How to: Online Critique Groups

So you’ve decided to join an online critique group? Good for you! When guidelines are established up front and followed, online critique can be enjoyable and boost your writing level.

An underappreciated aspect of critiquing other writers’ work is that you are less emotionally tied to every word and can discern where something stops working. It has been my experience that evaluating how a story is put together will cross over to your own work and help you to elevate your craft.

For critique to be constructive, praise the parts that are working as well as note where something doesn’t work. Articulate in a kind and helpful manner why it doesn’t work for you. Offering suggestions on possible different directions to take may be welcomed.

Who is a good match up for you?

(This may surprise you.) Any publication-minded writer who is familiar with story structure, who has a keen eye, and who has a kind way of phrasing their observations. I have had critique partners since the 1990s, so I know this to be true. The genre matchup between your work and your critique partner(s) need not be identical. Also, while it may be helpful if the other members of your critique group are at a similar place on their publication journey, it doesn’t matter as much as you might think.

Family members, best friends, or anyone who might rubberstamp your work to avoid hurting your feelings are rarely desirable for critique partners. Also, be on the lookout for toxic critiquers. These folks find fault with everything, and their input is rarely constructive. My advice? Bow out of that situation and try again.

What are your exchange parameters?

In general, the larger the group, the smaller the page count swapped (i.e., it would be arduous for a group of six people to swap 25-30 pages every week; 10 pages is a better amount for a larger group).For groups of two or three writers, 20-25 pages is a good ballpark number. Most groups use standard margins of one inch, double spacing, and a standard font such as Times New Roman size 12. Using Track Changes in Word gives you a way to add comments in the margin of the page. If your members aren’t familiar with Track Changes, another option is to use all caps or a different color of font for your remarks.

Clearly define what input you are seeking. For a piece that’s highly polished, a writer may want to know where you were tempted to put it down. For a first draft piece, a writer might want to know if the story flows, if the characters are believable, and so on. This may be author-specific or manuscript specific.

If you have more than two people in a group, decide if the critiques go back to the author or to the entire group. It can work either way, and it can also stimulate a discussion post-critique, if that’s what your group wants to do.

When will your group meet?

Keeping to a schedule is a good idea. That way, there are fewer surprises on submission dates. Decide upon frequency of submission and expected time of response. Some groups exchange weekly, some every other week, or some only at the beta reader stage. Whatever works for your group is the right answer.

Where will your group meet?

Most online critiquers opt for getting the exchanged files in their email Inboxes. Some may set up private social media groups for the exchange of files. Others may elect to connect via phone or a video chat service such as Skype.

How to critique

 Avoid stomping on someone’s dream. It takes a high degree of trust to put your work out there for peer review. The same people you are swapping with are also reviewing your work. Instead of offering negative feedback, provide constructive comments.

It is easy to make line edit suggestions, but grammar and punctuation are rarely the primary focus of an online critique group. Instead, critique partners often note story construction weaknesses, characterization inconsistencies, timeline issues, lack of setting in a scene, slow pacing, opening or closing hook needs strengthening, missing beats, untagged dialog, head hopping, and so on.

Showing vs telling is a common critique comment. If you notice an author “told” something instead of “showing” it, make a constructive comment to illustrate a showing in this situation. The goal is not to rewrite the work, but to offer a suggestion so that the author may own that revision.

Give praise where praise is due. A particularly well-drawn character, hero or villain, is a treat to readers, and the author should be praised for getting this right. Perhaps the dialog sparkles, the pacing is spot-on, or the settings are three dimensional – make sure you tell the author you noticed.

Writing styles vary. You want your critique partners to respect your style, so respect theirs. Style and voice are individual, and your goal as a critique partner is to make sure the work you are reviewing reflects the author, not your personal style.

Be kind. Nuance, humor, and tone don’t come through well during a critique, so make remarks in a neutral way. If you don’t understand something, say that instead of saying “you did something wrong.” Asking for clarification will help the author figure out what areas of the work need strengthening.

In summary, offer constructive feedback on writing craft elements in a neutral manner. Respect voice and style. Provide an example, if needed, for clarification of your remark. Praise aspects of the sub which are well done. Remember to be courteous and professional in how you phrase your remarks.

###
Check out this giveaway for a new tablet! Contest is live February 1-18, 2017: http://bookloversbench.com/win-a-samsung-galaxy-tablet-feb-2017/

It's dark in the editing cave

Authors talk about "editing caves" as if they are real places. My editing cave is the same physical location as my "writing cave," and yet it feels different - darker, gloomier.

A quick glance around assures me that the lights are working and my monitor is at full brightness, so why the different feel? Especially when editing is one of my strengths?

Frame of mind.

Here's my simplistic explanation. To pound out a first draft is equivalent to construction. You started with an idea and built on it, letting the imagination and/or an outline guide you. Each step of creation involves adding something that wasn't there before.

Those results are tangible and immediately transparent. A writer can step back and look at word count and see progress.

However, editing is akin to rennovating a building. Anyone ever lived through an office or home fix-up? Dust is everywhere. The noise drives you crazy. Everything is out of place and disrupted.

Those same challenges occur during editing. Sometimes it's the foundation of the story that needs work. Sometimes there's only a cosmetic facelift needed. In any event, the changeup can be disorienting.

Especially once you consider that authors are taking apart their own work. No wonder we grumble about editing! In the midst of the fix, precious words are cut, sometimes entire scenes find their way into the recycle bin. We get pulled into the microscopic level of craft, all the while trying not to disrupt the artistic flow of words that give the story fluidity.

In the editing cave, it always gets worse before it gets better. The virtual dust and noise discourage us. Many writers harbor self doubts, and it's easy to assume the story is crap at this point. Conversely, the temptation looms to hurry up and finish, to get the story launched right away, but the simple truth is, a well-edited story is a more satisfying read.

Respect your process.

Though bookselling is competitive, I submit that we are competing against ourselves. Writing the best book possible each time hones writing craft and builds a reader base.

Sure it may be dark in the editing cave, but wouldn't you rather find the mistakes and shore up the flaws before bright lights shine on the book? I know I would.

And hopefully, I'll emerge from my editing cave in March. Rough Waters will be worth the wait!

Maggie Toussaint
HOT WATERS - coming soon

ps you may have noticed a few differences here at Mudpies. I selected a different background to reflect my love of the ocean, a minor "edit" to be sure, but its a happy color for me. And, thanks to Jeannie Reeves, I have an updated image and I couldn't be happier with it. Thanks for your hard work, Jeannie!

Bad boys, bad boys

Once upon a time we all knew bad guys wore black hats. The baddie rode into town and was rude and offensive and bullied everyone. He had slitty eyes and an eat-my-dirt demeanor.

Fast forward to present times, and it isn't easy to identify a bad guy. Bad guys in the news span the range of a teacher's child, hoodlums, politicians, tax authorities, insurance companies, special interest groups, corporate raiders, televangelists, and more.

With such a diverse face to baddies, how are we to stay safe? How will we recognize danger and take steps to have it corrected or avoid it?

I struggle with these questions as I write books set in contemporary times. Human nature is universal, as is human behavior. Debra Dixon's book on Goal, Motivation, and Conflict comes in handy to help writers steer through characterization.

GOAL - a villain's goal can spring from past issues/desires, present issues/desires, or a desire to control the future. The scope of the goal may vary from the villain's immediate vicinity to a global person, place or thing.

MOTIVATION - bad guys want what they want for reasons clear to them, and they will cross lines of respectable behavior to get what they want.

CONFLICT - baddies try to attain something that isn't theirs by any means possible. They will use words, weapons, intimidation, legal maneuvering, bioterrorism, and more.

Using this framework, authors can create a plausible scenario for readers to believe in the antagonist. Next, the villain's physical attributes come into question.

On television, bad guys are often bikers, scowling lawyers, gangsters, Vikings, rival gangs, Olympic athletes, vampires, aliens, or hulking muscle men, to name a few sterotypes. But writers must reflect the times in which we write.

The truth: bad guys come in every race and gender. While it's easy to write a villain who looks and acts different from your main characters, oftentimes the villain comes from their world. He or she is an associate with a sharp axe to grind.

My question for you: what do you look for in a bad guy? Do you enjoy reading about someone who appears "normal" but does heinous things? Or does your taste run more to and outsider vs an insider conflict?

Maggie Toussaint
www.maggietoussaint.com

Storyteller or Technician?

"The Wizard of Oz" stirred me in ways I could not have imagined prior to seeing the movie. Oh, the thrill of the colorful scenes! Oh, the adventure of faraway places! Oh, the very idea of being stranded so far from HOME!

And the agony of it all.

Being lost.

Not knowing anyone.

Causing an accident upon your arrival.

And everything you try makes the situation worse.

Did you have similiar thoughts about the movie? Did you grow up fearing flying monkeys, numbing poppy fields, and the man behind the curtain?

I did.

But I was also hooked for life on the idea of reading - and telling - a great story.

Fast forward ... some years ...  and I'm telling stories - in book format. In my mind, the difference between a good technician and a darn fine storyteller have become blurred.

Writers yearn to have the power to sweep readers away to a new Oz so engrossing that time literally stops for readers. Writers seek that misty zone where Frank Baum, writer of The Wizard of Oz lives, where readers will suspend disbelief, where they are so needing to know what happens next that they will keep turning pages.

I used to believe the difference was in how one wrote, whether it was a more organized, outlined approach or a free-flowing organic approach. But now, after reading good and not-as-good stories in both lanes, I earnestly believe it's simpler than that.

For me, the difference harkens back to the actual weaving of words. Sure, writers need to have an understanding of writing craft and a storyteller's ear for timing and drama, but the word patterns themselves are what entice readers away from reality into a land of a writer's imagining.

So how does one acquire this story perfection? Are writers born with it? Can it be taught?

My answer is ... wait for it ...

Buddy Ebsen played the Tin Man in the movie

yes! A natural aptitude shoots some writers to the front of the line, but writers that work at their craft, that learn layering and hone their editorial ears, can know great success.

What's your take on this topic?

And for fun, which Wizard of Oz character do you identify the most with? Are you a Tin Man, a Cowardly Lion, a spunky Dorothy, Toto the wandering pooch, Glinda the Good Witch, or another character?

Maggie Toussaint
mystery and romance author
www.maggietoussaint.com

ps images about The Wizard of Oz are from Wikipedia