I’ve written in the past about my editors. I’ve told you how the editor I was using died unexpectedly last year. It was quite a blow to me and I was in a funk for an extended time. Then, after a few dismal attempts at finding another editor I finaly, finally found another editor I can work with. I’ve sent her a few of my stories and she has uncovered issues with them that I completely missed. Excellent!

A few months ago I sent he one of my favorite stories. I think every writer has a story they are particularly fond of. The story I sent to Susan is titled, ‘Changes.’ It is about the greed of big pharma, the dedication to research of one particular genetic scientist and what people are willing to do in the face of near certain extinction.

Last week I received the edit back. Again, Susan caught a few things I never considered, the reason I knew I needed an editor in the first place, but she pointed out one issue that really surprised me. Voice. Apparently it’s a common problem with writers without extensive experience.

Now, you have to understand there are at least two different voices for a writer. I suspect there are probably more. The first is the voice of the author himself or herself. For example, If I were given a couple of pages from Andre Norton, Robert Heinlein, Jim Butcher, Kevin Hearne or Jane Lindskold I’m sure I could identify each correctly. There’s a style each of them possess that is unique. That’s their ‘voice.’ It’s unmistakable. However, that’s not the voice my editor was referring to.

The voice Susan was pointing out to me, and what I need to correct, is the voice of my characters. They all talk the same, they all ‘sound’ the same. Now, granted, in ‘Changes’ they are all technical people, all research scientists and all very intelligent. I suspect they all would sound very similar. However, they all shouldn’t sound the same.

One of my characters, Frank, is a rather submissive gentleman. His wife makes him sandwiches to take to work every morning. He’s a diligent worker but he’d rather remain in the background rather than be in the spotlight. Steven, is an exceptionally brilliant researcher, second only to a man half again his age who has dedicated his entire career to discovering the workings of genetic code. What my editor was pointing out, and unfortunately correctly pointing out, was that when Frank talks he should not should like the head researcher or even Steven. He should sound like Frank.

So just how should Frank ‘talk?’ Since he’s rather submissive his sentences should be hesitant, probably short and probably filled with passive words.

“Do you think we should test this subject for digestive issues today or should we wait until tomorrow when he’s more recovered from anesthesia?” would be something you would expect Frank to say. It’s weak, it’s tentative and it shows lack of both authority and confidence.

“Set up a digestive panel for the subject. Feed him no more than thirty grams of protein and monitor blood glucose levels every hour for the next twelve hours. Please email me the results as soon as you have them.” is something you might expect Steven to say. It’s direct, it is a statement of what he wants done, when he wants it done and what he’s looking for. While the level is just as technical as Frank’s was, the delivery displays a completely different personality. This is what Susan was pointing to and what I completely missed in my story. I was more interested in telling the story than in the personalities, a grave mistake for a writer.

Writing ties together a number of talents; world building, storytelling, writing, psychology and the ability to relate to your intended audience. Without proper voice a writer falls short in both storytelling and psychology.

I now have to go back into this story and make sure each character has a distinct voice. When you’re writing, make sure you identify with each character as an individual and convey their personality through their own distinct voice. It’ll save you a great deal of time later. *laughs*