Dying broke only to be discovered after your death is not a noble pursuit. This is stating the obvious and I see no reason to start a flame war here as well. It's not important to know this; if the person reading the post can't figure that out then everything this thread is about is useless.
Actually, I see no reason to expect a flame war. Jay has said as much himself. But the reason it is important is that he sometimes makes sweeping statements about what does or does not make quality writing, and someone who is unaware of his posting history may be tempted to take it in a more general light than they should. I also think it's important in any "art vs. profit" argument, which this thread is threatening to become, to remember that the expectation that one has as a writer will have an impact on what advice is most useful to him or her. Edit: Well, shows what I know. Apparently Jay also seems to think I'm looking to start a flame war. So, let me be clear: I'm not, and never was. He and I disagree about some things. So what? In the end, he does things his way and comments accordingly. So do I. And presumably so does every other member of this forum.
And there's the first reason I feel CW courses are a waste of time. The students have not a clue of how to write, so the "feedback" amounts to, "You shouldn't be writing like you, you need to write more like me." I would bet that were you to ask the students in that class what a scene is, the definition they would give matches a stage play or a film definition. And if they believe that, they're unqualified to make any suggestions on improving the work. It's the teacher who should be doing the evaluating, because they, supposedly know what they're talking about. Reason two: the praise sandwich. If it's expected that you'll say something nice, pro-forma, the praise has no meaning. The publishing industry has a saying, "Unjustified praise results in unjustified submission." Were I to do a critique and point out ten major problems, but conclude with, "But with work this could be a winner," I've said nothing meaningful with the comment, but the only thing that writer will take from the critique will be, "He liked it." Ask yourself this: assume you've just paid someone $100 for a five page evaluation of the state of their writing. Would you want honesty or demand a praise sandwich? There are many ways of giving critique, and telling people what they need to know without discouraging them. And while the writing may be absolutely awful, if it's the result of missing craft rather then an inability to learn how to write, there is no bad or good writing involved. It will if that's followed by, "Here's why, and how to fix it. Good. You've broken the code. If you don't put your heart and mind into it you're wasting your time. But it's our job to be brilliant. It's where we're not, and why we're not that matters. A critique hurts. That's a given. Someone has just told you that your favorite child is ugly, even if they do it gently. But if they're accurate, and they tell you how to fix your problem, that critique is constructive, and a lot more meaningful than being told the reader loves the way the black print contrasts with the white of the screen, and how much they respect the masterful way you place a period just where it belongs. If we want praise we can always hire a hooker. They'll tell us anything we pay to hear.
Totally disagree. JayG's posts have absolutely nothing to do with great art, one way or the other. He's not even really talking about commercial success. His posts are simply geared toward professionalism, something all serious would be writers should strive for. Great art can't be taught. You either have it in you and you discover for yourself how to release it, or you don't. It's got nothing to do with your success as a writer, and will or won't happen irregardless. So let's not downplay JayG's efforts.
@JayG : Amen. I agree totally. I joined the course to get a better understanding on how to develop an idea into a bunch of words. Not to hear I'm a good writer because I know I am not. Otherwise I wouldn't have joined a creative writing course level 1 If I want honest feedback I'll post my work in the workshop part of these forums
I've looked at several of these CW courses in my local area, and the only one I saw that looked like it had the 'write' content by a good and well published author, filled up before I registered. Snooze you lose. It is true that many or them tout the benefits of class critiquing, but logically this can't work. If I am an expert, or just competent in any given field, it's fairly easy to see when and where a newbie is having problems, but as a newbie, it maybe important to learn the skills of a critiquer (is that a word?) but is a beginners class on writing the place to do that? The very thing you are there to learn. Perhaps if it is examples of what not to do?
Well, I think part of a writing course is intended to teach you how to critique. By reading a piece and really focusing on why you like something, or why you don't or figuring out where you're confused (and re-reading and re-reading again, to figure out whether the confusion is your fault or the fault of the writer, and where you start to get confused and why), or whether you find a character or conversation believable, and trying to figure out why you do or don't, you gain tremendous insight, not just as a reader, but also as a writer. When you critique as a group, and can discuss the piece, everyone benefits. It can benefit the writer, too, if, for example, everyone gets confused at a certain point -- if everyone got confused, that's a pretty good indication that you've missed something in your writing and need to clarify. You can also hear different interpretations of your piece, and you can get a good sense of how your writing is coming across. Ultimately, you're writing to communicate. You're not going to get anywhere just by writing and then putting your writing in a box. You're presumably hoping to communicate with readers overall, and it can be very helpful to gauge how you're doing that by getting some feedback from "regular" readers. I don't think there are too many of us who are writing purely for an audience of writing professors. (Even then, you'd get a wide variance in opinion.) MFA programs utilize group critiques a lot, as do college-level writing courses. I think it's a mistake to dismiss group critiques so easily. Another important lesson is for the writer whose piece is critiqued -- and that is to be able to differentiate the advice into what is helpful for his unique vision and what is not.
@chicagoliz your logic is sound and I'm sure at college level and MFA courses, class critique should be part of the process. To me, it's a question of when to introduce critiquing into the courses. I'm very sure there is no optimal time to do this. In the one intro CW course I've taken I found the class critique to be cumbersome at best. To me it looked like a means of taking up time. My gut feeling on this, is that at a very early stage in writing, it is better to have someone more experienced doing the critiquing in the presence of the students, with them asking questions about the piece. If the instructor is directing the discourse, then there would be some experience gained, but if it's just a bunch of people doing a "discovery" session, then I think it's a waste of time.
I don't imagine teaching creative writing would be a lot of fun somehow. All any student wants to hear about their work is that they're going to be the next Hemingway, or that you'll turn them into one. I work for a university and they teach writing there. One of the tutors said to me in a whispered aside about our students that: "Of course they all think they're going to make a living as writers, but none of them will."
Degrees in the UK aren't modular. All they study is creative writing, and they end up with a degree in creative writing, and no experience of anything else.
All I got for my bucks is... well.. the course. No degree, no certificate, nothing. I only had one class so far and I liked it. The teacher made us describe an orange which we all did in a few sentences. Than she asked us a few questions. How the orange smells, peel the skin, feel it, taste its flesh. We all had to write a few sentences when touching, smelling, tasting. Guess what... the description at the end was much better than when we started. That's the reason why I do the class. To learn these things. We learned that observation is very important. I don't know a thing about providing critique except how I experienced the story. If I find a piece boring I will be able to tell but I will not be able to pinpoint the reason or provide tips on how to improve so I don't find it boring anymore. It's fun though, providing feedback during the class. When some people read their work nobody says anything. When other people are read their work they get lots of praise from the class. I don't think it takes a smart ass to understand the difference...
