"Whose Voice is it Anyway?"

In Ann Ruggles Gere's essay she argues that the voice of a writer has a lot of significance. "Authentic" is a way in which a writer's work is often defined or criticized, but Gere argues that authenticity can also stifle a writer's work as well. Authenticity is the comparison of one person's voice to the voice of authority. If that voice does not match up, the writer's true voice is made to be inferior and incorrect. Gere points out that students's voices are often ones that teachers set out to fix, which is basically the same as taking the writer's voice away all together. In Gere's opinion, a writer's voice develops based on their family history, their past and what has shaped them into the person they are. Without their own voice, writers are separating themselves from themselves in order to have a voice that matches what society wants.

I think Gere's argument relates directly to the process of healing. A writer cannot heal if their voices are stifled and the histories are made to be separate from the voice that society will accept. This idea goes back to the first chapter when it talks about soldiers struggling with PTSD. If a writer is not able to write in their own voice, their trauma will be harder to overcome because they are not part of a community that accepts their voice and their views.  I think this is what I found most compelling about this chapter. While we as writers are urged to find our own voice, certain voices are better than others and easier to accept. So, my question would be what are those "authentic" voices and how can we integrate more to allow for more healing?