Critiques & Process III: Determining Relevancy

This is the hard one for me. I obsess over the critiques that I disagree with the most until I start to think that maybe, just maybe, they were right after all. This way of thinking is likely why I have found myself embroiled in endless drafts of novels, hovering around completeness without quite passing the finish line.

I have learned to work with this handicap, by addressing my own insecurities.

The first part of this is determining what I want to achieve with my writing. it’s like writing a mission statement for my novel, and my writing career as a whole. The purpose of this is to keep myself focused on what I consider the most important aspects of my own writing.

The statement of intent here is not for anyone else’s eyes. Rather, it is for me to use before reading critiques, to keep me from over-analyzing the feedback.

Next, I set up an order and a checklist. Being very business-like about the revision process helps to quite the more temperamental writer/artsy side that want to react to the feedback, and gives more precedence to the negative responses than the positive.

My checklist breaks down the responses into the following categories:

Plot/Character/Clarity

Description/ Scene/ Redundancy/Omission

Punctuation/Grammar/Word Choice/Formatting


Then I address them in order.

Currently this is written down, but I’m thinking of entering it into a spreadsheet for when the latest draft is done. The best way to turn the critiques objective are to make them seem less personal, and focus on the number of people who--having never met one another--agree on the same passage.

And yes, that means for me the group-form is mostly off. I need to keep the critiques non-emotional, so they can’t be personal to me or anyone else. So even if I know the people well, distance between my readers is better. Then I know if two people, uninfluenced by someone else’s critiquing method see the same thing wrong, then I should change it.

Because my writing style is more immersive, so too is my rewriting phases. So I need to be able to make and implement decisions quickly to keep up momentum. I need the momentum to be as continual as possible (allowing for life) but qualitative as well. That means I need to be able to identify problems objectively, quickly, and make changes. Groups tend to operate slowly. The slower I go, the more I second-guess, tweak and obsess. Slow inspires me to react emotionally because I don't react instantly, I'm more of a simmerer--something hits me a little off at first, it doesn't really bug me but if it goes unaddressed for any length of time it gathers importance and I get more upset and worked up.

There is no room for emotion when revising, and there is no room for me to react when working at top speed. Hence the need to know myself, how and what i react to in order to work around my own flaws to give my stories precisely what they require to reach their potential without me obsessing for years.

Critiques & Process II

So what are the bazillion options out there?

I have received critiques via email, in person, in Google Docs. I have shared scenes on this blog and received feedback. I have posted to forums, and I have listened to critiques over the phone. Different people critique at different rates, so it’s best to know your style of writing and critiquing in order to pick the best mode of feedback.

When I’m writing, I am generally very immersed. I tend to focus and produce a lot, rapidly. Every time that I have tried to revise slowly I have failed to complete a revision. I get board, distracted, or move on. I take it this means that I need to be as immersed in the revision as in the writing. The few times that I have done that, the results have been much better.

I need critiques from people who can look at completed drafts and make comments on the whole thing. I need to take a break in between the completion and the revision, but not so long that my brain decides to go in a new direction with the story -- which it will and has done 4 times in the past 7 years. With one story. So I need to work fast. Take short breaks, write shorter pieces, but never let the pace slacken.

When I am done applying changes, according to a per-decided schedule, I need to be done. I will tweak something forever. I will always see my pieces as unfinished works. Again, that is something that the years of reworking stories has taught me a bout myself.

Critiques & Process

Source: abundance-blog.marelisa-online.com via Drea on Pinterest

The years that I have been “dry” have been the initial editing/revising years. I did not realize when I launched into this process that there is such variety in ways in which you can receive critiques.

My mother had a writers’ group when I was in elementary school, it was focused on poetry and affiliated with the Sacramento Poetry Society. I came to believe that a critique group was the natural second step for completing a novel.

So when I thought I was ready to start putting my novel into shape for submission to agents, editors and the like, I found a group to join.

The group I joined raised issues that I had not foreseen, and in the process I began to realize that critiquing and evaluating a critique could take a whole new skill set that I hadn’t anticipated. A lot of articles I had read had made the process of evaluating critiques seen so very easy.

But we as people--we are flawed and we have things we are self conscious about. I was 21 at the time and there was plenty I was self-conscious about. So it took no time for me to plunge into a reactionary rewrite.

Those are bad. Very bad. They take you into the territory set up as “good” by your group, oftentimes, and away from the trajectory you wished for your project to follow.

Perhaps I was then a bit too impressionable, but you never know these things until plunge on in.

One advantage that I received from that first group was my first 2 conventions. At Baycon 2005, I had the opportunity to meet other writers and I learned that some authors used Alpha and Beta Readers instead of critique groups. This was my first introduction to the idea that there are about as many ways to have your work reviewed and critiqued as there are processes by which writers produce books.

In a roundabout way, I suppose, I have spent the last 5-6 years trying to find what my method was. Have you found what works best for you? where do you receive the best critiques for your fiction?

On Completing the Novel

I have written 4 novels beginning to end. 1 is shelved. 1 is undergoing a massive revision and turning into 3 novels. 2 more are collecting dust until I get to them.

What happened?

Between 7 and 10 years ago, I wrote 3 novels. Back to back, it took me 3 years-ish. And then I thought “I need to get the first one critiqued.” The group made me think I had left too much out.

I underwent a massive rewrite. I had a falling out with the group. 2 years later I founded a new group. They told me lots of wonderful things. I made superficial changes.

Then I reread it with a critical eye.

The whole thing did not seem to be what I wanted it to be! My characters, the plot, the world--it needed help. And the characters were still there, nagging me. So back to the drawing board I went.

They say once you finish the first it is easiest to write another. But sometimes life tosses a wrench in those plans. For me, as many of my posts illustrate--life is about finding balance--and that balance is as important for my revised drafts as my rough.

This time, I know what foot I’m starting on and I know how to answer the even harder question--

What do you do when you finish that rough draft?

Creating Community

Creating a writing community does not seem like it should be a difficult thing. But here in Sacramento where coffee shops, law firms and medical offices dominate our down town, politics defines the mud through which we must wade. But rising from it, we define ourselves. Talking to artists and musicians I hear some of the same complaints I, as a writer, voice.

Musicians face issues of permitting. Where do you put on a show when half of the venues can no longer afford the permits required?

For critique groups, it's a matter of finding a place to meet that is quiet enough for concentration and discussion. I have met in groups at cafes all over the city. To no avail. In time, each group must move, due to expansion or noise or even the change of seasons, members moving, etc.

So SWS is trying to generate a network of critique groups in order to combat these issues. We hope to be centered around a Writers' Reference Library which will provide a physical focal point for meetings, and place people can go to learn about us.

Currently we have four successful groups going, and are looking to start more. The more people, the more knowledge, the better the whole.