3 Common Critique Group Flaws
Posted by David Duhr in 
A couple of weeks ago, [redacted] from [redacted] emailed to ask us if a critique group was right for her. “I’m in the early stages of writing my first thriller,” she wrote, “and I don’t really have anyone I trust to read my first few chapters. But there’s a writing group listed on Meetup that I am thinking of trying, and wondering if you can tell me some critique group flaws and if you think critique groups are a good idea or bad?”
I hate to say this, but the answer is … shoulder shrug. Critique groups are like snowflakes; every one is different, and don’t drive your car through a pile of them unless it’s an emergency.
Whether or not a specific critique group is right for you depends entirely on three things: the group’s format, the quality of its humans, and what you’re hoping to get out of it.
Since it’s more fun to poo-poo than to woo-hoo, today we’ll discuss three common critique group flaws.
If you have the time, it’s not a bad idea to join a few groups and attend a session or two of each. And then winnow ’em down. As soon as you spot more than one of the following critique group flaws, bounce.
[Tweet “As soon as a critique group displays more than one of these three flaws, bounce.”]
In-Session First Exposure
Ah, the old ISFE. An ISFE group is one in which those being critiqued bring copies of their work that same day/night to pass around, or, even worse — far worse — bring only one copy and then read it aloud.
This is not ideal. Very few people can offer worthwhile off-the-cuff feedback. Especially if that feedback comes after hearing a writer read his/her work aloud. Expecting quality commentary on written work delivered orally is nonsensical. It’s like an orchestra passing out sheet music to the audience and saying, “Does this sound nice?”
To provide the most helpful feedback, a reader needs to spend focused, quality time with your work, ingesting and processing it at his/her own pace and comfort level.
Look for: Groups in which the writers scheduled to be critiqued pass out or email their work the week before.
Complaint: “I don’t have time during the week to read other people’s work.”
Response: Yes you do. It’s just that sometimes it will feel like just one more chore, or like homework. But putting in the time for others will always usually often sometimes mean that they’ll do the same for you, and because of that, you’ll get richer, more helpful commentary on your work.
[Tweet “Expecting quality commentary on written work delivered orally is nonsensical.”]
I found a typo on Page 4
Many critique groups operate at the line level. Which is fantastic! If the critique group is for poets.
Most prose writers in critique groups are working on book-length projects. At the very least, they’re writing short fiction or journalism or essays. These writers need feedback on larger-scale issues: structure, plot, character, ideas, setting, tone, style, mood.
And that type of feedback is super hard to find in critique groups.
Most groups ask writers to submit only a couple or a few pages at a time, in order to squeeze in as many writers as possible per session. Therefore, group members don’t get the chance to read your work in context. They can’t comment on the arc of your novel, or they have no idea where this 600-word section of your essay fits into the 5,000-word whole.
Because of that, many critique group members fall back on line-level commentary. Typos, grammar, insignificant word choice.
This is end-stage stuff. Unless a writer says specifically that he or she is giving the group a final draft and that he/she will be submitting this work immediately after the group ends, discussing writing on a word or line level is a waste of time.
Look for: This is a tougher one, due to the very nature of critique groups. If you’re lucky, you’ll find a very dedicated, and likely very small, group of people willing/able to put in the time to read more than two or three pages of work at a time, and willing/able to dig deeper than “I think an exclamation point would work better than a period here.”
Complaint: “But more pages means fewer writers per session get critiqued.”
Response: I get it. But would you rather have six sessions of “I found a typo” or one session of “I no longer understand your character’s motivations, and here’s why”?
Complaint: “But pointing out typos will save the writer time in the end.”
Response: Maybe. More likely, the line in which you spotted a typo will be cut from the final product long before it becomes a final product, due to helpful feedback from someone else.
Dingbatz, Dipshitz, “Experts,” ME ME ME
Any critique group made up of randos will contain a handful of members who really want to help you improve, understand how to give helpful feedback, and know how to behave well in a social setting.
The rest of the people will be crummy. That’s part of the package.
Some of them will be lunatics. Some will love nothing more than the sound of their own voice. Some of them will believe themselves to be writing geniuses, and will likely begin each sentence with “Well, actually.” Some of them will only turn up when it’s their turn to be critiqued, and then will disappear again like a fart in the wind.
Any group of people contains a sizable percentage of shitty people. Critique groups are no different.
Look for: I guess try to find the group with the lowest percentage of shitty people. A little bit of math goes a long way here.
Complaint: “I’m not crazy, I’m quirky”; “I monopolize conversations because I have a bajillion great things to say”; “Well, actually, I am an expert, and I’m simply trying to share my wisdom so that you can improve”; “Peace out, suckers.”
Response: You know who you are, and you know how to behave otherwise.
[Tweet “Many of the people in your critique group will suck. That comes with the territory.”]
Discussion
Already I have far exceeded my (and, without a doubt, your) desired word count, and I’m only about halfway into these critique group flaws. There’s a lot more to talk about: whose advice to consider and whose to ignore totally; how to deal with attendance problems; oral vs. written feedback; online vs. in-person groups; working within genres.
And I also don’t want it to seem like I think critique groups are a bad idea and/or a total waste of time. A critique group — if it’s the right one for you — can be beneficial and fulfilling. And even fun.
But I’ll have to cover that ground in a future post, because I’ve gone far overboard here.
In the meantime, if you have any questions or comments, let us know below.
And I’ve got a couple of questions for you: What’s your hot take on critique groups? Helpful, harmful, or both? What kind of format is your ideal? What sorts of, uh, personalities have you run into?
WriteByNight is a writers’ service dedicated to helping you achieve your creative potential and literary goals. We work with writers of all experience levels working in all genres, nationwide and worldwide. If you have a 2016 writing project that you’d like a little help with, take a look at our book coaching, private instruction and writer’s block counseling services. And join our mailing list, over in the right sidebar, for once-per-week writing goodies in your inbox.
WriteByNight co-founder David Duhr is copy editor and fiction editor at the Texas Observer and contributes regularly to the Dallas Morning News, Publishing Perspectives, the Observer and other publications.
First!
Ugh, I’ve tried SO many. Never found one that has stuck.
You’re right, each and every group I’ve joined has had too
many of these “personalities.” The talkers, the pedantic
“Well, actually’s,” the “You clearly don’t understand what I’m
trying to do” defensives. Not to mention the people who sit there
silently, week after week not contributing, clearly just passing
idle time until it’s their turn. But boy, when that turn comes,
THEN they’re ready to talk!
I should just form my own. My rules, my way, with my kind of
People.
I forgot about the “You don’t understand my work” writers! Good call. Though I’m sure I’ve been guilty of that myself; it’s a natural response to criticism, I suppose. But the writer who believes others don’t understand his/her work, but *also* carefully considers the legitimacy of their feedback, will be better off in the end.
And hey, I just wrote a post about how I would form my own critique group. You read my mind. Come back in two weeks!
And also, come back next week. I’ll try to do something fun.
I’ve had the same problems in groups I’ve entered. Definitely “I found a typo on page x.” And reading the work aloud, I never understood that. It goes directly against purpose, doesn’t it!? And most of the feedback I remember getting was just worthless. 90 per cent of it, at least. Some people were actually tried to be helpful, but most of them were just looking out for theirselves, and had no interest in helping the rest. It haven’t tried a new group in some years, but maybe I will again and look for these things you suggest, or look… Read more »
The typo thing really grates on me. My first experience in a critique group, I was all excited. I wasn’t being critiqued, but while reading the work (that same day, of course, in-session) I came up with some good talking points. And when the discussion was opened, the first response was “I found a typo.” And so was the next response, and then something like “I’d use this word instead of that word.” I was like, “Um, so, this is really deflating…” And the reading work aloud? That bugs me even more than the typo-hunters. It baffles me. Thanks for… Read more »
So much of this can be helped by setting of some ground rules if you are setting up your own group, like Ajax suggests above–what a great idea!
And I think it behooves writers to suss out some of these really important things ahead of time with some targeted questions.
This is a fabulous list, David. Thanks for the reminders about what’s good critique behavior and what is…well, crap.
Hey pal. Thanks for stopping by. Like I told AJax, I just wrote a post with some guidelines I would set for my own critique group. Lots of sussing stuff out ahead of time, for sure. Including a screening process where I meet every person who wants to join the group. And if you’re a gasbag and/or a pedant or just a psycho, you ain’t makin’ the cut. Though if I wanted to join a critique group and the moderator told me I’d basically have to interview for the spot, I’d probably be like, “Well, clearly *you’re* crazy. Bye bye!”… Read more »
Two things tie for the craziest. 1. In a group run by a MFA candidate, the leader literally rewrote my entire story submission, adding his own dialogue (It was memoir) and referencing sounds that a horse would not make in the circumstances (a friendly nicker from a terrified animal). He said – I looked up what sound a horse makes. 2. I applied to be admitted to a group once and the leader, by mistake, sent her critique of my writing sample (and my choice of genre) to me along with the other members of the group.– “Not a terrible… Read more »
Thanks for sharing the craziness, Lori. These both made me giggle. The *audacity* of rewriting someone else’s memoir … including dialogue! My goodness. He had to look up the sounds a horse makes from the front, but sounds like he’s an expert on what comes out the other side.
And “Not a terrible writer” is just so pompous. Did you ever find out what she had against memoir?
Not a terrible moderator, but oy vey, learn how the “reply all” function works.
I laughed at some of these, and I agree for the most part. But here’s a question: In a perfect world, what kind of critique group are you in? These are the flaws, but if you were forming your own group, how would you prevent them? What rules would you set? That’s a post I’d like to see. Also, maybe a post on how/where to find groups? Meetup, Craigslist, websites for writers, library postings, etc. Or what to do if you don’t live in New York City! I’m in a medium-sized Arizona city now, so it’s not a problem, but… Read more »
Thanks for stopping by, Marie.
Your question has inspired me to add a bit to the next post about my ideal critique group. In short: 12 like-minded people meeting once a week for two hours, three critiques per session, aiming for ~30 minutes apiece, and all of us working in roughly the same genre and, ideally, in the same format. Sounds pretty great to me.
So what’s your ideal group?
And, since you mentioned it, where would you post your ad(s) seeking other members?
Yes, the “instant critique offered from a reading” flaw struck me right off at my first group meeting. At best, all I can offer is an initial impression. Now there’s value in that so long as everyone understands it. But I think some kind of “pre-reading” format where the critiquers have at least a week with a piece is necessary if more in-depth critiques is what you want. In truth, I would prefer a “writer’s group” over a “critique group” because I get more from the interaction with people who are trying to produce literature, understand the challenges of the… Read more »
Hey Raymundo. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I wonder if there’s a worthwhile post in the distinction between writer’s group and critique group, or workshop and critique group. Definitions can float, but you’re right — most critique groups tend to be of the read-aloud and/or insta-critique variety, while a group that takes work home and digs deeper is more of a workshop. That’s part of what Ron is digging into in a later comment. I have an additional hurdle with a read-aloud group because I have massive trouble processing words delivered that way. A few weeks ago, Justine and I… Read more »
(LOL) on the falling asleep. I’m sure it was with the best of intentions. Regarding writing groups, personally, I like the idea of how I think Mr. Tolkien did it–sitting around the fireplace with some author friends discussing your work over brandy and cigars. Of course, smoking will kill you and after a few brandys the value of the discussion tends to slip. But it’s a neat image. Ron had some interesting ideas and I’m very interested in what you’ll have to say about structuring a group. If I ever start a writer’s group, it’ll be of the informal, Tolkien… Read more »
A modern-day Tolkein group: e-cigarettes and … PBR tallboys? Zima?
Either way, “author friends” is my ideal. People I like, people I have fun with, but people who can help me, too.
Justine and I once formed a group with two friends of ours. We were hanging out with them often anyway, so we all figured why not bring along some new writing next time we got together?
Long story short, the group met once. And by “the group” I mean Justine and me. Our two friends never sent along any new work, and we never discussed it again.
Fail.
Nothing is better than a professional group: Operated on a paying basis (about $40 a meeting) so people show up. With a trained moderator (Amherst Writers & Artists is a good model) who will keep the experts quiet, discourages talk that fixes a MS, and quashes copyediting notes when something deeper is what everybody seeks. A person who will reel in the sets of pages one week before the monthly meeting, then ship ’em out. No ISFE. No typo talk. Oh, and never mind about 12 people. It’s a crazy number. 20 minutes per MS works out to, well, do… Read more »
Thanks for the thoughtful comment, Ron. I think there’s definitely a distinction to be made between a workshop and a critique group. That’s something I probably should have touched on above. A lot of the stuff I’m talking about here is inherent to the critique group format. So maybe what I’m really getting at is, if you’re serious about your writing, join a workshop like yours rather than a critique group. In the next post I talk a bit about the money aspect, but you’re definitely right; $40 a meeting will weed out almost all, if not all, of the… Read more »
Some great observations, David. Many thanks! One bit of advice that I received several years ago from a multi-published mystery author friend in terms of a critique group was: “Listen carefully to suggestions from folks you trust, but in the end, trust your gut. BUT – if several people are telling you one thing, and your gut says something different, start to question your gut.” That has served me as a really helpful approach.
Thanks for stopping by, Jo! It’s nice to hear from you.
I love that advice. It’s true. Deciding who to listen to and who to ignore can be a struggle in such groups, but if everyone is saying the same thing, there may be some merit in there.
Of course, just because a majority shares an opinion doesn’t mean the opinion holds water. [Insert lame attempt at a political joke.] But discarding that opinion without considering can be irresponsible.
So the hierarchy of trust goes:
1. Your gut
2. People you trust
3. The rest
Sounds good to me!
Fascinating discussion … our Writer’s Group is of the read-it-aloud-same-evening variety, including “I found a typo.” There are certainly advantages and disadvantages to the format … it’s great for giving focused constructive criticism of shorter writing samples, though larger story arcs can be missed. But many of us find that reading it aloud enables us to notice things that we didn’t notice before. And we do have a variety of personalities (we don’t turn anyone away), but work to keep the meeting focused and positive through appropriate facilitation. Personally, I find that I’m a much better writer as a result.… Read more »
Hi Mark. Thank you for reading and for sharing your thoughts. I’m glad you find your group worthwhile and that it helps you improve. After all, that’s what we’re all looking for, regardless of format. But you’re right: your style of group isn’t for everybody, and my style (my ideal style, I should say; I’m not in one at present) isn’t for everybody. I suppose each writer needs to decide what his/her objectives are and then find a group that suits those needs/goals. Sometimes I think I want nothing short of an intense writing workshop. Other times, I just want… Read more »
David — that’s exactly right; having a moderator makes a huge difference. The group I’m part of has been meeting for about 25 years. I joined about nine years ago, and became the moderator about six years ago, continuing the group’s tradition and strategies for keeping the meetings positive. One of the things we try to do is focus on the writing itself, not the content — partly to avoid distractions and potentially unnecessary and unhelpful debate about issues social, political, religious, whatever, and partly to economize on time. I try very hard to be accommodating, to make sure that… Read more »
Twenty-five years! That is impressive. That kind of longevity is proof enough that its members find it very helpful.
Plus the camaraderie of food and drink afterwards. Sounds like a great setup. Do you meet at one place and then go elsewhere to hang out, or does it all happen at the same spot?
Almost — we meet at a Barnes & Noble bookstore in a mall, then walk over to a nearby Red Robin for Happy Hour.
And if I may be forgiven for a small bit of self-promotion, we’ve just published an anthology with contributions from many of our writers. Here’s the Facebook page for the anthology: https://www.facebook.com/Grand.Writers.Anthology/
Trying to find a critique group in a town where more interest leans towards sports has got me searching online. Although there are several at Meetup, I’m not in a financial position to pay for the group if I should find one I think fits. And there’s to question of trust. Who should I trust with my work that’s so dear to my heart? I doubt I’m the only one who has these problems. However, the perplexing dilemma of how to receive worthwhile feedback before taking that finally plunge to the publishing house still remains. Sure, a professional editor is… Read more »
Hi Glynis. All of the Meetup groups come with a fee structure? Is it a one-time payment or a per-session fee of a few bucks? Because if it’s the latter, you could go to one or two of them, hope to find some like-minded people, and then form your own splinter group. You could make it a free group, and then structure it any way you please. Be a critique group poacher! Regarding trust, is it more about trusting the group members (or any early reader) to provide quality feedback, or is it more about trusting people to keep your… Read more »
I want to offer a little feedback about the ISFE groups. We have some very productive groups of this type in the Tulsa area. And there are great reasons to read your manuscript out loud to others for the first read. Sometimes, what you wrote isn’t how you mean it to sound. If we hear a longer intended pause, it’s possible that a comma isn’t right, or there might be a better way to convey the pause. There are a good number of writers who have had their whole novel critiqued ten minutes at a time at these meetings. You… Read more »
Renee — that’s exactly how our group works, and that’s been exactly my experience as well. When done right, it seems to be a formula for success. Do these groups in your area also have moderators?
Hi Renee’. Thanks ever so much for stopping by and for the thoughtful response.
Two hundred members! Is there a cap for each session, or could you, in theory, have 200 people show up? If a cap, how does that work? The first [x] who respond get to attend?
I’m glad this structure works for you, and for many of the other members. I also love that you mention helping each other to not use “that” as often. This is something I’ve been working on quite a bit lately.
Great job, David. I belong to three critique groups in my area, two with moderators. There are the punctuation mavens, and the “this word is better than the one you used” participants. Bottom line, though, my experience has been a positive one. Your gut has to be the final arbiter, but as someone noted earlier, when two or more fellow group members make the same point, you’d best have a hard conversation with your gut. All three groups encourage emailing manuscripts before the group meets. Quick and on-the-spot critiques are often not helpful. I am interested in the comments regarding… Read more »
Hi Maria. Thank you for stopping by and sharing your thoughts. I’m curious about this workshop, particularly in how they landed on 4,000 words per. Seems a bit odd, seeing as how most mags/journals have a 5,000-word cutoff. There must be some kind of math involved that makes 4,000 make sense. When you wrote “we each received 10 ms. to critique,” I translated ms. to minutes and was shocked, until I took off my dunce cap. This sounds like a great setup. My only worry would be that because of my poor retention abilities I would have to save all… Read more »
[…] weeks ago we had a fun conversation about critique groups and what to watch out for when scouting for a new one — flawed formats and flawed people in […]
[…] the act itself is solitary. But recently we’ve been talking about the collaboration found in critique groups and ghostwriting. Today I want to bore you to pieces with an anecdote related to me & my […]
[…] a drum I pound on a lot, but there are right times and wrong times to address […]
David, I confess to being the “shady” guest at my first critique group. Being the only published author (ink still wet), I had a hard time trusting them to the eager critiques. So… I secretly posted a piece that had been previously published and well-received. I purposely left a couple of typos to make it look less professional. The typos were called out immediately. But then my opening paragraph was questioned as to its necessity and suggestions were made that I get to the point quicker and so on. Afterward I wondered what would have happened to this story which… Read more »
Hi Deb. Thanks for stopping by–we’re glad to have you! I love that you delivered a test to your group in round one. I’ve had to fight the urge to submit published work. And not my own, but like a Chekhov story. And then after the group is done dismantling it with low-quality feedback, I’d pop out of my chair and say, “This is a famous Chekhov story, considered by many to be one of the best stories ever written. Y’all know nothing about nothing!” “I need to choose who to listen to and play deaf to the rest.” That’s… Read more »
Shopping around for a good critique is hard and I agree with a lot of what you had to say. I do disagree with not believing people may not have time to read at home. I barely have to write and I have also been in crit groups where I took time away from writing to read and put in my feedback, only to come to group and find that no one devoted the time I spent on their stories on mine. I only do groups where I read ahead of time with people I know or have vetted. I… Read more »
Hi Ebs,
Thanks for reading and for the thoughtful reply. So it sounds like your ideal is to visit a group once or twice, find the two or three people who don’t suck, and form your own group with them. Which is my style exactly!
I’m fully with you on the whole “writing experts” thing. The kind of people whose feedback begins with “You need to.”
So how many loonies is too many? How do you spot one? That could make for a good post. DD
And sometimes that super annoying ‘expert’ actually does know what they are talking about. I critiqued a motorcycle chase scene one time. I have been riding 20yrs. The writer didn’t even have the basic anatomy of a motorcycle correct. Had no idea where the clutch, brakes and gear lever were. I probably came across as a total asshat because I spent all 3,000 words correcting her about where the various bike parts were and how a bike behaves while you are riding it. I’m certain quite a few eyebrows were raised. If you’re going to write a highly detailed motorcycle… Read more »
The irony is I came to this article because I for the most part agree with the premise of the article. Critique groups can be a massive waste of time but not for the reasons in this article. Which appears to centre upon the writer’s particular distaste for certain personalities. I stopped attending them because I discovered for the most part, I’m better at finding holes in my own work than others. Other writers are often focused upon the conventions of their own favoured style or popular taste, which isn’t what I write. So I got a lot of. advice… Read more »