standing mute in a huge, floodlit but empty auditorium, listening to a recording of her own as well as her ventriloquised voice. Her eyes stare awkwardly into the bright light, the dummy looks prostrate, deflated, and at the same time, there is a sense of anticipation: some sort of reveal has to happen, an
over-rated anyway but, for the first semester, did not read out their work in their real voice. The former visual theory students felt motif was anti-ideological but, for the first semester, proposed a diagrammatic answer to each rhizomatic problem. What was at stake in the first few months of the
reputation for being commercial for perpetually rehashing the same advice and mantras—‘Write what you know,’ ‘Show, don’t tell,’ and ‘Find your own voice.’ Nevertheless, handbooks can help aspiring young writers, and particularly ‘writer’s memoirs’ combining advice with information about a certain ‘literary
William Diver of Columbia University (1921-1995) critiqued the very roots of traditional and contemporary linguistics and founded a school of thought that aims for radical aposteriorism in accounting for the distribution of linguistic forms in authentic text. Grammatical and phonological analyses of Homeric Greek, Classical Latin, and Modern English reveal language to be an instrument whose structure is shaped by its communicative function and by the peculiarly human characteristics of its users. Diver's foundational works, many never before published, appear here newly edited and annotated, with introductions by the editors. The volume presents for the first time to a wide audience the depth and originality of Diver's iconoclastic thought.
Fleur Jaeggy designated as “mental manners of writing.”
 “Something more and something else than words,” wrote Alejandra Pizarnik to voice that form of maladjusted literature trickled from the pressures that being put on her writing.
Hard to imagine the poet articulating ‘research
between the work of art and the society to and about which it speaks, the self-understanding of the writer as a public voice, the expectations of the reading public regarding a writer’s involvement with political issues, and the marketing mechanisms through which literature reaches the public. 3 These
applying my own voice. Instead of opening up, the intended goal was so predetermining that the practice of writing neither informed nor transformed my understanding. It was the wrong way around. The approach, the point of departure killed my curiosity almost from the very beginning—and thus killed the
question of how to deal with this process seen from the church’s perspective. The East German churches had no common alignment while their official representative bodies (the EKD and EKU ) 4 lacked power to create such a commonly shared voice. Accordingly, we have to distinguish between the different
movement . In a wider sense, it stands for the (as ‘pure’ as possible) harmonisation of a variety of sounds, tones, voices, thus representing a state of mood and in any case refers to something that has not just been repealed within the medium of writing. Accordingly, the interferences between Baudelaire
various possible uses of the “voice,” the “stage,” and “light.”
He also differentiates various appearances of “humans”—naked or dressed-up—and “puppets,”
as well as “basic types” of “spatial conditions,” such as various sizes and functions of the theatre building.
Last but not least