Purity of Voice

One of poets' favorite things to argue about, I've found, is the idea of 'voice'--what is it? Does it exist? Is it important? And one of the permutations this argument often takes is the path 'o purity--this is often the argument put forward when someone does not want to revise their work, or take offered advice, as it might somehow affect the "purity" of the original thought, original voice in the poem.

I'm going to try and build an argument here: This idea of voice *is* important. BUT--this voice is cultivated over weeks, years, decades--it incorporates what one has read, what one emulates, specifically and accidentally, and often includes a healthy dose of "inner voice"--how you "think" comes out in what you write. I would argue that the 'voice' of a person is constantly evolving, and thus should be amenable to change, if one is being honest with themselves. The idea of 'purity,' to me, contradicts the notion of change--it indicates a poet feels good about where they are, for whatever misguided reason (because I tend to think poets should always be seeking out the 'new,' and not be settled on their laurels doing the same damn thing ad infinitum--what's the point of being in a medium such as poetry if you're just going to repeat yourself?).

...whatever filters we have can cause us to say things in a vernacular particular to our own experience, but the idea of 'preserving' that voice seems just odd--I think it would be fairly difficult to 'remove' voice from poetry, unless someone were methodically adding the words/ideas of another person verbatim. 'Voice' is in there and will stay in there, with revision or without, in other words. What runs through our own heads in a good faith way can become our own--this is why some poems seem like a great twist on an old idea, when other poems seem like poor parodies. So, in sum, I'd argue it's not about 'purity of voice'--it's about honest self-reflection, and the ability to assimilate what is needed, and discard what is not. Trying to pretend we're poet tabula rasas, impervious to outside influence (& believing that is a *good* thing) seems laughable. You have to read to see what is out there already, and to see what it is that flips your switches. Writing blindly, with no greater context, 999/1000 times leads to horrific poetry--pure voice or no.

But, don't mimic--evaluate, assess, assimilate. Reading loads & loads of poetry will help with this process. So will workshopping, if your ego is up to the needed bruising. ;-)

But hey, that's just me.
~Dani