THE EVOVLING VOICE

WHEN THERE’S A FRAME, HOW DO WE LOSE THE ADULT TO ACHIEVE THE CHILD?

I have the perfect example! I think it’s all in detail details details, and voice. I went back to the beginning of The Glass Castle, where I felt the narrator did it best, and came up with this.

“The pan was too heavy for me to lift when it was full of water, so I’d put a chair next to the sink, climb up and fill a glass, then stand on a chair by the stove and pour the water into the pan. I did that over and over again until the pan held enough water (11).”

This is a good example because although it’s told from an adult narrative voice, the reader can still clearly visualize the event happening through the child’s eye. If we go back to the ironing board, the vision from below would compare to that of the vision below the sink, or below the range of the stove, etc. So it makes sense for the narrator to create, in this particular instance, a scene where a small child is walking back and forth between the sink and the stove. We can visualize this character climbing up and down and up and down continuously, until this pot, which I imagine as being metal, is full. Key words like “climb” really help too because we can imagine a small child not being able to reach things in an average adult sized kitchen.

Another thing too is in the voice details. Simple words and phrases like, “My hospital room even has its very own television…” and “Yes, We do! We do!” (The latter being the children’s request to have Rex tell them a story (11, 24). As a craft choice, I notice that on a sentence level, Walls chooses earlier on to keep the responses of the children shorter rather than longer when they speak to each other and in reference to adults. I think this too is affective in capturing the child because it shows a contrast in the age difference. According to who’s speaking, whether the sentences are short or longer, this can act as a signifier.

Example: Child on Child action (29).

Lori: “Do you like always moving around?”

Jeannette: “Of course I do! Don’t you?

Lori: “Sure.”

Example: Parent on Child action (31).

            Jeannette: “I thought you were going to leave me behind.”

            Rex: “Aww, I’d never do that,” he said. “Your brother was trying to tell us that you’d fallen out, but he was blabbering so damn hard we couldn’t understand a word he was saying”

            Rex: “You busted your snot locker pretty good.”

            Jeannette: “Snot locker.”

These are good examples because we as readers can see the difference in the dialogue between the kids and parent. The kid’s phrases in comparison are choppier.

Also, another thing worth pointing out is how the words are put together. Take a closer look at Lori’s first line above… Notice anything??? She says, “Do you like always moving around?” Opposed to, “Do you like moving around all the time?” or something of that sort. Do you see the difference? (I keep saying it out loud and the way Lori says it sounds really awkward). I don’t think this is a mistake on Wells’ part, but more of her smooth attempt in capturing a child-like voice or language. It almost goes unnoticed. In writing this review, I’m realizing that much of good technique in losing the adult to achieve the child can pretty much boil down to simple sentence structure and wording. 

B. Hill