.jpg)
Is it a case of too many cooks? Or a case of the wrong cooks? Why are we even talking about cooks?
I recently read an article by a writer who joined an MFA, (master of fine arts grad degree) peer-group for short fiction to get critiques on her novel. The group critiqued her work, (a chapter at a time) infrequently. Of course the resulting critiques were conflicting and confusing.
As should come as no surprise, the writer abandoned the novel.
There are multiple takeaways from this person’s experience. My take is you have to know what level you are as a writer and match up with the support that best suits your needs. Square pegs will not fit in a round hole.
Through the magic of social media, I friended up with multi-genre writer Joe Lansdale. At one point I asked what he thought about critique (or crit) groups. He was less than enthusiastic, uttering the old “too many cooks…” axiom.
I can tell you that the crit groups have been imperative to my journey. The critique group is typically made up of aspiring writers who exchange work and provide feedback. When the feedback is honest and constructive, the group can help one another learn genre norms, (from tropes down to paragraph/chapter/book length) the query processes, and, yes, even feedback on tone, plot, and character development.
You know, assholes, mean girls.
However from pained experience, I can also tell you that crit groups can be petty, cliquish, and discouraging. Worse, a poorly led group can devolve into a mutual-admiration society, aka a circlejerk. As I’ve written previously, many new writers have a bad experience in a crit group and never put creative thought to medium again. Others drift away in, "I could've published, everyone in the crit-group said so..." sedation.
Even when everything “clicks” for the writer, first-chair of the crit group is not your destination. Under the best circumstances, groups have a short shelf life. Your skills should grow, your writing should improve, and you should level up—and out of the crit group.
“The best way to get something is to ask for it.” Morgan Hazelwood
In my journey, I went from the crit group straight to querying, with mixed results. After a number of rejection emails, I landed an agent for 15 minutes, (different rant different time). The agent pointed out that there was something wrong with the pacing in my story and that we needed to work on it.
And then I never heard from the agent again.
Since then I’ve run my story through a different kind of group: beta readers. Beta readers read your entire work as they would any other book. They give you broad feedback on tone, character development, plot, and pacing.
Your friends, family, that coworker who once thought about writing a book will tell you “oh, it’s good, I liked it…” Some may even read your book first, (jokes, kinda). But a pat on the back and an “atta boy” or “get it girl,” doesn’t improve your writing. For that you need an objective, critical eye.
The beta reader will tell you when your ending fails, when your beginning underwhelms, and/or when your middle sags, (common in writers my age). Often the beta reader is also a writer but this is not as important as that they are SERIOUS READERS. These are the folks who actively read, multiple books a year, (if not a month). No matter how smart that woman from work or class is, if she doesn’t read, often, she will be of no help to you whatsoever.
Your ideal beta reader may not be a writer but they understand the genre you write in. They may not understand story structure, pace, and story/plot arc—but they know when "it" isn't working. Literally, they are worth their weight in gold. Morgan Hazelwood has an EXCELLENT primer for you to consider when approaching a beta reader to get the feedback you need, here.
Beta readers are simply the best help you can get short of a development editor and much more economical.
Please note: if not implicit, the beta reader is the person you go to when you have a completed manuscript and have done all the diligence you possibly can—and not before. You only get to waste a person’s time once.
Your results may vary—and that's okay.
Also note: not every syllable of feedback will be helpful or useful. You are not required by law to implement the suggestions. Thank the reader/s for their time and consideration. DO NOT argue your case. The most important lesson a crit group taught me will serve you well here: NO DEFENSE OF WORK. Mostly, I’ve found that if you have to defend it—it doesn’t work.
The ultimate feedback option: write a check.
The MFA peer review thingy is great...if you’re an MFA candidate or graduate. But if you’re at the point where you’ve done crit groups and beta readers but still need help, this would be when you call in the professionals. A development editor is a person who has been in the publishing game. They know your genre, the industry, and will fine-tune your writing skills. What a development editor is not is a writing instructor. Like the beta reader, you need to have a completed story, written to the very limit of your ability and thoughtfully revised. Otherwise you’re wasting their time and your money.
Do or do not
Finally, all the hand-holding, guidance, and instruction does not change the fact that, eventually, you have to step out on your skills and trust your story. The crit group is to help you build your self-editing skills. The beta reader is the mirror that shows you the blindspots in your writing. The development editor is a diamond polisher who works your story into a shining gem.
Nothing will improve your writing more than writing and ruthlessly self-editing. All the help in the world will not overcome self-doubt. Just know that if you found the story compelling enough to re-read it (to rewrite it) dozens of times, there’s a good chance someone else will find your story just as compelling. But none of us will ever know unless you push on and get that story out there.
The photo above "The Menu" promotional poster is the property of Searchlight Entertainment, et al. Its use here, for instructional and educational purposes is covered by the Fair Use Act.
