As it usually happens, John McIntyre over at You Don't Say has a good post about editing and tact. There is a bit that really struck something with me, though, as the organizer and moderator of The Milwaukee Writers Workshop.

The professional demand is for all concerned to look at the text as an artifact, a thing, a production that is separate from the producer. To point out shortcomings in this thing is not to identify them with the producer of the thing. So professionals, writers and editors, try to avoid the second-person pronoun. It is the story, not your story. Refer carelessly to what you did wrong here, and armed missiles start to rise out of silos in Montana. (Restrict the second-person pronoun to instances of praise.)

Take into consideration this: John's thoughts are directed toward the world of journalism, but I believe they pertain to the community of writing workshops in a direct way.

Workshops are never about belittling a writer. They're never about trying to prove that you - the critiquer - is better than the author being critiqued. It's about constructive input regarding a story in order for the author to improve upon that work in the hopes of getting it sent out for publication. So one should always keep in mind when going over a story that the author is not equal to the work.

Anyone looking to join a critique group should always learn some of the rules of that group. Each one operates differently and knowing those little rules will help make the process a lot easier. One of our rules is that the author isn't allowed to chime in during the critique unless asked a direct question pertinent to the discussion. The reason for this is to allow the discussion to flow freely about the writing and the work without the author interrupting to defend that piece. Too much interruption can lead to the group getting distracted or frustrated because some people aren't being heard. Plus, it allows for the author to sit back and absorb everything: they can take notes, make comments, process what's being said.

As John says, learn the dance. A good critique group consists of writers and editors who know how to both praise and critique a piece of writing without making the author feel as though he's just been through the firing squad.

I recently met a new colleague, Phil Martin, who runs Great Lakes Literary. He's done a good deal of work as an editor both professionally (i.e. - for a company) as a freelance and small business owner. He's a good contact, and he knows what he's doing. He's also joined - or tentatively joined, as he works both here in Milwaukee and in Madison - The Milwaukee Writers Workshop, which is a great addition to our members.

I've also recently begun the job search again (having found a sense of renewed purpose with a proposed idea for a writers workshop/group for high school students interested in continuing on to college for degrees in journalism, english, communications, or other related fields) and hope to find something in the non-profit field that will allow me to shop this idea out to locals schools who might be willing to sponsor or fund the group.

Right now my first candidate for sending out my resume is Our Next Generation Kids, which is a great local mentoring group for kids.

In other news, The JB Dryden Company will be updating its website to incorporate all of its divisions and move over some of the current information to a dedicated site for its editing services and its consulting services. Our hope is to better focus each site to its intended client base. I'm eager to hear everyones' opinions once those sites go live.

NaNo Update: After a bout of being unable to produce anything at all on my novel (now turning into a novella) I finally had a breakthrough in the story and have since produced a whopping ten thousand words. So we'll see what happens at the end of the month.

I had planned on doing something a bit thought-provoking this week, but I was prompted to this post by two things: a pleasantly flattering email I received and an article in Writers' Journal. So what's the topic? Writers Groups, of course. Last Post I listed a number of the local writers groups.

In response to said email and magazine article, I'd like to post my own thoughts on how to craft a good writers' group. I believe there are a few different types of groups, and there are merits and flaws to each one. I will give my best attempt at detailing those, and I'll also give a brief run-down of how The Milwaukee Writers Workshop operates.

Critique
This is a group that focuses on bringing in unpolished works by its members with the express intent of having the other members read and critique those works. Once this round-table group has gone through the story, it is the hope that the author will have something to work with to polish it up before sending it out to various publishers. This is the most demanding on your time and efforts, but it is the most rewarding in that you get a good amount of feedback on your writing - much of it you can use. You also learn to trust in your fellow writers through learning their critiquing styles.

Critique groups can operate in two ways: reading the stories aloud at each group or reading the stories ahead of time. The article in Writers' Journal speaks very specifically about this type of group.

Workshop
This is a group that meets to work on the craft of writing through exercises, reading materials on writing, etc. Each group will focus on a different element of writing and work with the group as a whole to improve each individual's writing. Workshops only work well when there is a moderator to really drive the group to do consistent exercises.

Discussion
This is a group that typically gets together for a more social gathering to discuss writing, perhaps discuss market news, and other writing-related topics. It tends to be a lot less formal and may include a variety of things included in a workshop or critique group. They also tend to have much of a goal in mind other than enjoying one another's company. They can be hit or miss, but typically they are a good deal of fun.

Book Club
This isn't really a writing group, but many times a discussion group tends to devolve into a book club. Book clubs are nice as social gatherings, but they rarely benefit a writer trying to improve their writing.

So what is the best combination? Whatever works best for the members of your group. However, don't be afraid of change, suggestions, or the fact that some of your members may want something different and may want to strike out on their own. If and when they do, support them, because it's always good to have more than one option in the writing community.

The Milwaukee Writers Workshop
Our group is a combination of the first two. We meet twice a month (the article suggests meeting at least once a month) at a local coffee shop. It's comfortable, but it's also conducive to writing and discussion, and it's a great environment that everyone's comfortable. We offer one critique session each month and one exercise workshop.

For anyone who is in the area and interested, we will be adding another session on a monthly basis in a different area of town.

We also try to spend a bit of time doing a selection of the following: market news, going over rejections, various writing activities throughout the city, submissions updates, and general writing news. It's a good social gathering, but all of us are serious about getting our work out there, and we spend a great deal of time offering ourselves to our members and giving back when the time comes.

So what does your group do? I'm interested in groups from all over. What do you differently from MWW or other groups in your area?

If you have questions about our group or how to start your own (and you'd like my thoughts), please email me. I look forward to your thoughts.

Also, thanks to M. Ahmad for the email.

Update: NaNo is kicking my butt. I've put out a few very nice scenes, but the story is going off in a direction that changes my ending a bit, and I'm not sure how to reconcile them yet. I have 24 days to figure things out - or at least reach 50k and worry about it later.

On to other things . . .

Recently I was told that an ex-member of my writing group would be starting her own group. I was pleased to hear about it. Due to her own busy schedule - and a slightly personal distaste for how I operate things - she moved on and is now doing her own thing. Another writers group in the area is great: it allows for more feedback in different areas. I must admit I can be a bit draconian when it comes to my group and at times we go through spells of one type of fiction, but I like the rigidity of it, and some people don't. It's good to have other options, though, and I think it's wonderful that we have someone new to promote.

She is a writing teacher at the moment and does very well at it - and has a strong eye for good writing. You can contact her here.

Here is a list of other groups in the area, though, that I think everyone should at least look into if you're hoping to get your work looked at. (If you're on this list, and you'd like some info changed, please email me and let me know).

1. Milwaukee Writers Workshop, James Boone Dryden
2. Milwaukee Writer's Group, Liz or Trevor, contact available on the site
3. Redbird Studio, contact: jb@redbirdstudio.com
4. Woodland Pattern Bookstore, topical workshops, Julie Strand, contact: woodlandpattern@sbcglobal.net
5. Writer's Ink, Gail Toerpe
6. Broad Vocabulary, contact: info@broadvocabulary.com (they have a nice calendar of events to check out)
7. Hotcakes Art Gallery, Mike Brenner
8. Barnes & Noble Bayshore workshop, fourth Monday of each month at 7:30. You can email me for more information

If you're not on the list and would like to be, please contact me. If you have questions about any of the above places, don't hesitate to call them and ask about their programs; I'm sure they would love to hear from you and tell you about what they offer. Most of them are free; some of them are not.

I have said it before, and I will continue to say it: writers groups - no matter which one you choose - are beneficial. Unless you're in school, where you're surrounded by your colleagues, you don't always have the opportunity to get feedback on your creative ventures. Writers groups help foster that feedback and allow for a range of input.

I am finishing up Amy Einsohn's The Copyeditor's Handbook (I know, it seems like I've been taking a while, but I got distracted by other things). The most recent section I read brought up a question in my mind about the nature of "PC" - you know, that 80s term that came around: it means "politically-correct". More specifically (or more truthfully) it means "gender-racial-sexual-orientation-correct".

The discussion is centered around the gender-nonspecific use of the slash-paired 'his/her' in lieu of the word 'their' in sentences that are ambiguous about the gender of the subject.

Ex. "Everyone took their seat." vs "Everyone took his or her seat."

As an editor, the jarring nature of the second sentence irks me, and I will change it to the former. Why? Because it sounds better, and its just as grammatically correct. What also bothers me about it is the feeling of many authors to PC-ize their work in order to satisfy some unseen naysayer who's going to chastise them for being some sort of biased just by their use of 'their' instead of 'his/her'.

There is a distinction to be made here, though: business writing and fiction operate very differently. When you're writing in a business or trade setting, keep in mind that there are some standards and the 'their' usage might be frowned upon, but feel free to stand your ground and back yourself up with proof from the DEU that 'their' is a legitimate neutral pronoun. On the other hand, if you're writing fiction, don't write yourself into a PC nightmare just because you don't want your book to be banned for using the "N-word" when it might be justifiably pertinent to your story.

There is a place for PC; and there is a place for it to be thrown aside. Use your judgment, but always consider consulting someone (possibly an editor) when you have a question.

Coincidentally, two editors - John McIntyre and Angela Booth posted on similar topics this week, and I think it pertinent to respond to them with my own opinions, though I already did give a bit of an opinion on Angela's post.

I would have to agree more with John in saying that my characters are only ever mechanisms to further my story. That isn't to say that I can't write empathetic characters or realistic ones, but I can't say that a character has ever gone off to do his own thing. My characters do what I tell them to do, because they are my creation. As well, while I know my characters well, I never really craft them in such a way that I'm conversing with them at every turn of the corner.

Characters can be as you wish them to be, though, and I would say that however you create your characters works for you. So long as they are fully completed when they are placed into the story and successfully act their part to further the story in such a way that it brings across your point.

So how do you create a character? Do you go through the process of living their life through story? Or do you chisel them from a block of character clay and mold them as they are put through the plot of the story?

BarCamp Milwaukee was this past weekend (October 13 & 14), and I did two presentations: one was on Electronic Publishing, which I've talked about before, and the other was on "Fast-paced Fiction".

The session was a bit misnamed, I suppose, as we talked about a variety of things, but mostly it was geared towards the concept of online writing and creating fiction in somewhat non-traditional ways. In the session, itself, we actually wrote what might be called a short story, but it was a fun collaborative effort, that I think everyone enjoyed taking part in. We also talked about shared-world projects, flash fiction, and collaborative works. There are an innumerable amount of each one of those on the internet these days, and I think they're wonderful ways of expressing yourself as a writer. (At the end of the post, I'll link to some of those sites).

I think one of the things that I felt the group really latched onto was the idea that traditional writing is certainly the best means of making a name for oneself as a writer, but because of the internet, there are more ways - and more inventive ways - to truly present oneself and stand out from other writers who may not have as firm a grasp on the internet as you.

Outside of a good writers group, I think online communication with other writers is a great way to continue to keep yourself in writing mode. If you're not always writing, then it's hard to get yourself motivated to write. Having contact as often as possible with other writers is great motivation, and I think that any one of the three ways mentioned above is a good way of doing that - even if it's just a casual thing.

Having a writing buddy is good, too, but I'll touch on that more next time, as I discuss the upcoming National Novel-Writing Month, which I will eagerly be working on throughout November.

Flash Fiction:
365 Tomorrows
EveryDayFiction
Flashshot

Shared-World Projects:
Fargoth

Collaborative Works:
Viyala Project

Recently at the Milwaukee Writers Workshop we discussed poetry. (It's a Google Group, so you have to register to be a part of it). Generally the group discusses works of fiction written in prose, so it was a nice change of pace to discuss something a bit more colorful.

What I found most interesting, though, was the overwhelming presence - or lack thereof - of punctuation in the poems. Now, there's nothing wrong with free verse poetry, but just because it's a poem doesn't mean a writer should automatically nix the punctuation.

"E. E. Cummings did it, though," you may say. And I would respond: Yes, but Mr. Cummings was an experimental master. What he did was unique. Doing it just because you think it's the proper way to do things doesn't make you an emulator; it makes you look like you don't know your craft.

The real discuss came down to grammar, syntax, and semantics. In order to play with the rules of grammar to craft a truly fluid poem, you have the know the rules of grammar. It was obvious after reading many of these poems that knowledge of grammar was in short supply. It's not entirely the writer's fault, but I believe that there is still some fault that lies in the hands of the writer. If you wish to perfect your craft as a writer or a poet, you have to know the craft; and I think with poetry - more so than with prose - you really do have to know the rules of grammar and syntax inside and out in order to manipulate them in a way to craft your poem effectively.

If you want an example of a master of this, read some of Emily Dickinson works. Her use of punctuation is phenomenal, and when you know the rules behind the use of particular pieces of punctuation, her poetry becomes more powerful.

The point is, ultimately, is not that you should always use punctuation in your poetry; the point is that in order to bend the rules of grammar in your poetry, you have to know them. If you don't, take a class, pick up a grammar manual, or ask someone. One can never learn enough.

John McIntyre, the assistant managing editor for the copy desk at The Baltimore Sun, and writes You Don't Say, gave everyone the heads-up for a new blog called Words to the Wise, which is written by Kathy Schneck of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel here in Milwaukee.

It's nice to have people close to home. I feel a little isolated at times way out here in the Midwest, even though we're so close to Chicago. There aren't all that many fiction editors or agents in the Milwaukee area, and it'll be nice to read some thoughts from someone like Kathy, who works for a newspaper like The Journal.

I shall eagerly revisit and comment on it. Though I will say that there seems to be a lot of Journal-reader-based commenting going on, so I suppose that means I shall have to work more diligently on pouring over the paper every morning before work.

This article came across my desk today (which has been packed with more than I knew what to do with lately - hence the delay in posts).

It's a good article, for the most part, and I really only wanted to comment on the fact that it's interesting that it's found a site completely unrelated to writing at all. As a process, creative writing is taxing at best and harrowing at worst. It's a job that I love, but sometimes I wish I'd gone with something a little more profitable.

There are a few things in the article that I did want to respond to.

First,

...In the end, there’s no such thing as the “perfect size” for writing. Short isn’t bad, and neither is long. That is, unless either size is forced...

A lot of people seem to think that this is true. A lot of publishers want you to think this is true. The bigger the book is, the less likely it is to sell in today's market because people have shorter attention spans, on average, when it comes to reading. Ironically, though, no one seems to be publishing novellas, which would be a much more marketable reading portion for the average reader.

Second,

If you don’t know what to write about, write fantasy: it’s the easiest to work with...Everything takes work.

Nothing could be more true. I've had relatively vehement discussions (for literature geeks, I mean) about the "validity" of fantasy fiction - or any genre fiction, really. Most people have the misconception that "escapist" literature (and I despise that term) is an easy way out when you're stuck for what to write. You can certainly make up whatever you want a lot of the time, but you always have to be consistent with what you make up, and that's what hangs people up when they start to write it.

Lastly,

...critics have written many papers explaining just why there is no more for literature to truly achieve.

While their arguments make sense, given enough arguing back and forth, never assume that everything has been done. There is always some sort of new grounds to explore...

The greatest achievement as a writer isn't to write something new, it's to write something fresh. If you can write something that can catch your readers attention in a way they've never experienced, then that's an accomplishment. It doesn't matter if it's a story that has been written before, it hasn't been written the way you wrote it - and that's the challenge.