Royster and matters of voice

Royster's article, "When the First Voice You Heart Is Not Your Own," struck a cord with me. I believe that one problem I had with David Bartholomae's piece was the hint of dishonesty it had. It is hard to approach a piece with the same open-minded attitude when you know that a writer does not have the same background as what he may be writing about. I believe Royster is correct with the example she uses regarding African Americans reading or "listening to" the voice of someone who is *not* African American. While the intent of the author may be sincere, the voice will not have the same impact.

It will not have the same impact, regardless of how well the author is versed in the material. The research will likely not ultimately convince the reader, no matter how thoroughly it is done. Royster's piece comes into almost direct conflict with Bartholomae in that she states exactly the best voice to reach members of a community is that of a member who shares the same experiences. This lends an credibility to one author. Such an author doesn't have to "fake it" because that author has lived it.

This is not to say that writers cannot explore issues outside of their own experience or their own "communities." However, they do risk the pieces, words, or actions coming into question. Maybe even question is too strong of a word---let's put it this way, readers will take the voice of an author whose experiences differ from their own with a grain of salt. The question always in the back of the audience's mind will be, "Well, what does he really know about that?"