By CaraMarie Christy

Location is key to the efficiency of a critique group because it will set the mood, the pace at which the group functions, and the rate at which its participants develop their skills. Just as a grim setting on the written page can induce a sense of nervousness in a reader, a positive work environment can create a feeling of productivity and energy for crit group partners. There are few places where a critique group could not meet, given new advances in online conference calls, like Skype. For those critics who wish to meet in-person, some potential work spaces offer more benefits than others. Here are some advantages and disadvantages of common meet-up locations:

Coffee Shops/Bookstores- “I believe humans get a lot done, not because we’re smart, but because we have thumbs so we can make coffee.” – Flash Rosenberg. These are some the best places to set up workshops, as they are often designed to promote “comfort”—e.g. big comfy chairs, tables, and internet access. The issues with this sort of location are lack of crowd control and the occasional need to get permission from store owners to use the facilities. Starbucks is famous for allowing people to use their facilities as work spaces for free but, because of this, there are hours in which the stores become overcrowded with business. Too many people trying to work at once creates a chaotic environment. To prevent this, writers need to schedule around store “rush” hours and plan alternative locations if the primary becomes impractical.

Library- “A library is the delivery room for the birth of ideas, a place where history comes to life.”- Norman Cousins. There is something to be said for writing literature in a sea of novels and novellas, as though creativity can be obtained through osmosis. Libraries are usually free to use and include numerous spaces with chairs and tables to hold meetings. However, in the middle of that sea, are other readers and writers trying to work, which can lead to whispered meetings or noise complaints. Often, libraries have rooms that can be reserved for community use, where critics can be free to be talk without disturbing other workers. Using these can require contacting library administration, who will clear up the regulations and terms of use of these facilities. Critics interested in using a library’s conference room should be prepared to justify their group’s validity and reasons for meeting. Some libraries allow only non-profit organizations to use their meeting rooms.

Playground/Park/Outdoors- “Nothing coaxes jumbled thoughts into coherent sentences like sitting under a shade tree on a pleasant day.” – Carol Kaufman, NY Times. Some writers benefit from fresh air. It can be relaxing and studies show that sun exposure helps establish a strong sleep cycle, increase Vitamin D absorption, and can cause stress relief and relaxation, all of which can lead to more energy to put towards writing and editing. There is also easy access to outdoor facilities. However, fighting the urge to lie out in the sun can be counter-productive to writing group goals. If the group is one for casual chat and critique, then this would serve its purposes. But a serious push for studying requires sitting up, paying attention, and having all participants actively engaged in discussion. There is also a problem for critique groups, in that if any one of their members has allergies, staying outside for an extended period of time becomes a challenge.

Home- “You will never feel truly satisfied by work until you are satisfied by life.” –Heather Schuck – This is a location with easy access and atmosphere control, having a critique group member volunteer their own home means that no one has to ask anyone in administration, like the coffee shops and libraries, for permission and there is no fear of disturbing other workers. The downside of using this environment is the distinction between a “work zone” and a “relaxation zone.” It’s important to have a work-life balance. Productivity increases with routine, at home routines can involve watching television and eating meals, instead of working on written content.

Diner/Restaurant/Bar- “First we eat, then we do everything else.” – M.F.K. Fisher. A favorite environment with many writers is a local diner, restaurant, or bar. These places offer the availability of substantial food and refreshment, unlike coffee shops which only provide sugary foods and drinks. Often times, if staff are tipped well and managers don’t mind, critique groups can meet here without having to confer with anyone beforehand. Typically, diners and bars are well-crowded and conversation is a norm, so there is no fear of interrupting another patron trying to work. The downsides of these environments are if the diner not selected well, the meals they provide can be expensive and that plates of food can often leave little room for writing samples and workshop notes. The work usually has to begin after the table is cleared.

By CaraMarie Christy

The difference between a book group and a critique group is that the former is created to study literature, usually without any of the authors present, and the latter is to share work-in-progress with other writers for the mutual benefit of each participant. Those who choose to form critique groups can desire different outcomes from the effort that they invest. Productivity is subjective and depends on the end goal of the individuals who initially decide to form the new critique group. An end goal can be anything from improving grammatical skill to discovering new story ideas, or simply obtaining a better understanding of readers. Forming a group is most fulfilling when the group’s activities match most of the participants’ end goals. The focuses of the critique groups below can be mixed and matched to create critique groups that will fit various writer needs.

Skill Building– “Am I doing this right?”- This is the best way to start off a critique group for new writers. The idea behind this type of group is to focus on construction rather than content. Many writers, even professionals, make mistakes in formatting dialogue, common grammar, and switching tenses mid-story. However, if these skills are drilled often enough, writers can see a significant improvement until formatting and grammar become second nature. A great way to get this type of critique, without having to dedicate copious amounts of workshop time toward it, is to produce hard copies or email copies of work to other group members. By making use of the Track Changes function of Microsoft, which can be found under the Review tab, writers can make comments on pieces they have received and then return them to the owner without altering the original work. Through this, group members can work on the grammar and formatting of their piece on their own time and reserve critique time for a different focus.

Concept Forming- “J.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis walk into a bar.”- This form of group is less about how the words are written, and more about the overall picture that the words form. To approach this style of group requires some form of mutual respect in its participants, because favorable concepts are going to vary based on a writer’s opinion. A famous partnership, and example of this, was that of J.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis, who used to throw around ideas with each other over drinks. Once J.R. Tolkien stated that no novel would ever be successful if it were to include a lamppost, which gave C.S. Lewis his famous idea for using a lamppost as the iconic image for his magical world in The Chronicles of Narnia.

Social Interaction- “Writers choose a lonely life.” Some writers are only out to touch base with other writers, read manuscripts, and receive/give encouraging comments. These kinds of groups give writers affirmation of their skills that they cannot provide for themselves. The problem with this sort of critique group is the heavy possibility for a lack of commitment. If meetings are only casual, members will not feel a strong need to prepare or show up to the meetings. To prevent this, a group can build into their workshop fun exercises (for example http://www.writersdigest.com/online-editor/7-creative-writing-prompts-to-spark-your-writing) which will help writers stimulate their creative senses and give them a reason to look forward to the workshop.

Mock Readership- “Would you buy this?”- This is a group to choose if the profitability of the work is the primary objective. This is the hardest type of critique group to form, as it requires a great deal of planning to form a group who will be subjective, with no personal bias to distract from the analysis and whether they would rate the piece favorably. For example, a friend might rate a piece of work at a higher value than a non-acquaintance. This type of group is also only productive if everyone in the group fits the “target audience” for the types of work that are being presented. If someone who writes mystery novels presents their work to a romance reader it might not receive the type of feedback that they are looking for. Few critique workshops are meant to be styled like this.

by CaraMarie Christy

There is no set of concrete rules for how to approach critique etiquette, or critiquette, as it’s been called. However, those who participate in a workshop/critique group should hold themselves to a standard of professionalism that encourages the productivity and continuity of the group. It’s difficult to know what these ideals are, what is considered acceptable and what is not, especially when most comments made in critique groups and workshops are, assumedly, an effort toward producing good literature and not an opportunity to vent. Here are some common critiques broken down into instances in which they might be acceptable and other times when they might be taken as counterproductive:

Character/Story/ Style Critique- “I don’t like what your character did.” These are the hardest critiques to give and receive, because they can often come across as unduly subjective and unhelpful. Characters in fiction cannot be censured for their misbehavior. However, there are some times when such comments are extremely beneficial to writers, though they should be more carefully crafted than the example given above. If a critic has a strong sense of who the character is, what they are likely to do, and can justify that “what the character did” is not in line with how the character has previously acted, then this critique is valid. A way to rephrase this opinion in line with useful critiquette would be to say, “I’m having trouble believing that your character would do this because of [insert reasoning here].” There are rare times when this critique is acceptable because of the character’s immorality. Numerous popular stories about serial killers fly off the shelves. If the character’s offense is so grotesque that it could be seen as a threat to readership (it makes readers stop reading) then it might be suitable to ask the writer to consider having the offense done “off screen” or, in other words, not in the view of the reader.

Format Critique- “Your story is too short/ long.” This is a critique that can work well, given that it has proper backing and the critique is also given with an identification of where the writer could shorten/lengthen the story. What a critic often means by this is that the pacing feels wrong. If a story is too short, then some of the scenes need to be fleshed out more, or there needs to be more background information. Focusing on description rather than action can also lengthen the feel of a scene. If a story is too long, then perhaps certain scenes need to be cut, focusing on those that would not impact the story’s arc. A solution for this problem is to take a favorite book, highlighting slow portions of the text with one color and the fast with another, to get a sense of how these even out in a story.

Factual Critique- “What happened in your story is impossible due to… (the laws of physics, human behavior, my experience, etc).” There are three versions of the factual critique to look out for: those that have been researched, hearsay, and overgeneralizations. Two of these are not professional and should be avoided during workshops: overgeneralization and hearsay. Overgeneralizations are not facts. An example of an overgeneralization is, “You can’t make the dog the hero in this story, because one time a dog bit me, so therefore all dogs are evil.” Hearsay is when a critic points out a flaw based on assumptions they’ve heard, but has not bothered to make sure that their critique is a fact. It allows for reasonable doubt about that comment’s accuracy. A well-researched and established fact is the most productive input.

Specific Detail Critique- “I don’t like when I can’t pronounce the character’s name. If you ever want anyone to read your work ever, you should change it!” –. The above statement, which is common in critique groups, is simply not true. A lot of great books have characters with difficult names, most notably “Hermione” in J.K. Rowling’s famous Harry Potter series. In her fourth book, after massive amounts of fans requested the pronunciation, Rowling cleared up the confusion by having one of her characters sound out the name phonetically. Few would argue though, that no one read the Harry Potter books until after book four. The best way to approach a specific detail critique is to look at the work as a whole. Does changing this detail cause any change to the theme as a whole? Does it help improve on the theme or verisimilitude of the piece? If not, then the detail might be inconsequential and a matter best left to the writer’s personal choice.