by Mary Jo
Occasionally I've been asked who I might like to collaborate with to write a book. My answer is more or less "That will happen over my dead body!" It's my book. MINE!!!
Yet though writing is justly known as a solitary pursuit, that doesn't mean that writers don't like talking with other writers, and that we can find ways of benefiting from such interactions.
I'm part of an online book club of long time authors. We all started in romance, and some have gone in different directions such as mystery, women's fiction, and paranormal. But we're all storytellers in our DNA, and our last book discussion slid into talking about writer's processes (often very different} and that morphed into a discussion of working with others in a constructive way.
Imposter's Syndrome is pretty common, even among successful writers who have written dozens of books. The feeling, usually when one is in the middle of writing a new book, that someone will say "You're a fraud! You don't really know how to write!" This can happen despite the evidence of multiple awards and bestselling books, proving that authors are masters of cognitive dissonance. <G>
As Maris Soule said, "I know I was relieved, years ago, when I heard other successful writers say they feared one day the world would discover they really didn't know how to write or create a story."
Author Judith Arnold said, "I have to figure out and solve a book's problems myself. I'm always afraid that if I let others in on the process, I will lose what little control I have over the material. I fear that I'll wind up writing someone else's story, not my own. Of course, once a manuscript is done, I get input from editors. But that's different--because the manuscript is done. I appreciate a good editor's criticisms and I'll address them. But while the book is still in progress, I can't let anyone else into the process. How about the rest of you? Critique groups? Critique partners? Or solitary strugglers, like me?"
It turns out that positive feedback from other authors is really useful at convincing us that a book is working. An interesting insight that emerged as we discussed this was that over time, there has been a change in the kinds of writers groups, and in what we want from such groups.
Critique Groups
Critique groups were very much A Thing when I started writing. (There were online forums in places like Prodigy where writers would post whole books in progress.) For writing neophytes, much could be learned about publishing, agents, submissions, and more in critique groups with more experienced writers. I'm sure there are long running critique groups that are warm and supportive, good at fingering problems with a manuscript and also saying what is working well. But the word "critique" is related to criticizing, and a group has to be much more than critical to be useful. Here are some of our experiences with those early critique groups.
Patricia McLinn, said, "I was in critique groups early-on. First one lasted about 18 months and was helpful because it was so very early and I knew zip. Next one lasted a lot longer, also was helpful early, but gradually faded out as most of the others stopped writing. Critique group was tough for me because of writing out of sequence and writing faster than the group -- we met once a month and they wanted to look at a chapter at a time and I'd be way past the next chapter."
MJP again: I went to a local critique group exactly once, when I was starting my second book. It was under contract but I was new and uncertain and wanted feedback. People read the first chapter and immediately started piling on with comments that were not my story! I felt as I was being assaulted by foam rubber bats. I shut up, thanked people, and never returned.
Emilie Richards, who loves her active brainstorming group, had the same experience in a critique group: "I went to one critique group session a very long time ago, and I would never do it again."
Judith Arnold discussed critiquing more expansively. "In the MFA program I attended eons ago, most of the classes operated like critique groups, although it was called "workshopping" a manuscript. You'd do some writing, then print out copies of what you'd written and pass them around to the others in the class, read your work, and have the class critique it. The professor would usually add his comments (all my creative writing profs were men, for some reason) at the end. What I found myself doing was writing to please the critique group. I wanted them all to read my work and say, 'Wow, this is great!'
But by the time I was done with my MFA, I realized that other MFA students seated around a table--and certainly all those male professors--did not comprise the audience I needed or wanted to reach, so writing to please readers like them was not going to help me fulfill my ambitions as a writer."
There are other kinds of writer interactions, one of which is having a regular, long term critique partner. Joanna Maitland said, "I've worked with the same critique partner for about 10 years now, essentially since I stopped writing for Harlequin and so lost a professional editor. We try not to read as editors but as readers. (We've discussed that and I accept that writers can never read as non-writing readers do, but we try our best.)
We highlight things that strike us as readers, such as (a) I fell over this sentence/paragraph, (b) I wanted more here, (c) I didn't understand what was going on, (d) I found myself disliking this character because… (e) this didn't work for me because…
We also highlight the good stuff, things that make us laugh, or cry, or marvel. Really important to do that. Generally there are a lot more positive than negative comments.
One crucial thing with CPs is trust because you're letting someone in to your most private work. And you have to love each other's writing. I also think it helps if CPs don't write the same kind of books. I generally write historical; my CP generally writes contemporary. But we both read both plus lots of other genres. I just hope my CP and I fall off the twig at the same time because I couldn't see myself having as good a working partnership with anyone else."
Brainstorming
Brainstorming is very different from critiquing because it's all about tossing out ideas as uncritically as possible because one never knows when a wild idea will lead to a brilliant breakthrough. It's all about stimulating the imagination, and it's also great fun. I've been part of a brainstorming triad with two of the other Word Wenches for years, and the sessions are very stimulating--and great fun. <G>
An important element of critiquing and brainstorming is to ask specifically for what we need. Jennifer Greene put it well: "You have to ask for what you need, not just leave it open when you're going into a critique thing with 'outsiders.' If you say, I don't want to hear about characters--that's mine....my conflict is set, don't want to discuss it...but I'd like to hear if my plot is going too slow, if you're interested in it, or how it comes across to you…. Every critique group I've ever been near, the members bubbled over to help, to share, to pour out 'stuff'--without considering what the writer actually needed from the conversation."
Retreats:
The topic of brainstorming led into retreats. Judith Arnold said, "I would love to get together with other writers for a retreat, maybe rent a house somewhere and write all day, and in the evening drink wine and talk about what we'd accomplished and about writing in general. I would not want other writers tampering with my oh-so-precious words, but if I had a bad writing day, I'd love to be able to gripe to fellow writers, and if I had a great writing day, I'd love to be able to celebrate with fellow writers." (Word Wench Anne Gracie is part of a long running retreat group like that.)
Joanna Maitland says, "I'm part of a group that does go on retreat once a year. There are 7 of us – writing different genres. Some bring partners. We hire a big house with at least 7 bedrooms, all with private bathrooms. We also ensure we have a huge kitchen/sitting/dining area where we can all relax. We don't do any critiquing though everyone is happy to be a willing ear if someone wants to vent about good/bad things happening in their writing.
We do precisely what Judith Arnold suggested – we write all day (with a break for lunch, but not too long), drink wine and eat good food in the evenings.
The one thing we usually do is to say, on the first evening, what we're planning to achieve during the retreat. Then, on the last night, we say whether we have. It does concentrate the mind especially for the procrastination prone, like me <g> The partners usually go out during the day while the writers scribble. Partners also tend to do the food shopping which is very convenient."
My conclusions:
1) Writers often want feedback from other writers, as long as it's done on our terms. <G> Being as positive as possible is essential.
2) We need to be clear about what we want from the interaction.
3) Critiquing and brainstorming partners absolutely must be people we trust. We need to trust their honesty, their judgment (though that doesn't mean we'll always agree), and their kindness. We need to trust that they're on our side.
I'm talking about writers and writing here, but I'm sure that the general ideas apply in many other areas of life. What's your experience of working productively with others? Please share!
Mary Jo