Defining a Critique
My writers' group is so essential to my career that I take a two-hour conference call with them every two weeks, now that I don't live near the group anymore. In a crunch, we email each other things as we rewrite and before we send to our agent. I cannot tell you how valuable my critique partners are to me.
And one of the things about our group is we have our groove. We "get" each other. Like any relationship, we had to feel our way as we got to know one another . . . but we "get" what is involved--at least for us--in a solid, useful critique.
Not so easy to find--a match like that.
There is another author, a friend, who has critiqued my work. Can't stand the critiques. Not that this author isn't a good writer, or doesn't have valuable things to say. Not that I can't take it when someone shreds my work apart. I can.
Nope, this author doesn't critique MY work. He rewrites it so it is HIS. "I would write it this way . . . "
Um . . . the point is I would write it MY way.
Eight years ago, my group tried out a woman who has had 25 books published. She's a good writer. But we disinvited her. Same deal. Whether it's control, or a misunderstanding of what a CRITIQUE is, she didn't mesh. She rewrote whole chapters of people's work--choosing all new words, doing it HER way.
Here are two definitions of critique:
n 1: an essay or article that gives a critical evaluation (as of a book or play)
n 2: a serious examination and judgment of something; "constructive criticism is always appreciated" [syn: criticism]
Do either of these imply rewriting someone else's work?
So . . . that's at least my take. A critique partner should tell you where the action lags, where a cliche is in your writing. They can tell you their emotional reaction to a scene, or how they are perceiving your character. They can spot plot holes. They can let you know where your writing is too passive. They can even--on occasion--suggest a strong word or how to tighten a joke. But rewriting your sentences? Uh-uh.
Thoughts?
And one of the things about our group is we have our groove. We "get" each other. Like any relationship, we had to feel our way as we got to know one another . . . but we "get" what is involved--at least for us--in a solid, useful critique.
Not so easy to find--a match like that.
There is another author, a friend, who has critiqued my work. Can't stand the critiques. Not that this author isn't a good writer, or doesn't have valuable things to say. Not that I can't take it when someone shreds my work apart. I can.
Nope, this author doesn't critique MY work. He rewrites it so it is HIS. "I would write it this way . . . "
Um . . . the point is I would write it MY way.
Eight years ago, my group tried out a woman who has had 25 books published. She's a good writer. But we disinvited her. Same deal. Whether it's control, or a misunderstanding of what a CRITIQUE is, she didn't mesh. She rewrote whole chapters of people's work--choosing all new words, doing it HER way.
Here are two definitions of critique:
n 1: an essay or article that gives a critical evaluation (as of a book or play)
n 2: a serious examination and judgment of something; "constructive criticism is always appreciated" [syn: criticism]
Do either of these imply rewriting someone else's work?
So . . . that's at least my take. A critique partner should tell you where the action lags, where a cliche is in your writing. They can tell you their emotional reaction to a scene, or how they are perceiving your character. They can spot plot holes. They can let you know where your writing is too passive. They can even--on occasion--suggest a strong word or how to tighten a joke. But rewriting your sentences? Uh-uh.
Thoughts?
Labels: critique partners, the art of critiques
posted by Erica Orloff at 9:39 AM
13 Comments:
My very first *real* crit group was a bunch of women who were (for the most part) targeting category and one publisehd author who gave me many WTF moments. Not that there's anything wrong with writing category but it was very obvious (to me after a while) that we werne't writing the same thing.
I left.
HOWEVER like most writing experinces I did get soemthing good out of it--I found my writer's voice (right about the time I said Piss on you, I'm doing it my way). *g*
Hi Amie:
I've read some things by a certain e-pubbed writer that she posts on her site . . . and she heavily relies on and blogs about her critique partner . . . and in my mind, she needs to get a new one. Her writing is just awful--so you can have a group that just as easily yes'es you to death and really doesn't help you, just as you can have groups that thrive on cut-throat nastiness. It's tough to find the right one--but when you do, man, it's invaluable.
And good for you for finding your way and your voice.
E
I'm afraid I've been guilty of rewriting sentences for people sometimes. They were pretty bad sentences, but still...
You're right. Thanks for pointing out that rewriting isn't really the proper way to critique.
Jude:
When you rewrite, it just treads on a person's work, and to me, it isn't helpful. Sometimes, at least to me, it can seem like "hogging" the work--like a ball hog in basketball.
Critiquing is an art unto itself. I worked as an editor for over a decade--and think I'm pretty good at it. I can circle a scene and explain to an author why it doesn't work--but it's not up to me to suggest the language to fix it.
E
I think you're great at it.
The second story I wrote, a fellow writer showed me, with a few sample sentences, how to get into the characters' heads more.
The sample sentences worked for me, but you make a good point. Plus it was only once, LOL. I think you're right, too.
Some people learn by example, some by analysis, some by doing, some not at all ...
Spy:
Over the years, I have definitely taken paragraphs or a few sentences and shown a writer I was critiquing how to make their work less passive, or how to write dialogue more effectively or whatever. But as a matter of working with someone in a critique group over time, to me it's utterly presumptuous, and even rude, to rewrite sentences another author has crafted and chosen. Maybe some of that is my personality--I don't like to be ungracious to anyone. But I think it's just wrong. You wouldn't go up to a painter's canvas and re-do it your way.
E -- I wish, wish, wish I can find a group like yours.
Karm:
Maybe one of these days we can coordinate to meet halfway once a month . . .
E
I think that the writing/rewriting during a crit really depends on the situation and the agreements of the participants.
Generally though, I am in complete agreement that it is a useful tool as an example but not as a way to do the entire crit. Use it as a concrete example of an endemic problem with passive voice, or dialog, etc.
Even prefacing the rewrite with a statement like 'if you rewrote the following passage thus you would find your narrative popping out of the page...'.
Anyway, just my $.02 fwiw.
eowh:
Agreed. I think I generally feel all sorts of things work in crit groups if the participants are in agreement. I just feel writing "over" another's word choices usually isn't the way to go except by example.
E
I totally agree with everything you say.
I have an amazing crit group - we've been together for about 3 years and are scattered across the world - one in UK, one in Oz and now two of us in NZ (one just moved here). And lke you we totally get each other. We all write differently, yet have so much to offer each other. I'd be lost without them.
sara:
Wonderful that you, too, have such a great tea in your corner.
E
Post a Comment
<< Home