Okay so I joined a local writer's group because somewhere along my research someone said as a writer, it is a good idea. But now I am there, and wondering... is this a waste of time? I could be writing! I appear to be the only one working on a full manuscript plugging away and focused. Don't get me wrong, the people write but I want to hash out some general things like I find in these forums - people's experiences with plot, POV, style, etc. So far we mainly share (read out loud) something we have written and then get applauded. I've never been to a writer's group so I don't know what I should be expecting. So, my question is: What have your experiences been with writer's groups? And what part has been useful to you?
The useful groups never flattered me or pandered to my ego. They kept me honest as far as writing and told me what worked and didnt't.
Not all writing groups are equal. If it isn't productive for you, there is no reason to remain active. A writers group should be one that is active, honest, non-cliqueish (is that a word? ), and furthers the writing careers of all members through reading and input, support and networking. A writer's group takes time from all members to participate but the payoff should equal the time and effort put in minimum. I wrote an article a while back that may help you determine if the current group is right for you: Five Considerations Before Joining a Crit Group. Good luck. Terry
i'm not one who would recommend that... here's my take on the subject... all imo, of course, and not to be taken as 'gospel'... writing is and should be a solitary pursuit... writing groups can get more in the way, diverting one's attention and energy, than they can help...
I agree with Maia on this one... I sometimes think it would be nice to be in a group like this, but I quote nearly every published author when I say writing is the loneliest job in the world. If they really are helping you, go for it, but it sounds its not and imo, I would rather be writing...
I think you're probably better off just getting help online from neutral parties or taking classes. It doesn't sound like your group is very constructive, and finding a good one could take a lot more time than it's worth. Also, if you get into a group where people speak up/crit more, you could end up being influenced in the wrong direction by opinionated members. It's a lot easier to maintain perspective from a distance, whereas in person you may not be so objective. You're more likely to be swayed by what's popular with them, and that may or may not be beneficial. I think small groups tend to get in a rut where certain opinions become "accepted truth". . and then new members are "indoctrinated" into this thinking, which may be completely wrong. This is why the internet is so great. You can post your work on any number of sites, and get virtually unlimited feedback. You don't have to put up with the limited views of a limited group. And you can get in touch with pros like maia online. How could a local club compete or compare?
you're better off getting feedback and peer review than creating work in a vaccum IMO but, some people may do the right things for the wrong reasons. If you are here to get a pat on the head and a tummy rub for a job well done, you may get some, but it may not make you a better writer. if you are here for stern (and honest and helpful) critiques, you may find those as well. Just remember that opinions are opinions and one person's trash is another person's treasure.
I think writer's groups can be a great resource for aspiring authors. There's potential networking opportunties, and feedback and support when you need it. One of the groups where I live, some of them are published, and most are pursuing writing as a career. They're serious and professional. However, if you don't feel a connection with the group--they're not writing much, they're not taking it as seriously as you do, you guys are on different writing levels--get out and spare yourself a frustrating experience.
I'm a part of two writing groups, and I find different people go for different reasons. Some people have the idea that all feedback should be positive (the clapping) so as to encourage the discouraged writer. Others, like you (and me) look for specific feedback that can help with such areas as the examples you gave: plot, POV, style, etc. It's never easy when these two cultures mix. Constructive criticism can hurt the feelings of those in the first group, while those in the first group are unlikely to give valuable constructive criticism to those in the second. My suggestion is to search out alternative writing groups, start one of your own, or bring your concerns up openly and honestly with the group you're in: let them know that you're interested in discussing specific areas of improvement, not in applause to build your self esteem. The biggest problem I've found in groups is that there are too few minutes in the hour and too few hours in the meeting to be productive. There's a limited time for reading and criticism, especially if the group is large enough. In one group I'm in, they had to limit everyone to two pages, just so that everyone has a chance to share. That's hard for me, when I have a chapter of my book that's seven pages, and two pages is barely a taste of what the chapter is about. But I have gained some helpful insight from some of the meetings I've attended. Charlie
I remember reading some advice on writer's groups; there are some good ones and bad ones, the latter you should avoid of course, because they would be a waste of your time. I can't remember the advice, but if you feel that group is wasting your time, then maybe they are, that is if you aren't really getting anything beneficial from it.
I'm writing this partially as a response to another post, but after re-reading it I've decided to make a new thread to get other people's experiences I don't know about anyone else but for my entire school life all 4 of my English teachers were awesome. We could learn more about religion and history in a given English class, especially with one old guy called Chris Hardy. Mr. Hardy was one of those idealist academics - someone that became genuinely depressed when trying to teach someone stupid/apathetic and was only ever happy when he knew for certain that we'd be leaving the class wiser for the experience. His normal English classes followed the syllabus fair enough (even if we did get sidetracked teasing him with infuriating questions like "Was Shakespeare inspired by Jane Austin?") but English Extension 2 (Australian schools here) was an entirely different experience. We'd be given a prompt (optional) and told to write for 30 minutes solid, then we'd read out what we'd managed to come up with and we'd get critiqued by first the class and then the teacher. He really knew how to be brutal and constructive at the same time. It wasn't until today that I realised that that was my first writing group and a lot of the understanding I'd gained from the experience is something I'll never be able to thank him for enough for. I wonder if all English teachers are this awesome or if I just got lucky?
You got lucky, I've only had one english teacher that good, but he was awesome. Shakespeare becomes a whole lot more fun when the teacher explains all the dirty jokes to you, and then you figure out that he was selling sex, violence, and drama just like every other play/tv/moviewrigt before and since. He also set up a system for prom where the girls who didn't have a date yet would come to him and he would take down their name so that the guys who were too scared to ask someone out because they might be taken could come to him and find a date. He was the second best teacher I've ever had.
Yeah, you definitely got lucky, I think. I'm trying to think of an English teacher that actually inspired me in any way. It's hard. I always thought my history of teachers was pretty good but now that I think about it, I can't think of too many. Usually in classes we'd get sat down, then we'd go through the bog-standard idea of certain people taking certain paragraphs of a book, if we were reading. Often though myself and several others would end up skipping past the sections that were being read, and would frequently finish the book well in advance of the rest of the class.. I'm interested to see where this thread goes, in terms of wider English teaching. In particular wondering whether it's best to be part of a "high achieving" group, where the people who score well in reading and writing get moved up to a more demanding group, or whether it's better for everyone to be mixed together? So that, in theory, the "more intelligent" pupils teach the "underachieving" ones. I've experienced both, and neither are without their flaws.
My high-school English teachers were amazing. My teacher for Junior and Senior year was one of the very, very few people I ever looked up to.
I've had four english teachers to date. My last one was pretty awesome as, you could tell, she really knew and enjoyed what she was talking about. She got that some people weren't good at the subject but still worked hard to make sure they at least passed. I've also had a few substitute teachers which were amazingly enthusiastic about their subject. Hopefully i have a few more.
I've always hated English class, although I was very good at it. I despise analyzing poetry and literature, tearing it apart letter by letter looking for metaphors for starving children in Africa. Literature is meant to be read and enjoyed, and I suppose I'm saying that if you don't get it, it looses value if somebody has to explain it to you. I don't have a lot of patience for that. Honors English was fun, a little more lenient and a lot less patronizing. I suppose I just never had as good English teachers as the rest of you. ;.; "...So that, in theory, the "more intelligent" pupils teach the "underachieving" ones." - natemjames HA! Not likely.
50/50 My graduating year of secondary school, I had a great English from the East Indies. Imagine a 190cm, bald, 50-ish man who spoke with a Caribbean accent, and used to make jokes about going home for the lunch hour to "get down" with his wife. He lived across the street from the school, and everyone in his classroom could see his backyard from the window. Whenever his wife would put out her little black toy Poodle, our teacher would smile and wave, then under his breath curse the dog. He hated the animal with a passion, because his wife would make him walk it in the street every morning while students were arriving to school. Again imagine this tall, bald, dark skinned gentleman walking a tiny toy poodle with a look of contempt on his face. His lessons were the standard affair, Shakespeare, Fitzgerald, Tennessee Williams. But he made it interesting, because he would read everything to us, instead of having us all read aloud in class. He had a great actor's voice and nobody but the lowest pot-head clown slacked off during his lessons. As our end of year project we had to make an analysis of an important work of literature that affected culture in some way or another. I chose 'The Tale of Genji', by Murasaki Shikibu (the world's first novel). After I graduated, he told me that out of his 30 years of teaching, I was the first to chose that novel, and my essay and presentation inspired him to buy the novel and read it for himself.
I love English I got lucky as well for my first and last year. Shakespeare was better with my teachers making jokes and all, and they were very knowledgeable.
I can remember all the English teachers I had through high school and all are memorable. There was, let’s call her Mrs White. Mrs White liked to talk; once she got going you could not shut her up. In fact, she did not so much talk as pontificate on seemingly random subjects. Like the time she was an opera singer (she gave a demonstration, it was awful), how World War I started (that lecture went over several lessons) and it’s sequels “WWII: origins” and the “Cold War: the great arms race”, and the time she met the godfather, you get the picture. Then there was Mr Mustard. Mr Mustard had a voice that was the closest thing a human being could get to Microsoft sam without being Stephen Hawking. He liked to read out of textbooks all the time and when students wanted help he quoted the task sheet at them. I believe he is still continuing to bore students today. Mr Green (and yes I am channeling Cludo here) put the extension into extension English, literally. Remember that lord of the flies assignment that due one whole term later than the date specified (of course you don’t but I do). One student was sick the whole class got another couple of weeks to draft, sorry kids I didn’t feel like looking through your draft this weekend don’t worry I’ll have them done soon. And even if you didn’t do the assignment, just write something funny, it doesn’t have to be related to the course, and if it gets a laugh from him you pass. You may not think Mr. Green was a good teacher but he taught one class of precocious, gifted, stress heads the most important lesson of all. Never take life to seriously. No one wants to end up like Mr. Mustard
i had a few really good English teachers. mostly my sophomore and junior year of high school. Both semesters my freshman year of college I had awesome English teachers. The one helped by showing how to write more specific. Every time someone would use the word "things" in explaining something or their writing she'd say "Things? what are these things?". Then my second professor helped me stop writing in run-ons. One day she helped me out with them and the next paper I turned in a barely had any. She was a little over the top when it came to analyzing the stories we read, I thought, but other than that she was awesome! I also had an awesome literature professor this past semester. He made Melville interesting to me, so I have to give him some props haha. So yeah there are great English teachers out there and I think it's sad when people don't experience them. They bring writing and literature into a whole new light.
I never had any memorable English teachers. And I always got Cs in English, though I never knew why, so couldn't do anything about it (or so I thought at the time.. now I wish I had ASKED why I was only getting Cs). I was getting As and Bs elsewhere across the board though, so maybe he thought it brought balance. Or encouraged me. Instead though, it told me I was just hopeless at English, so sadly, I banished the thought of being a writer from my head. Maybe that is why it took me so long to start writing...
The best english teacher I had was my tutor. In fifth grade I could barely write, my dyslexia was really bad. I have note books from when I was in fourth grade and I was already wanting to be a writer, and you can hardly make out what I was writing, they were just pages filled with backwards letters. Anyway, she taught me from scratch how to write. I could read just fine, but somewhere between my brain and my hands there was a disconnect. She also told me to just keep reading and it would help. After her, no one compared, especially not my English 101 teacher in college. She was awful, not motivated to teach rather inclined to convince young writers they were failures. Everything I have learned about grammar since my tutor has come from countless summers and night spent reading and self teaching.
