Writer's Voice Effect Upon Getting Submission Read

[A F Waddell]

Ms. Roerden brings up a new issue for me - are certain types of voices more marketable - and if so, why? Pondering, I remain. ~ A

[John McFetridge]

Maybe memoirs are different, but this issue was pretty much at the heart of the "Margaret B. Jones" story a few months ago.

[Clair Dickson]

I wonder if voices that are different, distinct are the most marketable. If it sounds like it could be written by anyone, it won't be as memorable. Like all the clone music groups that seem to pop up (98 backsync boys, etc.) If it's got a unique flavor, people are more likely to remember.

No body is going to confuse Raymond Chandler with Arthur Conan Doyle, for example. But you might not catch the differences between Hammet, Chandler, and James Cain if you're not that familiar with them.

When I read anthologies straight through, some stories stand out because they're so different, so interesting just in writing style from word one. Others, I couldn't tell you what they were about, let alone who wrote them.

[A F Waddell]

I missed that . . . thanks for the heads up.

[A F Waddell]

How very true! We must avoid clone writing . . . avoid clone writing . . . avoid clone writing . . . :-)

I wonder if voices that are different, distinct are the most marketable. If it sounds like it could be written by anyone, it won't be as memorable. Like all the clone music groups that seem to pop up (98 backsync boys, etc.) If it's got a unique flavor, people are more likely to remember. >>

[Chris Roerden]

Apologies for not keeping up with the discussion I started--undoubtedly because I'm on the road so much conducting this very discussion on my workshop tour of libraries.
You're absolutely right that a distinctive voice will get mss noticed in the submission pile. If the voice is wildly distinctive, that could work against the author in that the voice draws too much attention to itself, distracting readers from getting immersed in the story.
The more frequent problem comes from old writing habits having become deeply entrenched, hence invisible to the writer (and to her or his critique partners, who have the same habits). These poison the natural voice of most new writers. Getting rid of the habits raises the "read rate"--best estimates are that 90 to 95 percent of submissions are not read, simply because those pesky habits show up to flag the writer as merely average.
If anyone reading this is in the area of Los Angeles, I'd love to meet you. I'm about to present free Don't Sabotage Your Submission workshops on this subject (with interactive discussion) Aug. 3, 4, & 5 in Burbank, Pasadena, and San Bernardino. My schedule is posted on www.snurl.com/28jtg. Feel free to spread the word.

[Elizabeth Zelvin]

I've said before (elsewhere) that voice can't be faked or forced, and it led to a lively debate. Since then, I've realized I should have qualified it: an original voice can't be faked or forced. Lots of people can write like Conan Doyle or Robert B. Parker if they put their minds to it. But a new voice? I think this is an area where the "It's a mystery!" part of writing comes in. (Remember that great tag line from Shakespeare in Love?) If I'm right, then voice can't be created to please the market, and therefore what's the point of asking whether some voices are more marketable than others?

[carole gill]

Great discussion.
But how does someone know if their own voice is different?
I can see the difference in novels--but can't judge my own.
In your opinion, A.F., how can a person examine their own voice?