I know my voice, and it's intelligent and informed, not ignorant. If some people are offended by that, too bad. I won't dumb down anything I took the time and energy to write for someone to get mad because he/she doesn't know what a word or phrase means.
That was an interesting read. I'm sure if I read a new book written by one of my favourite authors I'd still know it was them even if their name wasn't on the cover. Even though their stories change, the style and voice remains the same. That's what keeps me going back for more.
"Smarting up" a term paper is for the quackademics, not Joe Schmoe.
I thought that it was an interesting article, but only partly agree:
1. I believe that it's more important to write in the voice of the pov (point of view) character. That is how to induce the reader to be absorbed in the story. If the pov is of a truck driver it doesn't work to make him sound like university prof, and the other way around. The "voice" of the author is inconsequential in some ways.
2. I agree with #2. It is absolutely important to have a purpose for the writing and stick to it. It doesn't have to be a profound purpose. Maybe the purpose is to entertain. That is valid. It may be more profound, such as to persuade or express the author's beliefs on an important subject. A highly skilled author is able to write on more than one level, combining entertainment, for example, with a high purpose.
3. Branding: I don't agree with this at all. I think what is suggested leads to repetition and cliches, which tend to debase the quality of the writing effort and are limiting at the same time.
I think this list of three items is oriented to the author and misses the concept that a literary work is a two-way street between the author and reader. (Sorry for the preceding cliche.)
AW
that just feels weird.... maybe I'm coming down with something....