Here I am back again. Sean, I think "voice" comes first and editing infuses that voice with concision. Editing is the secondary task in that way. The invention included the "voice" of the writer and I'm hoping that you can see that in my work. What do you think on editing as the secondary task--absolutely necessary, but secondary--even though sometime seemingly never ending.
I'm closer to George Saunders on this, Mary. I believe that in a first draft we begin with A voice and there will still be remnants of this in the final draft. But I also believe that *fanatical*, highly-detailed polishing of the type Saunders recommends will significantly alter that voice, and for the reason he provides: because over an entire book, those many thousands of minute choices will be made differently by every writer. In short, if you want individualise your voice, obsessive editing should help achieve that.
Here I am back again. Sean, I think "voice" comes first and editing infuses that voice with concision. Editing is the secondary task in that way. The invention included the "voice" of the writer and I'm hoping that you can see that in my work. What do you think on editing as the secondary task--absolutely necessary, but secondary--even though sometime seemingly never ending.
I'm closer to George Saunders on this, Mary. I believe that in a first draft we begin with A voice and there will still be remnants of this in the final draft. But I also believe that *fanatical*, highly-detailed polishing of the type Saunders recommends will significantly alter that voice, and for the reason he provides: because over an entire book, those many thousands of minute choices will be made differently by every writer. In short, if you want individualise your voice, obsessive editing should help achieve that.
Agree!
I actually have much to say--but need some time to do so, Will be back to you, Sean.
I look forward to that, Mary.