The Voice, Part 1
In the previous post, I talked about my approach to building the 'world' of the historic novel so that it lives and breathes for modern readers. The second sphere of awareness that plays a key role in my method of writing is the 'voice.'
What do I mean by 'voice?' It exists on two levels: as the writer's voice -- style and form -- how the writer chooses to narrate the story to readers; and secondly as the character(s) voice -- whose points-of-view are revealing the story and how are they expressing themselves?
In the case of THE SECOND MRS. HOCKADAY, I honestly didn't make a conscious decision to tell the story without a traditional narrator. The novel came to me as it appears in its published form -- as a series of primary documents: letters, inquest records and diary entries that collectively reveal a long-suppressed mystery. I suspect this was a result of having immersed myself in Civil War-era documents for several years while researching another novel (one I abandoned for HOCKADAY); consequently, when I stumbled across the true event that inspired this novel, I was able to sit down and write it in a white-hot fury with all that 19th century correspondence and inquest-jargon fresh in my mind.
I also have a hunch that the form of narration I used was influenced by the dormant playwright in me. Subconsciously, it might have been her way of establishing a closer connection to her readers, by having her characters speak directly to the reader (in the diary entries) or indirectly but still not filtered through narration, in the letters Placidia writes to her cousin Mildred, Mildred writes to her, Major Hockaday writes to his bride, and their sons write to one another and Mildred once they are grown and starting to uncover their parents' secrets, thus resolving the mystery for the readers.
Next time: The Voice, Part 2; Speaking as a Character from Another Time
What do I mean by 'voice?' It exists on two levels: as the writer's voice -- style and form -- how the writer chooses to narrate the story to readers; and secondly as the character(s) voice -- whose points-of-view are revealing the story and how are they expressing themselves?
In the case of THE SECOND MRS. HOCKADAY, I honestly didn't make a conscious decision to tell the story without a traditional narrator. The novel came to me as it appears in its published form -- as a series of primary documents: letters, inquest records and diary entries that collectively reveal a long-suppressed mystery. I suspect this was a result of having immersed myself in Civil War-era documents for several years while researching another novel (one I abandoned for HOCKADAY); consequently, when I stumbled across the true event that inspired this novel, I was able to sit down and write it in a white-hot fury with all that 19th century correspondence and inquest-jargon fresh in my mind.
I also have a hunch that the form of narration I used was influenced by the dormant playwright in me. Subconsciously, it might have been her way of establishing a closer connection to her readers, by having her characters speak directly to the reader (in the diary entries) or indirectly but still not filtered through narration, in the letters Placidia writes to her cousin Mildred, Mildred writes to her, Major Hockaday writes to his bride, and their sons write to one another and Mildred once they are grown and starting to uncover their parents' secrets, thus resolving the mystery for the readers.
Next time: The Voice, Part 2; Speaking as a Character from Another Time
No comments have been added yet.
