Crit Groups

[SRHowen]

Here is an interesting question. Well, maybe not, but I have been thinking of it.

If you belong to a crit group, what is the ratio of men to women? In my own group I find that at any given time we have more--a lot more, women than men.

And the most likely to drop out or just stop participating are the men. My hubby said well, maybe that's because the women are stay at home workers?

But in my group of 12 there are only 3 men and one who is on his way out if he doesn't up his participation--from about zero right now, and almost all of us work full time jobs besides writing and beta reading etc. So I don't think that's it. And we are not romance or women's fiction writers.

Shawn

[mistri]

I'm not in a crit group now, but I've been in several in the past. As far as I recall, women have always outnumbered men. I'm hesitant to generalise about reasons for this, but crit groups don't just take up time. They also require an author to take advice from others. Now I'm not saying men can't take advice, only that perhaps some of them prefer to work on a project themselves, rather than with other people.

I'm a woman, but the reason I'm not in a crit group now is because I prefer to work on my own until I'm relatively happy with something (and at that stage I'll consider a crit group, depending on the project).

[Fresie]

Men are proud. They take failure far too seriously. Just yesterday, a guy quit the group I belong to. He was a good writer, but obviously couldn't take criticism. It's a shame, really, because he was a good friend, too.

I also noticed that men are very harsh critics. They don't spare your feelings. That's why the groups that consist mainly of men don't last very long. And I don't like going there, either.

[BlueTexas]

The group I belonged to was 4 women, 2 men. The men were the more honest participants in that group. A bit more harsh, but I preferred that. I was there to learn, after all. I finally quit going because the oaf of a poet who ran the group got on my last nerve.

She had an eternal mother-do-as-I-say hang-up. "But Dear, you can't write about people dying that way. Write about the good things in the world; that's what I do and look where it's gotten me."

I hate that.

[azbikergirl]

I was in a group that was all women, and one that was 50-50. Never more men than women, in my experience.
I also noticed that men are very harsh critics.
Not necessarily. One man critter I know goes out of his way to be kind, while still offering criticism. He defines 'constructive criticism' IMO, and I appreciate his thoughtfulness. I've also known women critters who care nothing for the feelings of others and will rip up one side and down the other, and to heck with anyone who can't take it.

What drives me nuts with critiquers is someone saying, "I would never have said/done that."

Well, honey, the story ain't about you, so get over yourself. :D

[Jamesaritchie]

Here is an interesting question. Well, maybe not, but I have been thinking of it.

If you belong to a crit group, what is the ratio of men to women? In my own group I find that at any given time we have more--a lot more, women than men.

And the most likely to drop out or just stop participating are the men. My hubby said well, maybe that's because the women are stay at home workers?

But in my group of 12 there are only 3 men and one who is on his way out if he doesn't up his participation--from about zero right now, and almost all of us work full time jobs besides writing and beta reading etc. So I don't think that's it. And we are not romance or women's fiction writers.

Shawn

I've only been part of two crit groups, but I've been around and taught several others. All but one had more women than men. The single exception was a science fiction only group.

But I will say I found a number of the women were harder to get along with, and caused far more problems, than the men. The problem with the men was almost always a lack of participation. The problem with the women was almost always, well, too much participation.

The only writing group I'be been in that actually worked well and lasted was a group that almost never did critiques unless an individual writer had a specific problem and asked for help. That group kept both the men and the women until circumstances forced almost everyone to move for the sake of a job, etc.

[jdkiggins]

And the most likely to drop out or just stop participating are the men.

Shawn,

I am a member of two crit groups and both include men. One group has dwindled to just a few women. The other group includes three men; two have turned up missing for a time, have jobs in which they do a lot of traveling, so they aren't able to frequent the boards quite as much. (Or at least that is their excuse.) :) The third gentleman is in there every day plugging away and offering very constructive crits.

I guess it's all in how much a person really wants to put into a group and how much time h/she is willing to spend.

Joanne

[cwfgal]

But I will say I found a number of the women were harder to get along with, and caused far more problems, than the men. The problem with the men was almost always a lack of participation. The problem with the women was almost always, well, too much participation.


I'd have to agree based on my own experiences. In the two groups I've been part of, the men would sit back quietly and let the women run on and on and on about all kinds of stuff.

Though there was this one guy who was part of a group for a few weeks who insisted on monopolizing the conversation every time we met. The first time someone suggested that he might learn more by listening rather than talking was the last time we saw him.

Beth

[veinglory]

The 'take over' people that ruined a group I was in were men. I am not sure it is a matter of gender per se. I do think that writing groups and forums tend to attract more women and that may make a 'culture' that doesn't suit some men so they tend not to stay?

[maestrowork]

I would caution about calling it a gender issue. I think it depends on the person. I'm doing very well in the one crit group to which I belong. And I'm a man (I checked just now when I went to the bathroom...)

I can only speak for myself, but I do think that many men are goal oriented (I don't mean to say women are not, but bear with me...) I know I am. I think some of them join a crit group for particular reasons -- they want to give and receive crits, to help them improve their writing, etc. Some crit groups I went to in the past were:

a) the group is too large. There were 15 people one night at one group I went to.

b) it takes too long. One group spent 3 hours critting two pieces. There's a queue for crits -- 4 weeks' wait. So you end up spending more time critting others than having your own work critted.

c) there's a lot of "ego hugging" and "group therapy" going on sometimes. Not that it's bad, but for those who are "goal-oriented" per se, they could see it as a waste of time. They don't need group hugs. They need results.

d) they spend a lot of time doing "group writing" -- workshops, etc. I think some men are intimidated by that, and also they wanted to get on with the crits.

e) many of the writers in the crit groups are not published yet. So someone could walk in, and be skeptical about the quality of crits from the group. For example, if he/she hears someone saying things like "change your saids to belloweds, laugheds, exclaimed, etc.", you end up questioning the validity of the crit group itself.

f) unlike an online group where, when you're a little bored, you could do something else (like getting something to eat, surf the web for a while, etc.) as others are critting each other, you're kind of "stuck" at a real crit group. You end up sitting there for 3 hours critting two pieces of work, and you're falling asleep half the time. ;) It happens. And after a while, you question "Is it working for me?"


There may indeed be some gender differences, but I wouldn't stereotype just yet. I mean it is true that in general, women are better listeners, and they are able to listen just for the sake of listening. It's more about relationship building, showing support and such, instead of solving a problem (thus a crit group could be run that way -- a great support group). But men are more prone to want to solve problems, and their crits might be along that line as well -- to offer unsolicit advice for YOU to solve your "problems" (what goes wrong with your writing...) Read the book "Men Are From Mars -- Women Are From Venus"... I think there're some truth there.



I think, again in general, a crit group is a big time commitment, and when someone doesn't get the results he/she wants from it, they'd decide not to come back. For me, these 15-ppl, long, group-hugging, lets-write-together sessions did not suit me well. But that's just me.

[jdkiggins]

I think, again in general, a crit group is a big time commitment, and when someone doesn't get the results he/she wants from it, they'd decide not to come back. For me, these 15-ppl, long, group-hugging, lets-write-together sessions did not suit me well. But that's just me.

:Hail: :thankyou: Way to go, maestrowork!

If I need a hug, I'll go ask my mom. I like results myself. :)

Joanne

[azbikergirl]

That's one reason I find online crit groups work well in general. People don't know each other. We crit and that's it. Sometimes we have discussions about writing, and over time we get to know a few things about the members, but we're not buds. That's not to say that I haven't found friends in crit groups -- one of my beta readers is someone I met through an online crit group a year ago, which I quit after about four months. I, too, prefer crit groups that focus on the writing and not "group hugs." And I'm a grrl. :)

[Jamesaritchie]

I would caution about calling it a gender issue. I think it depends on the person. I'm doing very well in the one crit group to which I belong. And I'm a man (I checked just now when I went to the bathroom...)

I can only speak for myself, but I do think that many men are goal oriented (I don't mean to say women are not, but bear with me...) I know I am. I think some of them join a crit group for particular reasons -- they want to give and receive crits, to help them improve their writing, etc. Some crit groups I went to in the past were:

a) the group is too large. There were 15 people one night at one group I went to.

b) it takes too long. One group spent 3 hours critting two pieces. There's a queue for crits -- 4 weeks' wait. So you end up spending more time critting others than having your own work critted.

c) there's a lot of "ego hugging" and "group therapy" going on sometimes. Not that it's bad, but for those who are "goal-oriented" per se, they could see it as a waste of time. They don't need group hugs. They need results.

d) they spend a lot of time doing "group writing" -- workshops, etc. I think some men are intimidated by that, and also they wanted to get on with the crits.

e) many of the writers in the crit groups are not published yet. So someone could walk in, and be skeptical about the quality of crits from the group. For example, if he/she hears someone saying things like "change your saids to belloweds, laugheds, exclaimed, etc.", you end up questioning the validity of the crit group itself.

f) unlike an online group where, when you're a little bored, you could do something else (like getting something to eat, surf the web for a while, etc.) as others are critting each other, you're kind of "stuck" at a real crit group. You end up sitting there for 3 hours critting two pieces of work, and you're falling asleep half the time. ;) It happens. And after a while, you question "Is it working for me?"


There may indeed be some gender differences, but I wouldn't stereotype just yet. I mean it is true that in general, women are better listeners, and they are able to listen just for the sake of listening. It's more about relationship building, showing support and such, instead of solving a problem (thus a crit group could be run that way -- a great support group). But men are more prone to want to solve problems, and their crits might be along that line as well -- to offer unsolicit advice for YOU to solve your "problems" (what goes wrong with your writing...) Read the book "Men Are From Mars -- Women Are From Venus"... I think there're some truth there.



I think, again in general, a crit group is a big time commitment, and when someone doesn't get the results he/she wants from it, they'd decide not to come back. For me, these 15-ppl, long, group-hugging, lets-write-together sessions did not suit me well. But that's just me.

I think you make many excellent points, though I'm not sure a crit group can be too large, if it's managed properly. The most successful in person crit group I ever saw always had at least twenty-five people attending, and often had up to forty. They handled the size problem by having a constantly shifting mix of sub-groups, each of which focused on a specific genre or length, depending on what writers needed at the time.

They were a serious bunch, however, and had a president, a vice-president, a treasurer, etc. They brought in some high-profile guest speakers and workshop hosts, etc.

But I think having a good crit group of any size might be largely a matter of luck. If you chance to draw the right mix of personalities, you will probably have a good group, and if you chance to draw the wrong mix, there will be problems.

[Nateskate]

Yikes, I think this is an interesting topic, but I'm wondering if the answer doesn't have so much to do with critic groups as much as the different dynamic in male and female communication. And since this is about "Support and problem solving" so to speak, you are going to find women and men at logerheads.

Pardon any generalizations here, because that tends to happen in these kinds of threads. When my wife talks to me about her day, she's not looking for me to give her advice on how to deal with her boss, but wants me to listen empathically, "Oh, that was terrible, you must have felt horrible", rather than, "Here's ten steps to deal with confrontations." If I ask her for something, generally I'm not asking for sympathy or understanding. I'd rather she give me some concrete advice. We just look for completely different kinds of help.

I suspect this has to carry over into any male/female problem solving type situations. It's quite possible that a male will be there expecting a list of concrete suggestions on how to fix his book...etc. He isn't planning to listen empathically and supportively. When he listens, he's likely to make the same mistake that we husbands make before we know any better, and tend to blunt-headedly think that the woman is asking you how to fix her book, which comes across as pompous. But I guy will think, "Why the heck did you ask in the first place?"

Well, if some are there seeking a supportive type thing, while others simply want a mechanic to fix their story, you have people who aren't going to blend very well.

In general, few guys can process verbal communication as fast as a woman. I can't. My wife can overwhelm me, although she never tries to. I'm intelligent, but she'll talk about so many different things, sometimes she'll lose me. But being dutiful, I'll listen. Well, its not that she talks to much. Because she never overwhelms her female friends. They can go at it on the phone for hours. In ten minutes I'd be exhausted. Since they listen differently, empathically, it just seems they can keep up with each other. So, in a group of women, with just me, I'll wait my turn, and perhaps I'll never get my turn.

If I was in such a group, I might be there for empathy or support, because we all need that. But generally, I might be there for something altogether different. I want to get this stinking book published. I wouldn't want a supportive empathic answer, just a concrete one. What should I change? How would you do that....

[Maryn]

My own critique group has never been large--12 was the maximum, and that didn't last long--and has been mostly female, although we've had men join us for a time and drift away (or in one case, die).

However, we've found that gender isn't the defining issue of whether the group works for us. We've had men who were excellent members. We've also have men who were bossy, and men who were cruel, spiteful, and viscious, and men who were total slackers, and once, a man who was just hoping to meet women. (He joined Weight Watchers, for the same reason, and is the only person I ever heard of who was kicked out of WW.)

Our most disruptive member, single-handedly responsible for splitting our group in half last year, was a woman who was highly negative, very productive, and unable to accept criticism.

For us, what helps may be a narrowness of focus. One genre is all we do. Although most of us write in other genres, any critique on 'outside' work is not done at the group's meetings.

The critique part of a meeting is all business (we socialize beforehand, over a meal) and rarely lasts more than 45 minutes per critiqued manuscript, tops. (Usually it's less.) When a meeting ends, some people may stay to support one another (who doesn't appreciate a drink and a laugh after learning their work really stinks?) or to brainstorm with someone who needs help. We have a Yahoo group where those who choose to do writing exercises can share them and those who don't can ignore it.

We are currently all-female but continue to watch for promising men to join us.

Maryn

[reph]

If I was in such a group, I might be there for empathy or support, because we all need that. But generally, I might be there for something altogether different. I want to get this stinking book published. I wouldn't want a supportive empathic answer, just a concrete one. What should I change? How would you do that....
You would do it by designing questions to get the kind of help you want.

Sample question from seeker of warm fuzzies: "I had such a hard time writing this story! I got bogged down in the middle, thinking my characters were no good, the dialogue wasn't realistic, nobody would ever publish it. I just wanted to gobble down a pound of chocolate and go to bed for a week. Ever feel like that?"

Appropriate answer (matches the question type): "Oh, honey, that was me with my first story. Don't worry, it gets easier after that. I'm sure your writing is much better than you think. And you can always phone me when you get in 'that mood.' "

Inappropriate answer (does not match the question type): "I recommend the following books on dialogue..."

Sample question from seeker of information: "Do you think the dialogue on page 4 comes off as realistic? I'm not sure a 15-year-old housemaid and a peddler of pots and pans would have talked that way in 1800."

Appropriate answer: "I recommend the following books..."

Inappropriate answer: "Oh, honey,..."

[Nateskate]

You would do it by designing questions to get the kind of help you want.

Sample question from seeker of warm fuzzies: "I had such a hard time writing this story! I got bogged down in the middle, thinking my characters were no good, the dialogue wasn't realistic, nobody would ever publish it. I just wanted to gobble down a pound of chocolate and go to bed for a week. Ever feel like that?"

Appropriate answer (matches the question type): "Oh, honey, that was me with my first story. Don't worry, it gets easier after that. I'm sure your writing is much better than you think. And you can always phone me when you get in 'that mood.' "

Inappropriate answer (does not match the question type): "I recommend the following books on dialogue..."

Sample question from seeker of information: "Do you think the dialogue on page 4 comes off as realistic? I'm not sure a 15-year-old housemaid and a peddler of pots and pans would have talked that way in 1800."

Appropriate answer: "I recommend the following books..."

Inappropriate answer: "Oh, honey,..."

I understand, and you are right. There is a way to draw people out, and not to publically flay them. I'm trying to throw out ideas on why this lack of guys is universal. My initial thought is that guys and women are looking for something completely different in the first place.

Depending on the format of any group, you are going to find commonalities. And obviously guys can benefit from such a group. If I knew of one in my area, perhaps I'd go. So, you have to wonder, "What dynamic is at work here?" Do guys never show up in the first place? Do they come once and never come back?

The question may be, "What appeals to guys, and why doesn't the idea appeal to guys", or "If it appeals to guys, what's turning them off when they get there?" So they feel out of place or that they aren't getting what they are looking for? If they feel it's not for them, but women feel it's for them, then what are women looking for that men are not looking for?

These aren't answers, but questions and guesses?

[alaskamatt17]

I'm in a crit group that meets in person. There are seven men and seven women. Gender does not seem to affect behavior of individuals (at least as far as critiquing goes). Genre, however, does.

Poets seem to get the worst end of the critiques. I try to help them, but there are just inordinately more fiction writers and essayists than poets. Thus, very few people can give critiques on actual technique. I was worried that sci-fi and fantasy writers would be ostracized, because in the first week only three of us admitted to writing genre fiction. It seems though, that there are plenty of people who write fantasy in the class, but try to delude themselves by calling it "magical realism," as if that is somehow superior.

I really don't think gender has anything to do with abilities as a writer or a critic.

[Anatole Ghio]

This is an interesting thread. I have not been in any crit groups for awhile. When I went to college for writing, every class was based upon the workshop model, so I will base my opinions upon my experience there.

I do think a lot of this comes down to how men and women communicate. Whether there are differences between the sexes can be something of a hot topic, but I have seen studies which suggest there are not only cultural differences between the sexes, but also physiological ones in the ways the genders process information. If anyone cares to debate this, I suppose it would be relevant to the topic, but it would take us away from the core matter of writing criticism, so I would rather not.

For whatever reason, my experience in college was unusual in the sense that all my classes had an equal number of male and female students. I heard from a number of my teachers that the writing program had a larger number of female students in it, so I somehow bent the curve.

However, the majority of my creative writing teachers were women, I've had only a handful of male writing instructors. Among the ones which I count as the best I ever learned from, are the few men teachers... it is disproportionate to the number of women instructors I had. The reason for this is, in my personal experience, these men teachers tended to be technically oriented and were able to analyze the structure of the work I submitted and improve elements such as grammer, voice, plot etc... They were also very helpful in referring me to other writers of a similar voice.

Of the female instructors I count as the very best I ever learned from, it seems to me they were very good at seeing the intent of the work I was doing, at uncovering character dynamics, and at seeing what scenes could be expanded or reduced to increase the emotional impact of a work. They were also more process oriented and instead of focusing on improving a particular work, were very good at looking for triggers to stimulate THE NEXT WORK.

I am now going to somewhat qualify what I just wrote by saying as much as I learned from these core teachers, most of the teachers I had did nothing for my writing, unfortunately. I got more from interacting with the other students than from the teachers. So the split on the teachers was for the most part they did not increase my skill, but when they were valuable, they were very valuable.

As far as the comment about the workshop not being an efficient way to increase one's writing skill: that is correct, if you go into a large workshop with the intent of bettering your talent, you will probably be disappointed. The best way to do that is to show your work to a few people in whom you can trust their feedback. Do not go to a large workshop if this is your intent.

However, there things to be gained from a workshop apart from purely improving your writing: one can learn how to give better feedback, how to analyze a piece and see how it works and doesn't work, how to spot the intent of a piece solely from the style and structure, gain contact with other writers.

It is unfortunate but true that a large workshop will more likely make you a better critic than a writer, but every writer needs to have a critic in him in order to revise his own writing, so it does improve ones writing in the end.

- Anatole

[jdkiggins]

Gender does not seem to affect behavior of individuals (at least as far as critiquing goes). Genre, however, does.



That's a good point, alaskamatt. Genre does make a bit of a difference in one group I'm with. Some would rather crit nonfiction pieces rather than short fiction thrillers. Others like critting poetry. Yet, others will crit everything that is posted. I guess in some cases it depends on what the critter likes to read.

I wouldn't feel comfortable critting poetry since it is not something I write often, so I offer crits on other work. On the other hand, the poets in my group don't mind critting my "Life On The Farm" stories, when I get around to posting them. :)

Joanne

[Jamesaritchie]

This is an interesting thread. I have not been in any crit groups for awhile. When I went to college for writing, every class was based upon the workshop model, so I will base my opinions upon my experience there.

I do think a lot of this comes down to how men and women communicate. Whether there are differences between the sexes can be something of a hot topic, but I have seen studies which suggest there are not only cultural differences between the sexes, but also physiological ones in the ways the genders process information. If anyone cares to debate this, I suppose it would be relevant to the topic, but it would take us away from the core matter of writing criticism, so I would rather not.

For whatever reason, my experience in college was unusual in the sense that all my classes had an equal number of male and female students. I heard from a number of my teachers that the writing program had a larger number of female students in it, so I somehow bent the curve.

However, the majority of my creative writing teachers were women, I've had only a handful of male writing instructors. Among the ones which I count as the best I ever learned from, are the few men teachers... it is disproportionate to the number of women instructors I had. The reason for this is, in my personal experience, these men teachers tended to be technically oriented and were able to analyze the structure of the work I submitted and improve elements such as grammer, voice, plot etc... They were also very helpful in referring me to other writers of a similar voice.

Of the female instructors I count as the very best I ever learned from, it seems to me they were very good at seeing the intent of the work I was doing, at uncovering character dynamics, and at seeing what scenes could be expanded or reduced to increase the emotional impact of a work. They were also more process oriented and instead of focusing on improving a particular work, were very good at looking for triggers to stimulate THE NEXT WORK.

I am now going to somewhat qualify what I just wrote by saying as much as I learned from these core teachers, most of the teachers I had did nothing for my writing, unfortunately. I got more from interacting with the other students than from the teachers. So the split on the teachers was for the most part they did not increase my skill, but when they were valuable, they were very valuable.

As far as the comment about the workshop not being an efficient way to increase one's writing skill: that is correct, if you go into a large workshop with the intent of bettering your talent, you will probably be disappointed. The best way to do that is to show your work to a few people in whom you can trust their feedback. Do not go to a large workshop if this is your intent.

However, there things to be gained from a workshop apart from purely improving your writing: one can learn how to give better feedback, how to analyze a piece and see how it works and doesn't work, how to spot the intent of a piece solely from the style and structure, gain contact with other writers.

It is unfortunate but true that a large workshop will more likely make you a better critic than a writer, but every writer needs to have a critic in him in order to revise his own writing, so it does improve ones writing in the end.

- Anatole


I do think there's something to the "men are problem solvers, women are empathizers" idea. If something is wrong, a man wants to fix it, and no fooling around in the process. I think it's the way most of us are built.

If a friend says, "That dang car of mine won't start no matter what I do" our reaction is "Well, shoot, let's go look under the hood."

We take our toolbox, pop the hood, and find the problem. "You durned fool," we say, "You had the fuel pump hooked up to the radiator. Don't you know anything?"

Our friend doesn't take offense, he just says, "Joe told me to do it that way. Where's it supposed to be hooked up?"

So we fix it, and all he says is, "Thanks. Guess the beer is on me tonight. By the way, you see that new waitress down at Bob's? I'd sure like to hook my fuel pump to that."

"Yeah, I can just see her walking around with your fuel pump in her ear."

What a man does not want to hear in response to a car that won't start is, "You know, that happened to me once. Shame, too. I loved that old car. Why, that was the car I had when me an Thelma were dating. Yes, sir, broke my heart when it wouldn't start. I still have the back seat out in the garage. That seat is a shrine, I tell you.

"Don't feel bad about your car, now. I'm sure the fact that it won't start has nothing at all to do with you. You can't take these things personally. I know you're a good driver, and a fine, responsible car owner, no matter what the neighbors say. And I think I know just the mechanic who can have her up and running in nothing flat."

Men really just don't care about the empathizing. Men want to know:

1. Can you fix it?

2. Will you fix it?

3. If you ain't gonna fix it, give me the name of the blasted mechanic so I can call him. I'm already late for work as it is.

As for workshops, I think good workshops, run the right way, and that have the right instrutors, are the best possible way to learn how to write well in a hurry. Far better than any crit group I've been around.

[zornhau]

1. Can you fix it?

2. Will you fix it?

3. If you ain't gonna fix it, give me the name of the blasted


Gendersmchender! That's the point of a crit group. Who the devil wants to waste time on a monthly group hug?

I'm obviously lucky. My (mainly SF) crit group rocks! It's for writers focussed on professional publication. You have to submit an audition piece to join. When in session, all remarks are technical/analytical.

I don't see a gender difference in giving or taking criticism, e.g. our touchy-feely female poet cheerfully declared that she'd mistaken one of my fight scenes for an attempt at comedy! I thanked her and went away and fixed the embarassing problem.

The idea is to get our work to professional standards, not engage in monthly group hugs: "If my work's broken, I'd rather hear that now, so I can fix it, rather than get a form rejection letter from an editor."

The newbies who quit or drift - male or female - are those who are ego invested in getting it right first time, rather than in producing and selling a professional work. They come to us for validation, and are mortified when we don't hale them as naturals.

The 2 dead giveaways are: interrupting a crit to mount a verbal defence; and overtly submitting incomplete or obviously flawed work (as a weird sort of ego defense).

My experience, and that of the other members, is that a good crit group does help your writing. It also saves on time spent waiting to get distance from a piece, which is one of the reasons the estabished pro sticks around.

(Conversely, I'm not convinced about University provided creative writing courses. Great at freeing the inner muse etc, but not so good at nailing down absolute technical basics such as tight 3rd person.)

[oswann]

You guys are good. Yes I agree, all of what I thought when I read the thread has been mentioned.

Also, men want to master and can sometimes forget the fun. It's the same reason why women drink wine and have fun singing Carly Simon and men slosh and gargle and talk about nuttiness and fruitiness with ridiculous expressions on their faces. It's easy for a man to be caught up in the seriousness of it all and the seriousness of mastering of the activity.

Os.

[azbikergirl]

How important is it that a writer join a critique group composed of members familiar with the writer's genre?

I'm writing a fantasy novel right now, and I've been in a crit group with a couple members who "don't do fantasy." While some may be able to set aside their personal reading preferences and crit what's on the page, not everyone can. Some make snide comments, presumably because they don't care for or understand the genre.

[zornhau]

Some make snide comments, presumably because they don't care for or understand the genre.

Tell them to [8 EXPLETIVES DELETED] off!

Or, slag off their genre in a playful fashion - e.g. a literary angst novel might be "Posh chick-lit".

Snide comments have no place in a professional atmosphere.

Having non-genre readers is generally very useful - the more they hate the genre, the better they are at catching mistakes. My favourite critter is a socialist hard-sf man. He hates magic, bloodshed, and quasi-medieval settings. Perfect!

[SRHowen]

My group had a member for a time that didn't have a clue about alt history, or about the culture in the story. He was not useful. He also decided to inject his own "ideas" into his crits. I would, you must, it's required and so on--about things that were only his opinion (such as naming minor characters, and he made snide comments about the culture in the story--making comments about (your "whatever" doesn't work) as if because he didn't like the names, or their culture that the story had to be changed because he didn't get it or like it.

I did a bad thing and went off on him. Many of his comments came across as bigoted as well. I should have just ignored him--but it's my group and I won't put up with that sort of thing.

Now, others in the group who do not read fantasy or alt history have been very very helpful--when they say, ugh, I don't get this. I can look at it and say OK, I need to find a way to explain that to a reader who might be new to alt history.

My group is a writer's support group more than a crit group--though we do a lot of crits, we also support each other. We could use some more men in the group though. LOL

I'd think long and hard about belonging to a group where people make snide comments about what you write. As said above, personal comments have no place in a critique.

Shawn

[zornhau]

You were certainly right to stand up to the prat! :Thumbs: Problems with the creative side of life always hit you where it hurt.

It sometimes helps to provide a brief intro to the target market, not the story, including any assumptions about the readers. For example, I recently sent something round the group with this in the covering note:
Here’s Chapter 2 of my Swords & Sorcery* novel.
*For those not familiar with the genre: think Lord of the Rings as filmed, but shorter with more sex and violence, and less lyricism. Typical authors would be David Gemmel, George RR Martin, and the blessed Robert E Howard. 20 years ago, it would have gone out with a cover showing a mighty-thewed warrior, sword raised, with a scantily clad wench clinging to his thighs…
I suspect that the most effective groups have a clear mission statement - e.g. "To get published" - and, initially at least, adhere to the formal meeting rules complete with a chairperson. SFWA has stuff on this, e.g. http://www.sfwa.org/writing/critiquing.html

[vrabinec]

I've come here, hat-in-hand, looking for a crit group to join. My own work won't be ready to be disected for several months, but I'd love to get to know a group in the interim. If anyone could use an extra pair of eyes, I'd be honored to participate. I am a guy, but I'm not insensetive, and I am reliable. My genres of interest are pretty much anything other than erotica (not only does it not interest me, I doubt my wife would understand if she caught me reading it). My own genres are historic fiction for my current WIP, and Sci-Fi/fantasy for several others I've either started or contemplated. I'd like to find a group of between 5 and 10.

If anyone's interested, feel free to contact me.

[JerseyGirl1962]

My own genres are historic fiction for my current WIP, and Sci-Fi/fantasy for several others I've either started or contemplated. I'd like to find a group of between 5 and 10.

If anyone's interested, feel free to contact me.

Have you considered joining an online group? For spec fic, two come to mind:

Online Writing Workshop (http://sff.onlinewritingworkshop.com/)
Critters (http://critters.org/)

For general as well as genre, there's:

Critique Circle (http://critiquecircle.com/)

Just an idea. Good luck!

~JerseyGirl

[vrabinec]

Have you considered joining an online group? For spec fic, two come to mind:

Online Writing Workshop (http://sff.onlinewritingworkshop.com/)
Critters (http://critters.org/)

For general as well as genre, there's:

Critique Circle (http://critiquecircle.com/)

Just an idea. Good luck!

~JerseyGirl

Thanks Jersey Girl. Precisely what I was looking for.

Hey, I just noticed that you're the writerlystuff blog girl. I just passed through (Fred), I swear I'm not a stalker. Thanks again.

[blackbird]

I'd have to agree based on my own experiences. In the two groups I've been part of, the men would sit back quietly and let the women run on and on and on about all kinds of stuff.

Though there was this one guy who was part of a group for a few weeks who insisted on monopolizing the conversation every time we met. The first time someone suggested that he might learn more by listening rather than talking was the last time we saw him.

Beth

This is exactly the point I was about to offer up when I saw your post. For women, critique groups often become social affairs as well. A place to discuss everything from marital problems to menopause. Most men (at least the ones I know) tend to feel uncomfortable and obtrusive in such situations, and will usually end up bowing out of their own accord.

I've been to some groups that worked because there was roughly equal the same number of men and women, which created more balance. Men will often feel "odd man out" in a roomful of women, and likewise for women if only one or two women show up at a critique group that is predominantly male (though in my experience the former happens far more frequently).

[MicheleLee]

I have tried many a crit group and reader. By far I have found people who say more that "I like it/don't like it" are rare, especially in beginner crti groups where writers want to be told they can do it, not what they are doing wrong.

I currently have my husband and another male friend who read, and they usually only comment on if a plot works or not. If it weakens in places or fizzles.

I am also part of a "support group" style board that does crits on request. Mostly female they are good at prose and feel and how the words actually fit together. They're not so good a poking holes in my logic.

I am also a member of two formal crit groups, one of witch is by email and mostly male and fantastic. They are a wonderful help, are on a similar level of publishing as I am and look at almost everything. The other is a board and I am quite unhappy with because they are quite hard and negative. Now I can take opinions, but when I send the same thing to two groups (often) and the one is always hard and negative with "I don't understand" and the other seems to be a mix of "i liked the prose and imagry but this part didn't work" and "I loved this, here are misspellings I notices and some tense slips" you start to think maybe your instincts are right.

The thought of people being in a crit group to just tear down other people (it happens, really, it happens) bothers me. As does the thought of a pure hug group. Neither one is reliable or useful. All of us get down and need a few good words at times, but nothing but praise is useless too. Perhaps one should make a question sheet to go with their stories to be critted with what they want to know "Does it suck" would, as some one else mentioned" imply they want to hear it has potential" "Does this scene seem realistic" means exactly that.

[JerseyGirl1962]

Thanks Jersey Girl. Precisely what I was looking for.

Hey, I just noticed that you're the writerlystuff blog girl. I just passed through (Fred), I swear I'm not a stalker. Thanks again.

Hi, Fred! :D Yes, I answered the question you left there, in my usual windbag way.

Glad to have been of help!

~JerseyGirl

[Linda Adams]

If you belong to a crit group, what is the ratio of men to women? In my own group I find that at any given time we have more--a lot more, women than men.

Our group (thriller) has ALWAYS had more men. The first two years, we had seven guys and me. And not from lack of trying to get more women (co-writer and I particularly wanted women because our book is a thriller for the women's market; most of the male members of the group have struggled with this concept). We'd have a camp night and recruit a few women, but they'd never stay more than a couple of meetings. At the last camp night, we recruited something like six women but only two stayed, and co-writer recruited a woman reader. So right now we have four women and about eight or ten guys.

[ErylRavenwell]

I'm in a 100% male group. Then it has only one member: me. LOL, people just depress me. I can be a very difficult guy to get along. Not that I'm a major league a--hole, it's just I don't allow people easily into my world...unless it is about love. In that case, I can be a very charming fella. Otherwise, I'm rather clannish and businesslike.

[brutus]

m

[CaroGirl]

BUT, maybe someone can explain why the opinions of an unpublished writer (unless it's the next Hemingway) are of more use than the opinions of an avid reader. I admit I might be wrong. I also might be right.
Sorry if I offended anyone but I need to be honest in order to learn.
The opinions of unpublished writers probably aren't much more use than the opinions of the average reader. That's okay by me. I use my crit group as motivation to get work done. We meet once a month and I like to have something ready to be critted every month. I've also had glaring inconsistencies and plot holes pointed out by members of my group (you know, the character who opens the same door twice, that kind of thing). I'd rather have that stuff found by members of my group than an agent or editor. The members of my group, however, do include a couple of pubbed writers, though not in my genre.

[farfromfearless]

I think crit groups can be great if you find the right people; I'm hesitant to join large groups as there tends to be more of a social dynamic that takes away from the goal of a crit group - at least the ones I've been part of in the past. I also hesitate to join a crit group as it is largely unfair to the other members if I cannot concentrate long enough to provide useful crits during meetings. My WiP is taking up most of my free time and I have about three short stories and one serial installment that I've been hankering to read but never seem to get a chance as I'm always turning back to my WiP (Sorry Caro, I promise I'll read it asap :D ).

Also, I do think that sex certainly does play a role in the social dynamic of any crit group - at least on a subconscious level anyway. Most times though it is a conflict of personality, an inability to communicate clearly or deliver constructive criticism that derails most crit groups. Then of course you get the JeffRivera or GordonJerome types that are just so completely overbearing they suffocate groups (kind of like sitting in a room trying to breath as the last of your air is being vented into space...); There are great exceptions, but I find that it happens typically in smaller, more intimate groups.

Oh, and then there's the poets. Most times I feel terribly for them (gotta applaud them for their courage though), but its difficult to deliver criticism that's meaningful for something that's so subjective.

[IrishScribbler]

If I need a hug, I'll go ask my mom.

That's my quote of the day now.

[IrishScribbler]

This is a great thread, and timely for me! I'll be moving to Orlando this summer (getting married and all that), and I'm going to try and find a crit/writer's group to join, since I'll have the opportunity to really focus on my writing career thanks to my fiance! (Long sentence, anyone?) This thread has given me a lot to think about as far as finding a good group. Things to watch out for, things to want, etc.

So thanks!

[allmostcomatose]

I'm a guy. And, as a guy, I tried a group that was mostly women. A couple of them wrote chik-lit stuff.

I hated reading that porn, sorry, sexual explicit stuff. I also have a hardtime with vulgarity and torture/horror.

The women were into personal attacks as well, so I kept my mouth shut most of the time and didn't share my writings but crit others.

That's why, as a guy, I don't go to groups.

[jdparadise]

BUT, maybe someone can explain why the opinions of an unpublished writer (unless it's the next Hemingway) are of more use than the opinions of an avid reader. I admit I might be wrong. I also might be right.

On one hand, you're right; when we ask for crits the most useful info often comes from the reader-eye more than the writer-eye.

On the other hand: Writers are inclined to read more closely than average readers when they're reading for crit. Writers may be consciously attuned to subtleties that non-writers may not pay attention to. Writers often read with an eye to what's wrong; their advice may or may not work out, but noticing flaws will come easier to someone used to struggling with their own work. Look at how you used to read versus how you read since you started writing and looking at technique; that's the difference.

It's not in the quality of the "how to fix it" feedback that you may see a difference, I don't think--it's in the way the different types of reader look at the piece and what they're looking to get out of it.

[Chumplet]

I belong to a wonderful online crit group that is composed entirely of females. It's a romance group, so that's understandable. I lied, the only male member is the Administrator's husband, and he pops in once in a while to give his two cents.

In order to be a member, I had to pass a writing test so they wouldn't be inundated with newbs. Two crits per week is mandatory, or you're kicked out.

They helped me a lot in the first few months, and even if I wanted to leave, I probably wouldn't because they have all become great online friends, from all over the world. Some are respectable published authors, and some unpublished like myself. Some are warm and fuzzy and some are tough as nails.

I take what I need from each of them, and do my best to offer decent crits myself. Through them, I have learned to be diplomatic in my crits on this board, and to point out good things as well as those that could be improved. So far, my crits have been well received.

Yes, they're mostly all business, but they also support each other emotionally. Tragedy has struck some members more than once - two have been widowed in the past year.

I wish we had a male writer in the group; he could certainly offer a point of view that could be useful for all of us. I've had my work critiqued by a male in the past, and his no-nonsense but gentle approach helped immensely.

[Cat Scratch]

The best crit group I was ever in was mostly men. I think at our highest count we had was 6 men to 3 women. They were all fair in giving and receiving of criticism.

[Hillgate]

Is the correct collective noun a 'barrage' of critics?

[FergieC]

wonder if a writers group (critique group) isn't a little like the blind leading the blind.

They really do vary, and it's a question of finding the right group for what you need. I've been in some that were worse than useless; where it was a group hug, or nothing got done. Then there was another one that had exceptionally good, published or nearly published writers in it, and a regular writing tutor - that one was great, so long as you could take really harsh, honest crits.

The best ones though, have been the ones with a fairly large number of people and a good mix of genders, ages, writing styles. That way the different personality types balance each other out and you don't end up getting too "huggy" or too "male" or whatever.

The bottom line with crit groups is, if you think they're helping you, great; if not, leave.

[Hillgate]

that one was great, so long as you could take really harsh, honest crits.

That's the best kind of criticism.

[allmostcomatose]

Is the correct collective noun a 'barrage' of critics?

I would say "murder of critics"; as in a murder of crows, always squawking, fluttering around and a general nuisance.

[allmostcomatose]

Oh teah, what's a collective noun?