recruit me. I ended up giving him a thirty minute lecture about how what he did for a living was wrong and I would never be caught supporting murder in the name of democracy. I never understood how naive I was until I read this article.

Sheeler's article conveyed so many things all at one time. Facts, emotion, the human element. How can you write with that much passion about devastation? Reading this article made me rethink how I view the men and women who fight for my rights and freedoms. Not to sound cliche, but I'm proud to be an American although I know this country's not perfect.

I would like to meet Jim one day and ask him all kinds of things about what his year long investigation taught him, how it changed him. Simply reading it for the purposes of our class, I was changed. That's what journalism is all about I think. I want to be a part of something like that one day.