Crit Groups
>Judging quality in the sense a critique group judges quality is not something any pro writer I've ever known does.
[James Ritchie]
Hmm. First, I think we may be using slightly different definitions of 'judging quality'.
I'm using 'judging quality' to refer to looking at the components of a story and thinking of how they could be improved, i.e., if the characterization is flat, if one of the character's reactions are 'off', if the dialogue is stilted, if the symbolism is heavy-handed etc. As yet, I don't have the skill to identify all these weaknesses in my stories, which is where a critique group helps.
>Sure I change things if I think they need changing.
[James Ritchie]
Right, and at the moment I, and, I would imagine, most of the people on Critters, do not have the experience to figure out what needs changing in a particular story. As I write more, I am finding it easier, but I still don't have the experience to be able to do it as well as someone who has been writing for many years.
>Perhaps when I am fully pro these groups will just be a form of entertainment but they are definitely part of my 'evolutionary' process.
[Veingloree]
This goes for me too (btw, I don't want to give the implication that I'm anything but a complete beginner). James, you say that "no pro writer" uses a critique group, and I can see where that might be true, but, even if it is, not every writer is a pro-writer yet, and what might be no help at all for a pro, might be very helpful for someone who is beginning to write.
I can see a point in the future where it might be time to move on from Critters, but it's not going to be for a long while yet.
And yes, I do think that any valid assessment of writing quality (as in 'this is a great story') needs to come from an editor who's willing to pay money for it, or a reader who did pay money for it.
Anyway, that's my 2c,
Cheers,
Euan