Got kicked out of a writer's group

KTC said:

this really has nothing to do with taste. it has everything to do with skill levels. you're being unfair.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Much of the time all readers can do is tell you "This didn't work." A writer will tell you why it didn't work.

And for anyone who says they've never joined a writers' group - you're all members of AW aren't you?

scarletpeaches said:

Agreed. Much of the time all readers can do is tell you "This didn't work." A writer will tell you why it didn't work.

And for anyone who says they've never joined a writers' group - you're all members of AW aren't you?

Click to expand...

I have belong to a small writer's circle here. There's maybe 10 of us? There is no criteria for joining because it's sponsored by Salt Lake City's Diversity Center and the community college.

I also belong to a guild that has no requirements for joining.

We have people who can only sit and comment on whether or not they liked something and why not and it is valuable to know but it's not as helpful as someone who has the ability to edit and critique in addition to giving their opinion as a reader.

Having said that, I wish there was some criteria for my two groups. For example, our OP has stated that they told her to go take some basic grammar classes. If someone were found in my first group to be lacking in these skills, should there be a requirement for skill on that level, the group could refer them to free classes and ask that they only submit work once they've completed them but could still participate in the group.

It's really unfair to expect other members to read your work if it's incorrectly written from a mechanical point of view. Who is it unfair to? Everyone including yourself. It actually misrepresents your story and stands as a road block for some to even want to read it. If someone is as I am, my mind picks over every word, every comma. I will stumble on misspelled words and bad grammar and in the end, I won't read it. I just won't.

scarletpeaches said:

Agreed. Much of the time all readers can do is tell you "This didn't work." A writer will tell you why it didn't work.

And for anyone who says they've never joined a writers' group - you're all members of AW aren't you?

Click to expand...

And that's where the taste part comes in again--oftentimes they're wrong. The written word is really the only format I can think of where these things are so intensely subjective.

If you ask five different electricians how to wire a house, you're not going to get a lot of vastly differing answers.

If you ask five different authors how to write a compelling novel, you're going to get radically different answers.

If you ask five different authors how to write a compelling novel, you're going to get radically different answers.

Click to expand...

I don't agree at all.

Salis said:

If you ask five different authors how to write a compelling novel, you're going to get radically different answers.

Click to expand...

This is not what critiquing is about. It's not about asking the people at the table how to write a compelling novel. Your argument does not fit this discussion.

shameless said:

We'll just have to agree to disagree. I probably don't know it for a fact, but I do think it's tactless to tell a writer who has been participating in a writing group to take a course in creative writing. It's cold and it's mean.

Click to expand...

I'm about to disagree, then agree with you (just so you don't stop before I get to the "I agree"):

Why is the suggestion cold and mean? Because writing is something that people should just know how to do? It might have been very good, encouraging advice - or even, say, "you're good - this class is the next step, and I think you're ready". We weren't there to hear it.

That said, if it had been mean in an encouraging way, I'm guessing the OP wouldn't have opened a thread about it - so chances are good, I'd think, that rudeness or callousness was involved.

shameless said:

I'm bowing out of this discussion because I seem to be in the minority.

Click to expand...

This is precisely the argument I'd use to encourage you to stay IN the conversation.

God help us if being in the minority is, by itself, cause to remain silent.

Salis said:

And that's where the taste part comes in again--oftentimes they're wrong. The written word is really the only format I can think of where these things are so intensely subjective.

If you ask five different electricians how to wire a house, you're not going to get a lot of vastly differing answers.

If you ask five different authors how to write a compelling novel, you're going to get radically different answers.

Click to expand...

Do you mean readers or writers?

Readers tend to go by opinion, which isn't wrong, although we may disagree with it.

Writers? They'll speak to you of grammar, spelling and such. Like it or not, these are a matter of right and wrong. Again, again, again, you have to know the rules before you can know how to break them.

And who's going to tell you the rules but another writer? Readers go by instinct (not always, but most of the time). Writers deal in specifics.

If someone's got a thin skin, they've got no business being in this game. You can be firm without being rude when you're critting someone's work, but if all you (not you specifically, I mean in general) want is praise...tough.

You want praise? Earn it. Earn it by having the cojones to put up with correction and counsel.

Karen Junker said:

On the other side of the coin, I've beta'd for several people here on AW. I didn't think I was being particularly cruel or harsh, but a few of them have simply not responded to my crits and they have since re-posted here, looking for new betas. So, I've been rejected by writers as a crit partner.

I wish someone would have had the courtesy to let me know what about my crits didn't work for them!

Click to expand...

I felt the need to respond to this since I've had the same experience (not at AW) many times over the past year in my quest to find a crit partner. I've exchanged sample chapters with many folks (newer writers and experienced writers both) but it never seems to get past that initial exchange.

I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong. I like to think I have a handle on the entire thing. I've been published a long time, have decent sales, get good reviews, but evidentially I lack something in the crit/beta department. I just wish someone would clue me in.

Back to the original post. I'm of the opinion they could have handled things a lot more tactfully.

Shamrockgreen said:

Remember the CG I wrote about...one of the members of the 4 person group asked me not to come back until I took a English Comp course or a Creative Writing course.

Click to expand...

This is what we know for certain what Shamrock was told.

Then, she added this:

Shamrock said:

I have to admit I did not present my "best", however after spending 3 months on editing, rewrites et al. I was ready to take back what I had reworked, then I was told take a hike.

Click to expand...

I am confused why they didn't even give her a chance to show them her edited work.

Then this:

Shamrock said:

I agree and the grammar in my MS was not that bad.

Click to expand...

Now, I am thinking, if they told her to take an English Comp or Creative Writing course, it must have been bad enough for them not to want to read her work.

shameless said:

I'm bowing out of this discussion because I seem to be in the minority. I believe anyone can be told anything -- even something bad about her writing -- if done in a kind way. Kicking someone out of a group because the members don't complement each other or someone doesn't fit, I understand. Doing so and adding an insult about her abilities, I don't.

Click to expand...

I agree and don't agree. I've been studying communications for 32 years now. I do think we can present constructive criticism in a kind way and with all the grace and tact in the world we know how to.

BUT, if a person's self esteem is low or they are self conscious or they are defensive in receiving advise (and let's face it, I just described pretty much all of us to some extent ) then no matter how nicely someone wraps it up with the prettiest paper and a beautiful bow when saying negative feedback, we are going to struggle with them over it.

I fail to see that leaving the conversation will benefit anyone, including you. You are bringing your point of view to the discussion and while some may not agree with you, you may help to remind them to be kinder when such things have to be done. People don't have to have agreeing positions to be of benefit. Quite the opposite really. Extremes are never a good thing and perhaps you will help someone to find more of a middle ground.

Salis said:

And that's where the taste part comes in again--oftentimes they're wrong. The written word is really the only format I can think of where these things are so intensely subjective.

If you ask five different electricians how to wire a house, you're not going to get a lot of vastly differing answers.

If you ask five different authors how to write a compelling novel, you're going to get radically different answers.

Click to expand...

As a contractor, I can tell you that there is only ONE way to wire a house and that is: according to federal, state and city building codes (and no they don't vary much, the basics are all the same, they have to be). There are manuals for it, there is no subjective way to do it.

As for the mechanics of writing, there are acceptable methods and from the books that line my shelves, I can vouch that they all pretty much use the same one. Not so sure I know what I'm talking about? Go have a browse through your collection or ask an editor or agent what they hate the most about trying to read manuscripts.

I hope everyone will take time to read or reread Maryn's post HERE. This is exactly the way, (I believe) a group should run.

The problem of it taking too much time to critique a weak writer's work can be solved if the system is changed to each piece of work getting a 1 hour critique by the group, rather than 'as long as it takes'.

It also forces the critiquers to prioritize the feedback rather than just list absolutely everything, so the vital feedback doesn't get lost in a list of minor points. I've found that people tend to have their pet subjects for critique too ... one guy will spot all the theme problems, another is the apostrophe king, someone else spots good opportunities for scene reversals, etc. If the same fault (eg: typos) is riddled throughout it, then once it's mentioned with a couple of examples, people tend to focus on other issues.

That is pretty much the system at a critique group that I go to irregularly. (I try to go regularly, but real life gets in the way.)

It seems to work.

(Honestly guys - I'll go this Thursday!)

Mac

My two bits...a "4-member" crit group is at risk of even being called a group if just 2 of its members are absent. Regardless of what they call themselves, this has the appearance to me, at least, of being a long-term, essentially closed alliance. These folk are probably all at similar levels, and have operated for 10 or 20 years that way. They're not likely to suddenly change. It's unfortunate that it was seemingly communicated to the OP that this was an 'open' group--as it seems, in hindsight, that there are stipulations that one must be at a similar level as the other members. So, in that sense, the situation was probably not handled as well as it could have been.

That said, a thick skin is almost as essential to successful writing as creativity and mechanical skill. So...move on. Life is always in flux. Even if that 'group' had accepted you with open arms, who's to say you'd still be there 2 years from now? I used to belong to a writer's guild; the past couple of years my attendance has gotten very spotty. Groups and their dynamics change (at least they do in genuinely open, large groups), and people's needs within those groups change over time, too. Sometimes it's more rewarding to flow with the current of your life than fight it; it can take you down new streams you might not have otherwise considered. Good luck with your new group.

KTC said:

This is not what critiquing is about. It's not about asking the people at the table how to write a compelling novel. Your argument does not fit this discussion.

Click to expand...

Huh? That's exactly what it is. You're asking five people to tear apart your writing. Their opinion on what makes a good novel is very important.

On the other hand, readers tear apart your novel because the idea sucks, or because it didn't keep their attention.

Writers tear apart your writing because you used too many adjectives.

Writers? They'll speak to you of grammar, spelling and such. Like it or not, these are a matter of right and wrong. Again, again, again, you have to know the rules before you can know how to break them.

And who's going to tell you the rules but another writer? Readers go by instinct (not always, but most of the time). Writers deal in specifics.

If someone's got a thin skin, they've got no business being in this game. You can be firm without being rude when you're critting someone's work, but if all you (not you specifically, I mean in general) want is praise...tough.

You want praise? Earn it. Earn it by having the cojones to put up with correction and counsel.

Click to expand...

Except writers typically aren't interested in fixing your grammar or bad spelling. Hence, at the beginning of the thread, people filtering for that, or kicking people out for bad grammar.

You're going after a non sequitur, there, although it plays into my point: the very thing writers could arguably help you with (the unalterable facts of grammar and spelling) are typically not what we turn to writers for. No, we turn to them to help us with the art of the thing, which is a huge mistake in my opinion. The art is entirely personal. Once you've graduated (or write at) the equivelant of College-level English, the learning becomes really nebulous and debatable.

In fact, I don't care about praise. I just think it's silly to turn to writers for that sort of thing. You will almost never earn praise from another writer (unless you are, in turn, praising them). Witness how eagerly writers tear into each other--often, pointlessly.

My overarching point: I don't believe in writing for writers. Once you have reached a point of basic proficiency, what readers have to tell you is way more important. Really quick example, from the art (visual) world. Art's (outside of commercial products) acceptance in the mainstream took a huge nose-dive when art began to be judged/created/consumed entirely by artists. It led to these really stupid ideas of what "art" consisted of (hi, post-modernist art), stuff that no average person could derive any enjoyment from, beyond "well it's art, so that must be good". Writing isn't in as nearly a bad place, but the tendency is there. There was another great thread on this subject a few days ago, about the gigantic gap between what writers ostensibly consider good writing, what editors/agents say is good writing, and what people actually read.

Uh, no.

Writers are readers too.

scarletpeaches said:

Uh, no.

Writers are readers too.

Click to expand...

There is a huge difference between reading as a writer, and reading as someone who has never analyzed the craft. You can try to suppress that, but it's always there. We all know this already. There's been so many threads on this very subject. So, um...

I'm going to give up here because it seems like I've ruffled some feathers with my beliefs, and there's really not much more to say.

Thank all that is holy.

I couldn't wrap my brain around why someone would want to come into a writers' forum and basically diss writers.

Salis said:

You will almost never earn praise from another writer (unless you are, in turn, praising them). Witness how eagerly writers tear into each other--often, pointlessly.

Click to expand...

I have not experienced this. I find that writers are very eager to encourage me and help me. I've not found someone give me a pointless, negative critique of my work.

You are painting with too wide of a brush, I think.

Ah, well, you edited your post after I hit send so I'm not sure my last post makes much sense now. Anyway...

Salis said:

Except writers typically aren't interested in fixing your grammar or bad spelling. Hence, at the beginning of the thread, people filtering for that, or kicking people out for bad grammar.

Click to expand...

Why should they be, really? Some things are so basic it's an insult to expect another writer to correct them.

Okay, writers will speak of grammar and spelling as I said, but in the sense of 'get this sorted' rather than teaching you what you should already know, so it was perhaps incorrect of me to suggest beta-readers and other writers would 'edit' your work for you.

I still think readers will tell you how they feel about something, but writer/readers will be able to tell you why they feel that way. So the response is the same, the gut feeling I mean...but a writer will be able to put it into words better, by virtue of him being a writer.

Salis said:

The art is entirely personal. Once you've graduated (or write at) the equivelant of College-level English, the learning becomes really nebulous and debatable.

Click to expand...

True. A writer should know the mechanics - heck, everyone should know the mechanics if they want to communicate. It just amazes me that some people who can barely spell have the cheek to expect me to read their barely-legible scribblings when they quite clearly have no idea about the English language let alone story structure, plot development and characterisation.

All of which are, as you said, the 'art' rather than the craft.

Salis said:

In fact, I don't care about praise. I just think it's silly to turn to writers for that sort of thing. You will almost never earn praise from another writer (unless you are, in turn, praising them). Witness how eagerly writers tear into each other--often, pointlessly.

Click to expand...

Completely disagree. I've had writing-related praise from folks I'd never entertain as a friend. A critter (love that word!) who puts ego aside and elevates story is worth their weight in gold.

And if writers tear into each other, then perhaps there's a reason for that.

Salis said:

My overarching point: I don't believe in writing for writers. Once you have reached a point of basic proficiency, what readers have to tell you is way more important.

Click to expand...

Writers are readers too. My opinion is no less valid because I'm a writer. I am also a reader. If you want me to spend money on your book, you'd better make it a damn good one and if I spend time on your book, I've got a God-given right to an opinion on it, and I'll tell you what that opinion is.

Salis said:

Really quick example, from the art (visual) world. [MOAR WURDZ].

Click to expand...

Your analogy doesn't stand, unless those artists are also customers. Were they? Because writers are also readers.

Salis said:

There is a huge difference between reading as a writer, and reading as someone who has never analyzed the craft. You can try to suppress that, but it's always there. We all know this already. There's been so many threads on this very subject. So, um...

I'm going to give up here because it seems like I've ruffled some feathers with my beliefs, and there's really not much more to say.

Click to expand...

Yes, by all means, paint us all with this wide condemning brush and then run from the scene.

Honestly now, you need to stop assuming that all of us are the mean-spirited, and cruel people you are painting us to be.

For God's sake people.

*bangs head against wall*

Not all readers are writers, but every writer worth their salt should be a reader too.

When you talk about "Critting as a reader," and "Critting as a writer," that suggests they're mutually exclusive. They're not.

You can have both in one package.

Salis said:

You will almost never earn praise from another writer (unless you are, in turn, praising them). Witness how eagerly writers tear into each other--often, pointlessly.

Click to expand...

I find this an insult to all of us. I would never tell somebody their writing is brilliant if they paid mine a compliment. And I would never tell somebody their writing is bad because they shredded mine.

I can't believe ANYBODY would say something like that. Especially in the company in which you said it.

They sound to me like the words of someone who's received an unfavourable crit, although I could be wrong.

Look, we all know it's hard to see our precious words chopped up and criticized but if you can't take it then don't ask for it. Learning how to take it is just as important as the writing itself because if you can't pay attention and weigh it with care, then you are going to end up producing work that doesn't sell.

Cass, you sound almost as bitchy as me.

I'm so proud of you.

Yeah, I think people are taking that as a, "HAH, I HATE WRITERS!" kind of thing, it's not like that at all. I love writers. But it's a natural result of the medium that they're going to be a pretty cruel and arbitrary bunch more often than not.

I catch myself being really judgmental about writing all the time. I am not a mean person. In fact, I probably will go out of my way *not* to mention those things, to avoid crushing a writer. Thing is, you can't avoid those thoughts. It's a natural part of taking up very specific standards. The problem is that those standards really aren't important to readers. Readers approach it from a perspective of, "Is the writing so bad I can't understand it or it jars me? No? Then whatever, get on with the story."

But wait, writers are readers too! Yes, everyone is a reader. The point being that a writer approaches any reading with a much more restricted sense of what is acceptable.

Also, I'm assuming when we say "writer's group" we're talking about a kind of group that isn't necessarily attached to your family or friends. i.e, you're going into a room of (basically) strangers, and tossing your work at them. Don't know about you, but in that situation, I'd prefer them to not be writers. We tend to be an egotistic bunch (I say that lovingly!).

Of course I have no problem throwing my writing at writer friends who I know. Hell, if they tear me apart, that's cool, I can handle it because I respect them, and I know what they're telling me has some weight. If a stranger tears me apart with, "Your style is bad. You should change it.", I'm really not sure how to respond. It's much easier to respond to, "I didn't sympathize with character X."

Maybe, though, I'm alone in being the only writer who is fundamentally altered by being a writer. If so, you guys really need to teach me how to enjoy reading sloppy writing again.

Salis said:

The point being that a writer approaches any reading with a much more restricted sense of what is acceptable.

Click to expand...

Good. I'm proud of that. As I move through life I hope to develop higher standards, not compromise with lower ones.

Salis said:

Maybe, though, I'm alone in being the only writer who is fundamentally altered by being a writer. If so, you guys really need to teach me how to enjoy reading sloppy writing again.

Click to expand...

Good god, no. If being a writer stops you enjoying sloppy writing, then good. That's a very good thing. It doesn't stop me enjoying reading. It means I search out better and better each time. And if I come across a crappy book, it gives me hope for my crap!