Developing Authorial Voice

The Three-Hills Metaphor

The metaphor of the three hills is a visual-metaphorical articulation of my pathway to finding my own authorial voice. I used to feel that to be a scholarly author you needed to present your argument as if it were a sage on a stage in a dimly lit crowed auditorium. I've since learned that, for me, the authorial tone I value most in others and find most supportive of my own voice - is that of the hiker and explorer. Notably, I like hiking and maps, and find geographic and spatial associations valuable in a number of analytic contexts.

As a visual representation of authorial style - the three hills encourages an author to associate the manuscript with a journey. Although it is easy to stare into the candle for too long and find the edges blurring - or otherwise feel the fatigue of the constant process of writing (or the seemingly unending steps required of hiking) - when recognized as three hills, you're encouraged to stop and pause to appreciate the views from the top and the vistas provided by the valleys at the bottom, or to make clear the distinctions between the destinations and discern the uniqueness of each main point.

As an author, the three hills implies that you're able to take a step back and reflect on the overall topography of your writing. In almost every instance, your paper should be crystalized around three main points (your hills) - and each makes an analytic contribution. Even a review of literature has an objective purpose, it crafts an argument that supports the chosen method. The method then makes an argument about the particular type of analysis needed. This leads to the results which exclaim the findings as they are related to the previous literature and unique contexts of the study.

Although each hill exist on one trail, they each have different peaks and valleys. Through each - the author needs to take the readers hand - at times, convincing a reluctant reader that it is necessary to climb a certain hill and forge a particular connection between ideas (do I really need to know about x?) other times, an author needs to show a reader the mountain top views and explore the value and uniqueness of their position (exclaiming: "these are the three important findings” as if for all those below to hear), and finally - in other moments - an author needs to walk the readers down the hill - connecting all of the past experiences together in a way that gives a sense of close to the section and momentum entering the next, or otherwise inspiring a good rest in the conclusion (what's x got to do with y? and how can future research resolve some of the big questions that remain).

In sum, the three hills metaphor is a way I visualize my own process and aspire to recognize when I've "lost the forest through the trees" or otherwise “starred into the candle” for too long. It encourages me to identify the three main arguments I'm trying to make and sets my task as if it were to steward my readers through an exploration of their complexities to arrive somewhere further than we began. Importantly, such a perspective lifts the burden of forging an entirely new trail and enables a new perspective to how we might “steward” contributions to scholarship.

I want to know about your process of developing your authorial voice.

What metaphorical analogies do you use to navigate your way?

Reach out at Philip.tschirhart@discoursedesigngroup.com
or connect with me on linkedin.com/in/philip-tschirhart/