# In what other ways, besides online, do you share your writing?



## The Backward OX (Sep 7, 2010)

I’m interested in the details of experiences you have, or have had, with other types of writing groups. I don’t mean other online venues, I mean real-life groups.


----------



## Mike (Sep 7, 2010)

It was 2004 when I last participated in NaNoWriMo. I had completed it three times before. I was particularly bored that year, and not all that inspired by the coming winter months. In November, I would get together with the local NaNos on the weekend and we'd workshop various parts of the stories we were working on. It wasn't very productive. We spent more talking about writing than actually writing and editing and critiquing. However, I did meet some interesting people - sometimes we'd get together during the weeknights and watch movies or hang out. Those weren't productive times either. As the weeks went on, the membership of the group dwindled. There were three of us left when the month was over. I wanted to keep the group going - we had editing to do next. (A lot of it, too. One doesn't exactly cut through a chunk of 50,000 words formed like rambling, run-on sentences with anything short of a machete). But, one of the girls was just 17 and had to go on vacation with her parents, and the other was a few years older than me who, after mistaking a 1 on 1 workshop for a date, proceeded to stalk me for a couple of years even though I was always very clear about my intentions about never getting together with her. So that was the end of that workshop. 

While living out of my car in San Luis Obispo, California, I joined a local writing group. Most of them were poets. None of them were very much interested in the genre I was writing in at the time - speculative science fiction - although most of them gave a good effort at reviewing my work. Again, the meetings were short - a couple hours a week - and with more than a handful of people coming, it's not very productive after the initial 20-minute hello-how-are-yous.

The most effective workshops I've been in (so far) are at universities. If i'm in town long enough - meaning, more than half a year - I'll enroll in an advanced writing workshop. The down side is that I'm paying money for it. But, with ten people who are there - and who have been assigned - to critique your story for an hour and a half every week, I think that it's money well spent. Most of the time, they are young students who are "fifth year seniors" (with that wistful look on their faces) who will go on to journalism, who have mostly dabbled in fiction. But, they have an eager eye for what is and isn't working for the story. However, these university workshops are tending to work for me less and less. It's also a hard thing to be taught by someone (and an attractive someone, at that) who was born the same year you were. It's stupid, I know, but I'm a little prideful in that respect.


----------



## garza (Sep 7, 2010)

I've spent some time sitting in bars with other wire-service, network, and free-lance types swapping war stories, but I don't remember ever talking about the writing itself. I do recall a writers' group at university that I never joined. They were the elite artsy types. Not my sort of people to hang with. Over the past 20 years I've led many workshops teaching the craft of news writing for radio, television, and newspaper.


----------



## LadyT (Sep 7, 2010)

I've been involved in two real-life writing groups.  One was a class at a creative arts center.  Everyone had equal opportunity to share their work in a round-table fashion (sometimes written to an assigned theme, style, or genre, but not necessarily) but there was rarely any actual critique going on.  People went out of their way to be nice, which isn't always helpful.

The other was more like a club that met at a local, independent bookstore.  Critiques were assigned in rotating fashion - each member required to read the work of two others, posted beforehand on a yahoo group.  The participants were more balanced in their criticism, but they were horribly unreliable.  There were at least three times that I had no feedback because my assigned partner hadn't read my piece or failed to show up.  This was particularly vexing because I made an effort to read *everyone's* work, even those not assigned to me.

Side-note: I rarely share my work online unless I consider it a throw-away piece.  I much prefer to talk *about* writing or give critique for free than to leave my work open to strangers.  However, I have found found a few excellent critique-buddies (and good friends) through writing forums like this one.


----------



## The Backward OX (Sep 8, 2010)

LadyT said:


> I much prefer to talk *about* writing


How much can one learn by talking?


----------



## caelum (Sep 8, 2010)

I checked out a real-life writing group and it was rather underwhelming.  My chief way of getting offline feedback these days is friends and family.  In many ways, I'm more interested in how a piece will strike "readers" who have no writing inclination themselves.  "More" is perhaps the wrong word.  I'm _also_ interested.  Their emotional responses, or flaws that they catch in the logic, I've found very reliable. And after all, the end user is typically a reader, not a writer.


----------



## The Backward OX (Sep 8, 2010)

Amen to that. I don't know if you ever visited Workshop around 18 months - 2 years ago, but the place was awash with writers, all attempting to upstage each other with their knowledge of writing. It was enough to make one put one's finger down one's throat.


----------



## garza (Sep 8, 2010)

I've always been most interested in the way a piece of my writing strikes an editor.


----------



## Mike (Sep 8, 2010)

> I've always been most interested in the way a piece of my writing strikes an editor.


 
Very heavy piece preferred.


----------



## J.R. MacLean (Sep 8, 2010)

I joined the local chapter of the Canadian Author's Association a couple of years ago. I've found online forums to be more valuable for straight critique but the CAA has proved great for getting 'audience reaction' to the material. I get an opportunity to read my work to 18 or so interested individuals every month. Their responses to the material are immediate and quite telling. Also, a group of us (not all CAA) are doing a collaborative book, a collection of related stories of which my 'Nicki Belfry at the Raven' is one. Another benefit of live interaction is the chance to meet writing buddies- friends you can bounce stuff off or have a coffee with and talk writing. Bottom line, I think, is to take the opportunity to read in public. Audience reaction is a reliable barometer of how good your stuff is.


----------



## MJ Preston (Sep 8, 2010)

I have just finished the second draft of my novel. 

As this was the second time around I sat down with my friend and mentor (Chapter by Chapter) and reviewed all aspects of the story. 

We reviewed grammar, typos, and whether the story was staying on track. Again done chapter by chapter face to face. 

The third time around I am printing off two copies, one for him, one for me. 

We will both read it cover to cover, red pen in hand, and after that I'll see about selling it.

He is a published author, eight historical books to his credit. 

Aside from that I have written correspondance pieces when I was in the army. I wrote movie reviews for a small town paper and was a columnist for a Veterans' Newsgroup I founded in the 90's. 

As for discussing writing craft, beyond my mentor and frustrated teachers, my exposure to discussion about writing has been primarily within the forum arena. Which, by the way, was nearly a short lived endeavor, because my first writing forum exposure was to *pompous-know-it-alls* who could not see past the mechanics and embrace the art of writing. (It is an art in my opinion) 

I am 45 years old, been out of school 24 years, my grammar is not Uniniversity Calibre, so I'm not exactly Steinbeck or Hemingway. 

What you see is what you get, in my case, a burger and fries. If that suits your taste, chow down.

Mark


----------



## caelum (Sep 9, 2010)

The Backward OX said:


> the place was awash with writers, all attempting to upstage each other with their knowledge of writing


 
Competitiveness _can_ get in the way of honesty.  Depends on the people.  Compared to when I first came here, I think I've learned a lot about how to give reasonable feedback that is less about me and more about the piece.  And this is the perfect environment for learning how to give and receive feedback.


----------



## MagicalRealist (Sep 9, 2010)

I think writing groups are a very important part of a writer's journey. Yes, there's chance you might make connections or be able to network about your work. More importantly, workshopping and listening to critical feedback on your work will teach you to face the fact that there's always room for improvement and where those opportunities for improvement are in your work.

I find that many writers, including myself, are sometimes blind or in denial of their own shortcomings; they want to think that what they have is just raw talent and that their gift is what's going to carry them to fame. It's just not the case. The reality is that it takes intense work and years of practice. Practicing and improving is difficult to do without feedback and direction from people who have been at it longer. Join a group and open yourself up to criticism. Take all in, determine what's valuable criticism and what's not, and then get back to the desk and improve. That's my two cents anyway.


----------



## J.R. MacLean (Sep 9, 2010)

> I find that many writers, including myself, are sometimes blind or in denial of their own shortcomings; they want to think that what they have is just raw talent and that their gift is what's going to carry them to fame. It's just not the case. The reality is that it takes intense work and years of practice. Practicing and improving is difficult to do without feedback and direction from people who have been at it longer. Join a group and open yourself up to criticism. Take all in, determine what's valuable criticism and what's not, and then get back to the desk and improve. That's my two cents anyway.


 
Well said.


----------



## garza (Sep 9, 2010)

A lot of effort is required, that's true enough, and feedback is essential, but the useful feedback is from editors who know best how a piece should be written to suit their publications. Those are the people I've listened to from the beginning, and that may be one reason I've never gone hungry.


----------



## caelum (Sep 10, 2010)

I think you're right, garza.  Editors are the walls between writers and publication that must be breached.  Their opinions vary quite an amount, though, from what I understand.  God knows there's umpteen stories about how this bestseller and that bestseller were rejected twenty times.


----------



## garza (Sep 10, 2010)

I've never regarded editors as any kind of hindrance, but rather as guides to getting what I write into print. 

I owe the most to the two editors at the local newspapers that first published my articles. They were my writing teachers. One of the newspapers was a daily requiring concise, inverted pyramid articles. The other was a weekly, more a magazine than a newspaper, that wanted essay style articles, a style altogether different from what the daily wanted. Between them, the two editors gave me a university course in writing in a couple of years, so that by the time I was 16 I was a stringer for newspapers in New Orleans, Jackson, and Mobile besides continuing to write for the local papers. Each of the publications had its own requirements, so in dealing with each editor I learned more about writing.

Throughout my life I have had good relations with editors, and have continued to learn from them as tastes change and requirements change. The editor is a door, not a wall.


----------



## The Backward OX (Sep 10, 2010)

Somehoo I gain the impression that KLM's editors and garza's editors are from two totally dissimilar tribes.


----------



## garza (Sep 10, 2010)

The editor is not there to stop anyone from being published. The editor is there to help his employer make money. He wants to get your copy into print just as badly as you do, if it's copy that will help sell the newspaper or the magazine or attract more listeners or viewers to a broadcast. 

It's possible that too many writers approach editors the way too many farmers in Belize approach the market. The farmer grows little round sweet pepper and big white onions because that's what he likes. He's upset when he gets to market and the vendors won't buy his produce because the demand is for long heavy sweet pepper and small yellow onions. The smart farmer does some market research and plants what will sell. The smart writer does some market research and writes what will sell. 

For himself he can write whatever he wants to, and if it's well written he may well find a market for it. But for paying the rent and buying the groceries you need steady income, and you can't have that if you always see editors as hindrances rather than as helpers.

I never argue with an editor. If I get a piece back, which does not happen often, I want to know why, and I set about to fix the problem. 

Just remember this most important fact: _The editor is there to help his employer make money._ Send him what he needs to do that, and you have a market.


----------



## The Backward OX (Sep 10, 2010)

I still say newspaper editors and publishers’ editors are doing different jobs, with different goals in mind. KLM was talking about books and you’re talking about bread and butter work.


----------



## caelum (Sep 10, 2010)

I was being figurative.  Editors are a wall in the sense that unless you have what they're looking for, you are stopped there.  And by breaching the wall, does not one make it. . . a doorway?



> The smart writer does some market research and writes what will sell.


Completely disagree with this.  I'm of the philosophy that the art should dictate itself, regardless of what the market wants.

Edit: Ox posted at about the same time as me.  Yeah, there's definitely a difference between the two.


----------



## garza (Sep 11, 2010)

Ox - The goal of the editor is the same whether you're talking newspaper or books. I've dealt with both and have been successful with both. _The editor needs to buy from the writer product that will sell_. Writing is product, no different from the farmer's onions and sweet pepper. 

Newspaper, wire service, magazine, have been my bread and butter, that's true. The books have been welcome extra, all except that one novel I wrote that I was immediately ashamed of and gave the money to Goodwill. Any fiction I write now will be for the pure pleasure of writing, without regard for its marketability, and considering my age and lack of experience writing fiction, I doubt I would ever be able to sell any of it.

caelum - About art I know nothing. If there are editors who buy a work based on some artistic value rather than its potential for sales, then Ox is correct and those editors are a different breed that I've never encountered.


----------



## The Backward OX (Sep 11, 2010)

garza - I believe he meant writing is an art like painting in oils is an art, that Joe Q. Public might say 'I don't know art but I know what I like', and that the same Joe Q. Public will buy a book based on that philosophy. To extend this line of reasoning further, the canny publisher will know it happens and cater to it.


----------



## garza (Sep 11, 2010)

Ox - Very true. And the canny publisher will instruct his editor to look for product that will meet that criteria you are talking about and thus will sell to John Q. 

Publishers are there to make money. They hire editors to help them make money. I live by writing, always have, so the policies laid down by the publisher and put into practise by his editor are the guidelines I must follow if I want to pay the rent and buy the groceries. This does not mean that I cannot write whatever I want for my own satisfaction and then look for a market for it, but to keep my computer running I must pay BEL every month, and to pay BEL every month I need income every month, and to have income every month I must continue to sell.

I'm a long way past that 'every month' routine by now, of course, have been for a very long time, but the idea is valid yet.

When I was at university I went to one meeting of a campus writers' group. They were all talking about the artistic value of this writer and the lack of artistic ability of that writer. When they asked me what I was working on I told them a series that I had sold to a newspaper on changes in racial attitudes since Brown v Board of Education. They all looked at me with unhappy faces. 'You sold your work?', one said. 'You're just a prostitute', another said. 

That's why I'm not an artist. I do try to be a competent craftsman. And just like the farmer, I know I must meet the market demand. The big issues in rural development today are extension reform, diversification, organic vegetable cultivation, integrated farming systems, post harvest practises, rural entrepreneurship, and value chain analysis to aid farmers in meeting market demand. Those are topics I study, topics I talk about with farmers and extension officers, and topics I write about, knowing I have a market for the articles I produce, just as the farmer knows that if he produces Camelot sweet pepper he will find a market.

I'm sure there is much to be said for the artistic approach to writing. I'm just not talented that way - lack of imagination, I suppose. Perhaps that fellow was right 50 years ago. Maybe I am just a prostitute. I have fun writing and get paid to do it.


----------



## The Backward OX (Sep 11, 2010)

garza - I was about to say we must move in different circles, that I never knew a prostitute who did it for fun. But I only got as far as the word 'circles' and then had an epiphany. I knew one two.


----------



## garza (Sep 11, 2010)

I've known a few who at least pretended.

edit - Oh, you mean _pro bono_. No, I've never known any atall.


----------



## The Backward OX (Sep 11, 2010)

No, I didn't mean that either. My poor writing skills again. I meant, took money, _plus _derived pleasure from what happened in return.


----------



## garza (Sep 11, 2010)

Well in that case I'll repeat that I've known a few who at least pretended.


----------



## J.R. MacLean (Sep 11, 2010)

> caelum - About art I know nothing. If there are editors who buy a work based on some artistic value rather than its potential for sales, then Ox is correct and those editors are a different breed that I've never encountered.


 
What about the editors who specialize in literary fiction? Or speculative fiction, for that matter? These genres have a limited readership. If sales potential was the only motivation, shouldn't all these editors automatically move to romance or mystery- something that sells? They don't, I suspect, because they find delight in artistic, imaginative fiction.


----------



## The Backward OX (Sep 11, 2010)

What he said ^^


----------



## garza (Sep 11, 2010)

Surely you are not going to tell me the specialised genre editors aren't paid to do what they do. They may love it to the extent that they stick with their favourite genre, passing up any chance to move to more mainstream publishing, but like it or not the publisher must make money to stay in business, so the selection of what is accepted must be based on what is judged to have sales potential. The fact that there is a limited readership puts added pressure on that selection process. No reasonable niche-market editor is going to recommend a book for selection unless he believes that book has a good chance of capturing a sizable percentage of that limited readership. 

Niche-market publishing is something I do know about, though in non-fiction rather than fiction. In either case, the bottom line is still the bottom line, and even those subsidised publishing houses that operate at a loss do not deliberately publish a book that has no chance of penetrating the target market.


----------



## J.R. MacLean (Sep 11, 2010)

Yes garza, but the target market, like the editor, delights in good art. Great writers are made by the number of people they continue to delight over generations. So the greater the art, the more money to be made over the longer period of time by the canny editor who spots the next Faulkner, Hemingway or whoever. My contention remains that there must be editors sincerely interested in brilliant, original work. Always have been, always will be.


----------



## JosephB (Sep 11, 2010)

I put my writing on neighbor's doorsteps, then ring the bell and run away.


----------



## garza (Sep 12, 2010)

J.R. - Now I'm confused. What you are saying in no way contradicts anything I have said. Please explain how you believe it does.

JosephB - That is self-publishing at its best, and probably the only way I would ever hope to have any fiction I would write published.


----------



## garza (Sep 12, 2010)

Allow me to rephrase my belief.

Editors exist to help get good writing published.


----------



## The Backward OX (Sep 12, 2010)

Now, finally, we're getting somewhere.


----------



## Mike (Sep 12, 2010)

Getting somewhere? 

Unbalance this debate, right longer than what's left, and we'll be walking in circles soon. Just you wait and see.


----------



## garza (Sep 12, 2010)

Ox - Isn't that the thrust of what I've been saying all the time? 

Mike - Say what?


----------



## J.R. MacLean (Sep 12, 2010)

> J.R. - Now I'm confused. What you are saying in no way contradicts anything I have said. Please explain how you believe it does.


 
It doesn't; my original point was addressed to KLM. Art and a decent return can, in certain areas, go hand in hand.

I guess the crux of the thing goes back to his earlier assertion:



> Completely disagree with this. I'm of the philosophy that the art should dictate itself, regardless of what the market wants.


 
I'm saying there are markets, however small, that want good art. A credo that says 'art should dictate itself' runs the risk of the artist working in a vacuum, pleasing only him or herself, leaving work on the doorsteps of strangers... Shakespeare likely could have written whatever the hell he wanted. But he created great art for the market that existed in his time.


----------



## garza (Sep 12, 2010)

It's just a different way of looking at the same thing, I suppose. Not being an artist of any sort, I suppose I can't appreciate the artist's viewpoint.


----------



## Mike (Sep 12, 2010)

J.R. MacLean said:


> I'm saying there are markets, however small, that want good art. A credo that says 'art should dictate itself' runs the risk of the artist working in a vacuum, pleasing only him or herself, leaving work on the doorsteps of strangers... Shakespeare likely could have written whatever the hell he wanted. But he created great art for the market that existed in his time.



This is why when you ring the triangle - _ding ding ding!_ - some people hop-skip in for dinner and other people continue ringing deep into the night.


----------



## The Backward OX (Sep 12, 2010)

I'll echo garza's puzzlement.


----------



## garza (Sep 12, 2010)

(He's on your side of the world. _You_ figure it out.)


----------



## Mike (Sep 12, 2010)

I'll solve it!...

The first remark about this debate on _Art_ being similar to a man trying to walk a straight line in the desert. This should be right up Ox's alley...or...dirt road. The second remark is on the ability to tell the difference between a smiling idiot and a drooling genius.


----------



## The Backward OX (Sep 12, 2010)

_*There's one in every cabin*_


----------



## garza (Sep 12, 2010)

(Is that stuff legal in NZ?)

As for sharing what I write, I don't share anything that is salable except with editors. I'll share some of my fiction here, but I don't anticipate ever trying to sell any of my fiction.


----------



## LadyT (Sep 12, 2010)

Learning isn't necessarily the objective.
I look for other writers because it is fun to share a passion.  Talking about writing helps me stay focused and motivated.   Talking through a problem or block can help me solve it.  Talking can lead me to new ideas or resources, new friends.  A lot can come from talking.


----------



## caelum (Sep 12, 2010)

Catering to the market is fine so long as you don't sacrifice originality.  When I think of things that cater to the market too much, I think of blockbusters like Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen, or the latest Lady Gaga song.  Very glittery, very shiny, and they make lots of money, but for me it's not as good as something made without profit as the main goal.  It's not a black and white situation of cater to the market or be original, but a situation where you can do both—and some do a lot more of the former.


----------

