Point of view

 Shifting back to writing about writing -- a topic on my mind this week is "point of view" aka POV. Many authors (and readers) are familiar with first person POV, which presents the story through the mind of one of the characters -- sometimes the protagonist, sometimes a third party who is observing the protagonist (think "Great Gatsby) -- and with third person POV, which is the author basically telling the story. 

However, there are more than just two POVs possible. There is second person, in which the narrator speaks to you. This is not commonly used in novels (but it is used in blog posts 😉) because of the difficulty of keeping it up for 100,000 words, but it is used occasionally in short stories and especially in "Choose Your Own" adventure type works. 

More commonly, though, is third-person limited and third person omniscient. Third-person limited is the one you probably thought of when you read "third-person." That's where the author is speaking in third person -- he, she, they, them, it -- but from the perspective of a single character. We know what that character is thinking and feeling and seeing. The perspective may change within the novel, but when it does, it is still from that of a single character, just a different one. It is always signaled by some kind of break, either a section break (###) or a chapter break or some other kind of break that I can't think of but undoubtedly exists. You don't change perspective within a single scene. 

Third-person omniscient is where the author/narrator speaks from the perspective of every character. And that isn't the same as "head hopping," where the author sometimes speaks from one character, sometimes from another at more or less random. The author must include every perspective of every character at all times -- which is what makes it difficult to carry off throughout a novel. And the narrator knows more than the characters do; the narrator is God. 😄 Some claim that you can "zoom in and out from limited to omniscient." I won't say that you can't, but you'd better be very skilled at it. Some of the Victorians did it, especially Thomas Hardy. He loved to zoom out and make omniscient proclamations, especially as the novel neared its end. Again, it should be signaled by some kind of break.

I've written several short stories in first-person, one being "Effie's Tale" that won the Mystery Category in last year's SouthWest Writer's short story contest. I'm toying with the idea of writing one from second person and, eventually, one from third-person omniscient. I started one recently, and switched to third-person limited without meaning to. 😄 Old habits die hard! But it was also because there were too many characters -- at least 9, without counting the bit players who had walk-ons. I think for my first foray, I should limit it to at most 4 characters. 

Marketing books is a full-time job!

The days when authors focused on writing and publishers and agents handled all of the marketing are long past -- if they ever existed. Authors have always attended signings at bookstores, conferences, and other venues. They've always given speeches and workshops and interviews. What's changed is who organizes these appearances. It's now all down to the author. You become your own publicist. 

Every public appearance is marketing, even when you're not selling books. My presentations to the Wheels Museum and to SouthWest Writers were opportunities for promoting my book and, as importantly, myself. I gave my "Adding Authenticity to Your Writing" to SouthWest Writers. I think of it as "Reference Resources for Lay People." 😄 There was a lively discussion afterward and several people stopped me later to tell me how informative it was. I had a great time and didn't have to grade anything! 

At the suggestion of my publisher, I suggested to my critique group -- Write Minds -- back in June that we organize group signings. Those ultimately were all held in August, with the intervening six or so weeks devoted to organizing them. Signings were so much more fun with a group! The time passed more quickly, but more importantly, more people stopped. Our group included one historical fiction (WWII) writer, two sci-fi authors, a historical romance writer, and, of course, one historical cozy mystery writer. We appealed to a much broader group of readers. People who were attracted to one book often politely talked to the rest of us -- and sometimes even bought one of our books as well. I remember someone buying my book for her mother, after having bought one of the others for herself. We agreed that the prime hours were 2-4 on Saturday and Sunday afternoons, so set up around 1:30 to be ready. Not much point in arriving before then.

Our first signing was at Books on the Bosque in Albuquerque -- in the afternoon after my SouthWest Writers presentation (whew!). They are a small, independent bookstore and coffee shop that caters to the literary crowd. They set it up as a reading event, not just a signing. We each took 10 minutes or so to read from our work, then answered questions. Unfortunately, it was sparsely attended. I wonder if we could have done more or better promotion. I suspect that if any of us were better known ... Maybe we need to join a book club or two. 😄

Then, it was back to Page 1 the next weekend and a traditional book signing at tables in front of the store. A week off, and then the two Barnes & Nobles in Albuquerque back-to-back over Labor Day Weekend. I'm exhausted! Nothing more at this point before the Southern New Mexico Book Festival in Las Cruces October 11, when I'll be giving my "Adding Authenticity" presentation again.

City directories -- what are they and why should a writer of historical fiction use them?

 And, no, I don't mean the old telephone directories -- although those can be useful, too. I mean the city business directories published by a variety of companies with Polk being the most familiar. And, yes, they are still published today, both in digital and print form. Looks like the current publisher is Data-Axle.

The city directory I'm referring to was was published primarily for the business community to use in marketing and advertising. It included a section of half- and full-page paid ads, a section with businesses alphabetically by name, a section that listed residents alphabetically with address and (eventually) phone number, a classified section that listed businesses by type, and a section arranged by address. This section is the reason that they are sometimes called a "criss-cross" directory (that was also the name of a specific publication). 

I suspect you're already seeing the benefits of city directories for historical research -- fiction or non-fiction. If you have the name of a person or business, you can quickly find where that person lived or where that business was located. Frequently, the business listing includes the name of the owner and if you're very lucky, the business took out an ad, which promotes its finer points.  

And, if you have an address, you can just as quickly discover who lived there or what business was located there -- or if it was a vacant lot. You can also see what or who was on either side of your address, across the street, down the block ... 

The classified section is obviously useful if you want to know the names of specific types of businesses. Not only can you find hotels, restaurants, and stores, you can find the names of lawyers, plumbers, stenographers, seamstresses ... You can add a touch of authenticity to your work. 

The ads are also useful -- assuming that there is one for the business you're interested in. They'll give you the name of the business, its slogan, the owner's name, and usually something the business. They are advertisements, after all. 

I recently used the 1929 Albuquerque city directory found in the genealogical collection at the main library to find the name of a Mexican restaurant walking distance from the Alvarado hotel. That restaurant no longer exists, but I have the name and the address. In this case, that's really all I wanted. However, for my next book, I needed the name of an auto court located on 4th Street -- which was Route 66 in 1929. I turned to Auto Courts and there was a list of them, located one after the other on 4th street. I picked one, then turned to the address section and discovered that there was an all-night diner located right next door! I'm assuming that "Midnight Lunch" was an all-night diner, anyway. 

That auto court also had an ad. I turned to it and found that it gave the owners' names and that they were 1 to 3 room cottages with steam heat, hot and cold running water, private tile bath, and a kitchenette with gas for cooking. I now have plenty of detail for creating an authentic context and my characters who live there can offer guests a cup of coffee or a drink or even a light meal. 

I also jotted down the names and addresses of several other cafes in the area where the story is set, just in case. There's Mecca Cafe, "the oldest and most reliable cafe in Albuquerque," proprietor Theodore Paulantis. Is it Middle Eastern? Greek? The Liberty Cafe : Home of Good Eats "where the choicest foods are served." We can guess what type of cuisine they offered. And, of course, the Coney Island Cafe, now known as Lindy's. 

I'll be returning to the directories to find the location of the nearest police station to the scene of the murder, maybe find the name of cab companies that my characters will use ... the possibilities are endless!

In my next post, I'll explore other resources at the public library, including ones that can help me find out what cuisine was served at the Mecca Cafe and what movies the KiMo theatre was showing in 1929. 

Challenges of writing a historical roman à clef

Note: I started this post on July 17 and now it's October 6 (!). In the time between these two dates, we closed on our house, moved into/camped out in our house, registered the car and got our new ids, unpacked our belongings when they were finally delivered (that's a story in itself) and made good progress on settling in. The washer and dryer weren't delivered until August 30, so I was also making weekly trips to a laundromat. We joined the local senior center, the Indian Pueblo Cultural Center, and the Museum Foundation of New Mexico and signed up for classes with Oasis. Still, I find it hard to believe that nearly two months have passed! 

A historical roman a clef is a specific type of historical fiction which is based on real events and real people. It's fiction, not non-fiction, so names of people and places are usually changed, events are modified, minor characters are composites of several real people. It presents special difficulties above and beyond those of historical fiction in general. One of my history professors said that he always cringed inside when a student wanted to write a history of a hometown, because it is so difficult to be objective. Beyond seeing things through a personal emotional lens (for good or bad), it's hard to decide what is really essential and what is irrelevant. What are the essential traits of the major characters and what traits can be dispensed with? Which details about places and events are significant and which ones just bog down the narrative? It's also difficult to simplify relationships and reduce the number of characters and events.

Another challenge that is unique to a historical roman a clef is facing the reality that the story you were told is not what really happened. That, in fact, sometimes it would have been nearly impossible for history to have played out that way. People are not lying (or usually not). Memories are faulty. They play tricks on us. If you don't believe me, ask your siblings about some event in the past at the next family gathering. Or maybe don't, as arguments will ensue. And, yes, sometimes they are deliberately lying to protect themselves or others. It's also the case that they've told the same lie/story for so long that they've come to believe that it is the truth. You'll be challenging people's memories and versions of the story, so be prepared! Presenting evidence is necessary, but it is not sufficient. You're rewriting their own memory of themselves. Be ready to say, "I know ... I had to do it for the story." 

If you're going to write a historical roman a clef, it's vital that you do your historical research in order to be able to identify the erroneous memories and sort out the confused timelines to the degree possible. You need to make sure that the contextual details are correct -- home appliances, tv shows, car models, clothing and hair styles, ethnic restaurants -- as well as the major details and events. Was it legal to do that at that time? Was it socially acceptable? Could the people in the story have afforded to purchase that item, go on that vacation, etc.? 

A couple of personal examples. When I was 3, we moved from Columbus, Ohio, to Puerto Rico. We gave the parakeet to the people who lived in the trailer next door. My memory is of walking next to my mother, carrying the bird cage and feeling very grown-up. According to my mother, I carried the box of bird seed. She carried the cage. How deflating! Obviously, I remembered it the way that I wanted to remember it. 

Another -- when researching the history of the establishment of a public library for my dissertation, I found an article in the local paper written about 50 years after the time period. The author claimed that the local opera company of the time performed an oratorio and raised hundreds of dollars for the library. The problem was (and is) that there is absolutely no contemporary report of that oratorio. I scoured each issue of the local paper during the time in question and the oratorio was never mentioned. The opera company was, but not the oratorio. Another problem was that there was no report of the funds raised for the library by that oratorio, and the newspaper reported on every single fundraising event and gave the amount that was raised, which was generally in the range of $50 or so. If hundreds of dollars had been raised, it certainly would have been reported. Long story short, it eventually became clear that the writer of the article, who was about 13 at the time the library was being built, had conflated several different events. There is a report of a local performance based on "The Virginian" which featured "real cow boys and real cow boy songs," but no oratorio. It raised about $47 for the library, not hundreds. 

The amount supposedly raised is very close to the sum total of all fund raising events reported in the paper. There are photographs of townspeople in costume for the supposed performance in the local history collection, but half of the characters are not characters in that oratorio. I did find a report of a fund raising concert given by a local man who had been accepted at Julliard to raise funds for his tuition. Later, it was reported that he would not be able to attend that year and he had donated what was raised to the library. (For those who are curious, he was Thomas Edward Birchell. He did ultimately attend Julliard and had a long and successful career as professional singer. He was known as "The Cowboy Baritone." https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/91303758/thomas-edward-birchell). Have I identified the source of those photographs and of the legend? 

The local history magazine refuses to publish my article. It challenges the city's view of itself as highly cultured from an earlier period. As Maxwell Scott says in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, "When the legend becomes fact, print the legend." 

Challenges of writing historical fiction

 In my experience, the first challenge is in defining "historical fiction." To begin with, I mean "historical realistic fiction." Fiction set in an imaginary past is "fantasy" or "historical fantasy" or "alternate history" or even "science fiction." It presents its own challenges, but they are distinct from those faced by writers of historical realistic fiction. 

Some define "historical fiction" as any fiction set twenty years previous to the time in which it was written. Others say it's fifty years. My personal definition is "set in a time of which the author has no memory." So, if you're in your twenties, that might be as early as twenty years ago. If you're in you're seventies, than it's probably something like sixty years ago - or even seventy. What's important is that you are not writing from personal experience, and I'll explain why that is in a bit. 

On to the other challenges. You're probably thinking, "The challenge is in getting the facts straight," and while that's certainly true, facts are far more than names and dates and places. Those kinds of facts are fairly simple to establish using Wikipedia or any other encyclopedia or work of history. 

The real challenge is in getting the facts of social customs, norms, attitudes, etc. correct. Historical fiction recreates a world that is as foreign to the author's lived experience as it is to the reader's. And that's why it matters that you not be writing from personal experience. As the author, you should also be on a journey of discovery. You'll view the time from a different perspective than someone who lived through it. Items, customs, attitudes, etc., that were taken for granted by those living in that time will be viewed quite differently from someone living in the future, when those things have changed. An obvious example is that of phones. Young people today may never have seen an actual telephone with a handset, a cord, pushbuttons or a dial, and a receiver. An author of historical fiction would need to write something more than "He called his mother" in order to recreate that common event -- and if the author lived through that time, it very likely won't even occur to her that a detailed description is necessary.

Dress -- at least, outer dress -- is one area that authors of historical fiction are almost certain to get correct. For many of them, that's why they are writing it and that's why their readers read it. They are in love with hoop skirts or Empire gowns or Highland kilts. They may even get the footwear right. Where they often fail is with the underwear or lack thereof, and with the everyday dress of the common person. They miss the fact that clothes were not laundered after one wearing, or even several. They were "aired out" and brushed and spot cleaned. Underwear was washed more frequently -- that was its purpose; to protect clothes -- if you were wealthy. Otherwise, you slept in it. If you were lucky, you had two sets -- one to wash, one to wear. 

The same for hairstyles. They describe in detail the elaborate hairstyles of the wealthy, but generally ignore the simple hairstyles of the working classes and of children. Too often, women leave the house bareheaded. All adults -- those about 14 and older -- wore some sort of head covering when in public until the late 1960s -- a headscarf, a mob cap, a beret, something. Most children did, as well, although there was more variation for them, depending on age, location, and social class.

Transportation is almost always correct, being another aspect that draws people to historical fiction. Although, again, the amount of walking done by the lower classes is usually ignored and the restrictions this placed on their abilities to move very far from their birthplace. 

So, what are the challenges, beyond presenting the lives of the common people? Social norms/customs and attitudes. In regard to social norms, I mentioned one already -- adults covered their heads when they went out in public. Women always wore gloves (and please learn the etiquette of glove wearing! Take them off before drinking or eating) and men wore them when in formal dress. Men wore ties or neckerchiefs or ascot or something around the throat. They wore collars that buttoned onto the neck of their shirts and were changed daily or so. It saved washing the shirts. More than in our modern world, clothes were status symbols. They reflected the wearer's socioeconomic status and position in society. They could also be symbols of rebellion, or of religions or political beliefs. Examples are the simple dress of Quakers, the short, skimpy shifts of flappers, and the bonnets rouges of the French Revolution. 

Another that really makes me crazy is when young men and unchaperoned young women will go on "dates." Often that actual word is used. Even courting couples did not spend time together unchaperoned. The young man would ask the father's (or parents') permission to court their daughter. That did not mean that the two of them started going on dates alone. It meant that he might walk her to and from church and be invited to Sunday dinner. He might call for her in his carriage and they might go for a drive in the park in the afternoon -- in full view of the public. The two of them might be granted some time in semi-private in the parlor -- with the door to the next room open. It would be acceptable for the two of them to dance with each other primarily, although not exclusively, at balls. 

An even greater challenge is the temptation to ascribe modern attitudes to historical characters and to judge historical characters by modern standards. As I said above, modern attitudes about cleanliness are often ascribed to historical characters. They not only wash their clothes far too often, they bathe and wash their hair too frequently, as well. We laugh at Eliza Doolittle who "washed her face and hands before she come," and think of her as "dirty," but that was historically accurate. 

While we certainly can point to women and men who challenged sex/gender roles, as well as racism, they were doing it within a specific socio-cultural situation. Their attitudes would continue to reflect the boundaries and norms of that society. They were able to successfully navigate those boundaries in large part because they were born to families with relative privilege and connections. Wealthy people obviously had more of both and were able to exercise greater autonomy, but women were still women and men were still men and the races were still segregated. 

While working-class people might buck the system to some extent, it was within the confines of that system. A working-class woman might become a school teacher; she would not become a physician. A working-class man might become a Methodist preacher; he would not become a member of the Anglican clergy. 

Too often those who hold the standard attitudes of the day are depicted as narrow-minded, rigid, sexist, racist, etc. The men are presented as physically and verbally abusive, while the women are submissive, depressed victims. Certainly there were such situations, but in general, the average woman was satisfied with her life. She accepted her role as wife and mother and took pride in it. The average man honored her achievements. He also accepted his role as financial and material provider and took pride in it. Both of them were living within rigid role definitions and both expected the other to do so. It is quite possible to write a story about a person who was not happy within those restrictions and who sought fulfillment outside of them without damning everyone else as either abusive or depressed.

And that is the greatest challenge of all. 

Characters' voices

 It's been a wild month since I last posted. We got an offer on the house in Baton Rouge in two days (!), I finished my last semester as a full-time professor and officially retired, the house was inspected and appraised and we packed, packed, packed. Furniture, etc., was picked up for storage on June 27. We closed on June 28 and immediately got on the road to Albuquerque. We arrived at our rental on July 1, went house hunting on July 2, found the absolutely most perfect place and made an offer and were under contract by July 3. Now it's waiting again for inspections and the appraisal. We're scheduled to close on August 1 and our furniture should arrive between August 10 and 19. 

Yesterday was the first meeting of my writing group in Albuquerque and I'm back to pondering the art and science of writing fiction. Readers have commented on how my many (some say too many) characters all have individuals voices and can quickly be distinguished from each other by their dialogue. I've been thinking about how I do that. I will be honest and say that it's not entirely conscious. It's an outcome of the process of creating an individual, unique character. This includes physical description, clothing, and manner of speaking -- their actual voice. 

The first thing I do is decide the gender and age of the character (not surprising). Then, the character's socio-economic status, which includes education and family composition, as well as birthplace/home town. Did this character grow up in a wealthy family, attend private schools, graduate from college? Or is this a working-class character with a high school education -- or less? It is 1929. Many young people left school at 16 to go to work and help support the family. Does this character come from a place with a distinct accent? 

At this point, I start to hear the character speaking in my mind. I don't put the word "hear" in quotation marks, because I quite literally hear the character's voice in my mind. I'm beginning to realize that not everyone visualizes the characters and the action of a book, as if a movie is playing in their mind.

I'll hear the voice, the accent, the rhythm of the character's speech. I make notes so that the voice will be consistent later. Does the character speak rapidly or slowly or at an average rate of speed? Does the character speak in a monotone or with dramatic emphasis or something in between? Does the character drop her gs or use double negatives? Does the character have a wide or narrow vocabulary? Does this character use slang and vulgarities or is this character prim and proper or perhaps timid or shy? Does the character remind me of a person I know/have known or of an actor or other celebrity? If so, I need to be careful not to create a parody or caricature of that person. It's one thing to be "inspired by," it's another to parrot or mimic another character -- real or imaginary. 

Whatever voice the character has, consistency is vital! Sometimes readers will correct a character's speech because it's grammatically incorrect or the word doesn't mean what the character thinks it means or because the phrasing is awkward or verbose. Occasionally it was a genuine mistake on my part, but most of the time, that's part of the character. 

And, of course, in my work, there is the issue of the character's voice being historically accurate. Word usage has changed. What was once incorrect is now correct, and what was correct is now incorrect. Words now have different meanings. Current idioms may not even have existed at that time, and idioms that were in use may be impenetrable or have changed meaning. Acceptable terms of the day may now be completely unacceptable and I need to do more research to find a historically accurate term that will not be offensive. It's also important to recognize that acceptable terms today may have been extremely offensive in a previous time.

In summary, voice comes from character. Your characters will have distinct voices if you've developed them sufficiently and know them well and allow them to speak naturally. 

We're off now to explore the Elena Gallegos Open Space here in Albuquerque. We find ourselves in the peculiar position of wanting to see and do as much as we can in ABQ and NM and yet realizing that we literally have the rest of our lives to do so. 

Show, don't tell

 Possibly due to the questions that Oleg asked in his interview (https://olegkagan.com/posts/shelf-talks-11-suzanne.html), I've been thinking a lot about the craft of writing.  Probably also due to revising and polishing short stories for submission to the SouthWest Writer's annual contest.

One of the most common bits of advice to authors is to "show, don't tell," but what do we mean by that? Interestingly, when I follow that advice quite literally and merely describe my characters' actions, tones of voice, and facial expressions, my beta readers complain that the work lacks emotion and that they don't understand the motivation of my characters. So, the literal "showing with no telling" that works for movies and television and other visual media doesn't particularly work for the written word. What, then, does it mean for us writers?  

Wikipedia defines it as "a narrative technique used in various kinds of texts to allow the reader to experience the story through actions, words, subtext, thoughts, senses, and feelings rather than through the author's exposition, summarization, and description. It avoids adjectives describing the author's analysis and instead describes the scene in such a way that readers can draw their own conclusions. The technique applies equally to nonfiction and all forms of fiction, literature including haiku and Imagist poetry in particular, speech, movie making, and playwriting."

OK, so I had it half right. It does mean actions and words, but it also includes "thoughts, senses, and feelings," as well as subtext. Readers do want to be told more explicitly how the character is feeling, why the character is acting in a certain way, what the character's motivations are -- but they want it to come from the character not the author, they want it to come naturally and organically, and they want to be free to draw their own conclusions about what is really happening.  

Does this mean that the story must be in the first person? That's sometimes easier, especially in terms of thoughts, senses, and feelings, but it's not a requirement. What is a requirement is that the character be the source of the information. The first, most obvious way, is through dialogue with others, in which the character's words convey necessary information, as well as the character's reactions to the words of others. 

A related technique is the internal monologue. These can be presented as actual thoughts -- I use italics to indicate that my character is thinking these exact words -- or they can be narrated, as in "She thought" or "She wondered" or "She reflected," etc. 

Along the same lines, the character can be said to "feel" an emotion. It's even more effective if the character reacts physically as well, crying or screaming or jumping for joy. Similes and metaphors are also effective means of conveying emotion without just baldly stating, "He felt happy." "He felt as if ..." "His heart jumped into his throat" or, conversely, "dropped to his stomach." 

This "showing" extends beyond thoughts, senses, and feelings to descriptions of the physical setting and objects in it. How many times have you been immersed in a story, identifying with the characters and virtually participating in the action, and suddenly you're presented with several paragraphs of rather pedestrian exposition? You're thrown right out of that world back into ours, feeling as if you're reading a textbook or a manual. Rather than telling the reader about the setting and the objects, allow the character to experience them through dialogue, action, and reaction. 

This is a standard feature of fantasy, science fiction, and historical fiction, where worldbuilding is so vital. The best example of this that I can think of is Tolkien (yeah, I'm one of those). He never just describes a setting. The hobbits do it for him. They gaze in wonder and awe. They react with fear or joy. They shiver in terror or ecstasy. They talk to each other about it. And we learn more about the other characters, the settings, the objects through the hobbits' interactions with them, verbal and physical. They struggle up a mountain path. They push their way through a thicket of thorns. They sink back into a soft bed. 

Thinking about Lost in Space (my husband's favorite nostalgia program), I could write, "The robot had a round metal torso with two accordion-pleated arms with metal calipers on the end of them. His torso could spin around in a complete circle. His head was a clear flattened bubble with lights inside that rose up and down as he spoke. His  accordion-pleated legs were each attached to a continuous track and generally moved in the same direction together." 

Or I could write, "The robot extended his accordion-pleated arms and flailed his metal caliper hands, while the flattened clear bubble that served as his head bobbed up and down and the lights inside it flashed off and on. He moved backwards and forwards on the continuous track that served as his feet, his accordion-pleated legs moving in concert. A voice emanating from a speaker in the upper half of his cylindrical torso warned, "Danger, Will Robinson! Danger." The torso rotated first one way, then the other, as the robot searched for Will Robinson." 

Same information about the robot, but in one version, it is sheer exposition, while in the other, it is an integral part of the description of the action and gives us insight into the personality, or programming, of the robot. And that insight forms a subtext -- the subtext of the relationship between Will Robinson and the robot. More on subtext in my next musings.  

Authorial voice

 A new blog post so soon?! I have the time and something on my mind -- and that is, the importance of finding your own voice as an author, whether of fiction or non-fiction. By that, I don't mean stubbornly clinging to what you have written, regardless of the feedback of others. I mean learning to distinguish between useful, valid criticism which will improve your story and criticism which is basically "I would have written it this way." My response to that is, "Please feel free." 

Every successful author develops an individual voice -- Dickens didn't write like Austen or even like Trollope; Stephen King doesn't write like J.K. Rowling; Hemingway didn't write like Faulkner. That voice attracts their readers and holds them. It gives the author's works their individual flavor and also adds a level of authenticity to them. The writing flows naturally and the characters and actions are authentic to the setting and theme, as the author is writing authentically and naturally. It's painfully obvious when someone is trying to write in the style of another (other than parody, of course) or to a checklist or template. 

This is the reason that I tend to avoid writer's workshops taught by other authors. Too many of them simply teach authors to write to a formula, to obscure rather than develop their own voice. I'm sure that they honestly believe what they are promoting, as it is what has worked for them. What they don't seem to understand is that it is not suitable to every genre, every audience, or every author.

The same can be said of literary agents. My limited experience with them was that they want authors whose works imitate whatever is topping the best seller lists today. It never seems to occur to them that those best selling authors, regardless of genre, are there because of their individual voice, not in spite of it. 

When I taught storytelling, I emphasized the importance of developing your own voice and style. I was always thrilled when the final performance rolled around and every student had developed an individual style that suited their personality. They also had learned to select stories that built on their individual strengths as storytellers. And every single student was effective, whether holding us rapt with a slowly building tension or making us laugh through humorous antics. They were all confident in their own voice. 

So, how do you develop your own voice as an author? First and foremost, you read -- you read deeply and widely. Partly to study the voices of others, but also to find which "voices" resonate with you and which voices you admire and want to emulate. If you only ever hear one voice, that's the voice you'll measure yourself against and it may be the wrong one. And you can study others' techniques that you might want to employ. 

Second, practice writing. Write in different styles and different formats. Write for different audiences. Experiment with different voices. Utilize those techniques you saw in the works of others. You may find that you have one voice for short stories and another for novels and yet another for blog posts. You'll likely find that some forms of poetry feel natural while others are totally alien. 

Third, seek feedback from other readers and other writers -- but only after you feel confident that you know your voice and your audience. Others can identify weaknesses that you want to resolve and they can also identify certain strengths that you want to build on. Use this feedback to improve and hone your voice, not to change it. 

And, yes, you might even attend writers' workshops taught by other authors. At this point, when you have confidence in your own voice, you'll be able to sift through the advice and keep the kernels while discarding the chaff.