Be careful what you say

We all know that email is not a secure medium - how do you think those spammers got your address?
Write Stuff members are all respectful of the written material shared at the meetings, both in terms of not distributing it and commenting on the craft of writing, no matter how personal the subject matter might be.
That's why it's distressing when something goes astray. A mistyped email address, perpetuated and amplified by cut and pasting, and who knows where your work and thoughts might end up.
Well we do know, since someone receiving a full broadcast by mistake recently took the trouble to reply.

So here's my suggestions:

1. Send email only from your own distribution list. Yes, it is a pain to set up and some new members may get missed at first, but is that really a bad thing, given the nature of some subject matter. At least until everyone is comfortable.
2. If a piece is particularly controversial, personal, or let's be honest, not ready to face the world at large (and I do mean world), then don't distribute it by email. Bring hard copy and feel comfortable asking for all copies to be handed back after discussion.

They are your words after all, at least until you decide to make them public, by email or any other means.

That's a good question

It's strange how much in the group develops by osmosis. It's only when someone new asks questions that this becomes evident. This blog is as good a place as any to record 'the way we work' when 'rules' would be too strong a term to describe it.

Question.

I see people provide written comments at the meeting, sometimes with every page covered in annotation. Is this required and what comments are acceptable?

Answer.

The basic rule is two things that worked well, two that can be improved. Many people choose to provide more, suggesting grammar and spelling corrections that would not be appropriate or a good use of time in the face to face setting of the meeting. In general writer's appreciate comments covering all aspects of their, including words of encouragement and positive reinforcement.

Question

Should a person providing comments assume that the piece submitted is for publication and address its suitability in their comments?

Answer.

Many people write for themselves and for the pleasure it gives them.

Others seek fame and some even fortune and openly declare such intent. Either way, it is a good idea when sending out work for comment to provide some idea of the target audience, e.g. young adult, mystery readers, cooking fiends, not for publication etc. and if the writer is seeking to have the work published, the potential markets considered/targeted.

Write Stuff Critique Group 'Rules'

“Rules” for the Write Stuff at Lincoln PL

updated Sept 2006

General

• The Write Stuff is an open group.
• All are welcome to join. However, only those who have attended at least two previous meetings will be eligible to read their work.
• The group may be divided if it becomes too large; having about a dozen regular members is ideal.
• The meeting shall be chaired by a facilitator, who shall keep track of time, encourage open and sympathetic comments and record who will read at the subsequent meeting.
• Members unable to attend the meeting should notify the facilitator.

Presenting Work

• Those who will present at each meeting shall sign up at the previous meeting.
• A copy of the work (maximum about 1000 words, or 4 pages double-spaced) should be sent by the author to each person in the group by e-mail at least 24 hours before the meeting.
• It is recommended that the work be sent as an attachment and pasted into the body of the email.
• The words Write Stuff should appear in the title of all emails relating to the activities of the group to aid filtering and recognition
• Names, email address and telephone number of members are made available to others in the group for the sole purpose of distribution of material and comments.
• If a reader is unable to send their work out in advance, then sufficient hard copies should be made available by the reader for distribution at the meeting.
• If a reader is unable to attend the meeting at which they are to read, they should notify the facilitator as far in advance as possible to permit substitution.

Providing comments and input

• Members will read the work, make comments and be prepared to discuss them at the group.
• Comments should include two positive aspects that the reviewer found in the work and two aspects that may be improved.
• Comments should be as specific as possible, give examples and be limited to the craft of writing as it pertains to the piece under review. (see appendix 1 for critique guidelines)
• All work should be considered confidential within the group, copyright of the author and should not be distributed outside of the Write Stuff group without the written permission of the copyright owner.
• All work should be considered fiction and not taken as a commentary or the express views of the author, unless clearly stated as such, for example as an editorial piece, memoir or non-fiction.

Appendix 1 (with acknowledgment to lessons learned at The Gotham Writers' Workshop)

Characters – the people in the story

• Are the characters interesting? Sympathetic?

• Are the characters dimensional, or one-note?

• Are the characters well drawn? Are you able to “see” them?

• Is there enough character: action, dialogue, appearance, thought?

• Are the characters distinctive, different from each other?

• Does the protagonist have a strong desire?

• Does the protagonist grow or change?

Plot – the sequence of events

• Is the plot interesting? Dramatic? Is a good story being told?

• Is there enough conflict?

• Does enough “happen”?

• Is there a logical flow to the plot?

• Does the story move forward? Does the tension increase?

• Is there a strong enough climax?

• Are any parts of the plot unnecessary? Are any necessary parts missing?

• Is exposition provided effectively?

Point of View – the viewpoint from which the story is told

• Is the right POV used (first person, third person, etc.)?

• Is the POV too “close” or “distant”?

• Is the POV consistent throughout the story?

Description– the way things are described

• Are the descriptions effective?

• Is there too much or too little description?

• Do the descriptions utilize the senses? Are they specific?

• Are adjectives and adverbs overused? Are the nouns and verbs strong enough?

• How is the use of figurative language (metaphor, simile, etc.)?

• Are cliches being used?

Dialogue– what the characters say

• Is there too much dialogue or not enough?

• Is there enough use of “scene”?

• Does the dialogue sound natural?

• Is the dialogue rambling?

• How is the use of “stage directions” – the staging of the dialogue scenes?

• Does the dialogue reflect the characters?

• Is the dialogue too “on the nose” – where characters always say what they mean?

• Are the tags (he said, she scolded, etc.) unobtrusive?

Setting – the place and time

• Is the story grounded enough in place? In time?

• Is there too much or too little setting description?

• Does the setting enhance the emotion or mood of the story?

Pacing – the manipulation of time

• Are there sections that should be cut, or moved through more quickly?

• Are there sections that should be slowed down?

• Are there too many flashbacks?

Voice – the “sound” of the narrator

• Do you find the narrator’s voice appealing or off-putting?

• Does the voice sound natural or affected?

• Is the voice consistent throughout the story?

Style – the stylistic choices

• Are the words consistent with the narrator’s voice?

• Are the sentences and paragraphs too long or too short?

• Is the writing too wordy, or too spare?

• Are there any style choices that distract you from the story?

Theme – the underlying meaning

• Does there seem to be a point to the story?

• Is the theme too heavy-handed?

• Is the theme dramatized by the plot?

Grammar