Writerland » critique groups

8 Secrets to a Successful Writers’ Group

Meghan Ward — Tue, 27 Mar 2012 08:27:12 +0000

Writers’ groups, also called critique groups, can be invaluable resources for writers. They provide the structure and support of an MFA workshop without the high cost of tuition. But not all writer’s groups are equal. Get in the wrong group, and you may do more harm to your writing than good. How do you know if a group is right for you?

1. Ask questions before you join. Find out how many writers are in the group and what kind of experience they have. Then ask to sit in for a session. This should give you the opportunity to read the other members’ works and discover whether the group is a good fit for you. If you’re a poet, for example, you may want to join a poet’s group. If you’re a literary writer, you may not feel comfortable in a group full of sci-fi and thriller writers.

2. Groups work best when there are rules. There should be page- or word-count limits on submissions. Find out if writers expect written feedback in addition to verbal feedback. There will likely be a set number of writers who get critiqued each night. (For example, my group has a limit of 20 pp per person, three people are critiqued each meeting, and we meet every two weeks.) Some groups don’t allow the writer whose work is being critiqued to talk during the critique to prevent her from getting defensive. Some groups give critiques one at a time followed by a more free-for-all discussion at the end during which the writer whose work is being critiqued can ask questions and the others can respond. Others follow a more open format during which anyone (except the writer whose work is being critiqued) can jump in at any time. It’s important to have a time limit for each writer, and to avoid too much repetition of critiques.

3. Don’t take the criticism personally. Remember, it is your work that is being critiqued, not you. There are no good or bad writers, just beginning writers and more advanced writers. Everyone started at the beginning.

4. Practice humility. This is one of the most challenging aspects of being a writer. It’s not always easy to take criticism—not when you’re a newbie and not when you’re an experienced writer. But if you think your writing is perfect and you refuse to heed anyone’s advice, you may find yourself with six unpublished books in your drawer. Make it your goal to put your ego aside and learn as much as you can from your fellow writers. Do everything you can to improve your writing through better dialogue, a stronger story climax, more well-rounded characters, etc.

5. Don’t make every change everyone suggests. While practicing humility, be careful not to assume that every writer knows more than you, or that they are always correct. They are not always correct. Take note of which suggestions were made by two or more people, and consider making those changes. But do what feels right to you. You can’t please everyone all of the time, and if you did, your writing would be too plebian to be interesting.

6. When giving feedback, use the sandwich technique. A popular method of critiquing someone else’s work is to start with something positive followed by some constructive criticism, and then close on a positive note. Remember, it’s much easier to criticize than to praise. Make an effort to point out the positive aspects of the author’s work. And when providing criticism, don’t just point out what doesn’t work. Make suggestions for how to improve the piece. Your job is to help the author figure out how to become a better writer.

7. Don’t get hung up on copyediting the author’s work. A writer’s group isn’t a place for you to show off your editing skills. Feel free to correct glaring typos and spelling errors in the text, but don’t use your critique as an opportunity to lecture on the virtues of the Oxford comma. Focus on what does and does not work in the dialogue, story arc, character development, descriptions, etc.

8. Read each piece twice—once straight through to get the gist of the story and then a second time with your red pen. If you mark up the text on your first read, you’ll find that many of your questions are answered later in the text. Give the piece a chance to stand on its own before providing it with crutches. Then go back and read it a second time while making notes in the margins.

What about you? Are you in a writer’s group? What suggestions do you have for someone joining a writer’s group for the first time? What has and has not worked for you?

Equal Parts Criticism and Praise?

Meghan Ward — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 06:23:00 +0000

In the comments section of my post on How to Critique Other Writers’ Work, a debate ensues. When using the sandwich approach (two slices of positive feedback with a glob of criticism in the middle), do the positive and critical parts of your sandwich need to be equal? If a manuscript needs a lot of work, is it still important to give it as much praise as criticism? If a piece is ready to publish, should you still give it as much criticism as praise? If you answer “No,” please explain in comments. Thanks for participating!

How to Critique Other Writers’ Work

Meghan Ward — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 23:51:24 +0000

A post by my friend Sierra about her toxic critique group inspired me to remind people how to give critiques of other writers’ work in a writers’ group or workshop.

The sandwich method always works best: Start by saying something positive, followed by your constructive criticism, and then end with another positive comment. The reason for this? It’s important to give the writer something she can work with (“I found myself losing interest at the bottom of page 3″) without making her want to give up writing altogether (“YA fantasy novels don’t really interest me.”)

Writing groups and workshops take on different formats. Typically, a group of people (anywhere from 3 to 12) agrees to meet every week or two at which time they will critique a chosen number of works—usually two or three for a 2-3-hour meeting. The works are handed out a week beforehand (either in person or by e-mail), giving the readers a week to read (preferably twice, once straight through and once while marking up the ms) the works.

The night of the meeting, the format could go a couple of different ways.

In my former writers’ group, there were about six people, and we met every other week. We worked in a circle, taking turns giving our verbal critiques while all the other writers, including the writer being critiqued, remained silent. After everyone had spoken, the writer being critiqued could comment and/or ask questions. The reason for the writer being silent during the critique is that writers tend to get defensive about their work and want to explain why they did this or that. The point of a critique, however, is not for you to defend the choices you’ve made, it’s for you to hear the opinions of others and then decide whether or NOT to take their advice. The more experienced the writer, the better she is at distinguishing which advice to take and which not to take. A good rule is that if several people agree about something, you should probably take the advice seriously. That does NOT mean they are right (40,000 Frenchmen can’t be wrong, but five writers can be). At the end of the verbal critiques, we all handed over our written critiques, some a couple sentences written in chicken scratch and others a one- to two-page typed analysis of the plot and characters. That was left to personal choice.

In my MFA program, we had twelve people in a workshop and we met every week. Rather than work in a circle, however, everyone just jumped in when she had something to say, everyone but the writer being critiqued, who remained silent. This format allowed for back and forth discussion: “I loved the scene in chapter one when the protagonist knifed her boyfriend in the neck,” “I totally disagree, I found the violence in that scene gratuitous,” etc. Some of my professors (but unfortunately not all) required that we start with the positive aspects of the manuscript, which was great until ONE person said something negative. Then suddenly the floodgates opened and everyone pounced on the opportunity to give negative critiques. Why? Because it’s SO much easier to give negative critiques than positive ones. SO MUCH EASIER. Whether a piece is magnificent or terrible, the flaws tend to be glaring. It’s much more difficult to articulate what works about a piece than what doesn’t. SO, the minute someone says that first negative critique, it’s all over. The writer is lucky if someone throws her a positive comment at the end. Once the pack of hungry dogs have been corralled back into their den, leaving the writer to lick her wounds, written critiques are handed over, this time with a minimum one-page, preferably typed, critique. (A copy of the critique goes to the teacher and counts toward the critiquing student’s grade, so they’re usually fairly thorough.)

Whether in a group/workshop with format one or format two, it’s important to leave the writer with some positive feedback to take home. I knew one woman who, while being critiqued, marked a check for every time she heard a positive or a negative comment. Her “negative” column was four times as long as her “positive” column, and it had nothing to do with her writing. (By the way, I DON’T recommend this practice. It’s terribly destructive to your self-esteem.)

The job of a critiquer is not to decide whether the writer should give up writing, and not to tell the person what she should write. It’s not her job to REwrite any portion of the person’s work either (not even sentences or phrases). It’s simply to tell the writer what works, what doesn’t, and what are some suggestions for improving the manuscript. If a person doesn’t like the genre at all, that person has to 1) Critique the piece as objectively as possible 2) Consider moving into a writer’s group that includes only the genre she does like. For example, if everyone in your group is writing sci-fi and you’re a literary fiction writer, maybe you need to change groups. If not, you’d better learn to critique sci-fi without being biased toward the genre.

What about you? What experiences (good or bad) have you had with writers’ groups? What did you learn from those experiences?