8/14/2019 Writing by Committee / Carrie Lofty

1/5

8/14/2019 Writing by Committee / Carrie Lofty

2/5

engaging American readers. Since both my partners \\rereCaucasian women, born and raised n the U.S.. thev wereideal-my own personal guinea pigs." When analr'zing hedisconnect between our creative brains and u-hat makes t ontothe page, our own personal uinea pigs can be inraluable, no

matter what we write.

"Th*r*u*m l*v*l *{ trwst nv*lvedn o critiqt: z*gpffirtner*kiphrst *ast?s* ***r*d for ihe parr**r^xhip r: w*rL."

- {h*r **rrmmn

Writing by Gommittee

These good intentions and hoped-for benefits don't alwaysmateialize. One of the biggest detriments cited by my respon-dents was the fear of "writing by committee." About her manycritique group experiences, multipublished author KarenWhiddon said, I noticed how everyone's oices were becom-ing generic." Without individuality, a writer loses not only hercreative voice and her ability to attract the interest of agentsand editors, but her motivation for writing in the first place.

Patti ShenbergerCandid Seductions) warned against this

development when she wrote, "Ifyou stay, you end up chang-ing your voice to suit the others, and you'11 end up hating yourown work."

Sally MacKenzie (The Naked Wscount) eferenced herone-time experience with a critique group: "Mainly, I leftbecause found myself writing to the group. They had becomemy audience; wanted their approval." As she gathered hercreative courage and matured as an adist, she no longer feltthe need or validation from many sources. Now, her agent sher supporl. "This way I only hear one voice, and hat voice issomeone who has a stake n my career.". Shayla Black (Possess Me at Midnight) didn't necessari-

ly write by committee, but she did find herself holding back.She oned down her naturally sexy style to keep from offend-ing other members of her longstanding critique group. "Isometimes ailed to push the envelope because knew my cri-tique mates would not like it, and I didn't want to hear thecomplaints." Although Black says she would've "given up inutter frustration" without her group's suppoft, she needed obreak free of their moderating nfluence in order to achieveand nurture her true voice.

Sounds Good. Keep on Writing.

Even more prevalent han fears of writing to the middle weremy respondents' ales of mismatched ambitions and inten-tions. When group members do not write at a similar level of

time commitment, professionalism, nd craftsmanship, esent-ments can arise. "I found that I was making the same com-ments o group members, often about grammar or marketabil-ity," shared Mira author Mindy Klasky (How Not to Make aWish). "They disagreed with my advice or weren't able toimplement t, which left me feeling as f my time was wastedin reading their work." Cara Marsi (Logan's Redemption)revealed he most basic critique she eceived, one hat prompt-ed her to reevaluate her commitment. t simply read, "Soundsgood. Keep on writing."

Sometimes writer's skills aren't at ssue, ut her dedica-

tion to professional oals. Unpublished omance writer M. I.Anderson said ofher critique group, "No one had real expec-tations of being published; heir writing was more of a hobby."Lynn Rae Hanis (Cavelli's Lost Heir) also noticed his tenden-cy. She said, "Some people don't have goals and are simplythere because t's a hobby they think will help them findwhat's missing in their lives." An author who wished toremain anonymous had this to contribute: "As one friend said,'Being in the group made me feel like a writer even when Iwasn't writing."'

This process of tuming a critique group into a stagnant

social club fiustrated many of my respondents. They wereforced to decide whether he devotion of their time and ener-gy was worth it, especially when their need or useful critiqueswas not being met...and especially when friendly groupsturned mean.

Meon Girls, Feeding Frenzies, ndEnqblers

Nearly every respondent cited examples of mean-spiritedbehavior. Although my call for survey eplies may have acted,in part, as a se lf-fulfilling prophecy in that discussing cri-tique group drawbacks surely attracted some with grievancesto vent-there's no denying how personal dynamics mpact anauthor's satisfaction with her group.

Larger assemblies often can deteriorate into whatMaureen Lang called group think, "where one person's ten-dency oward negative nput is oined by others until a feedingfrenzy erupts." When such opinions dominate, t may be diffi-cult to hear-or make heard dissenting voices. An anony-mous espondent aid ofher online experience, I did no t postany more comments because was ganged up on, ripped apart,

)iC.il"t',?i:li ?OOq RNv ,

8/14/2019 Writing by Committee / Carrie Lofty

3/5

swom at, and condemned y many of the group members."Moderators do not necessarily ssuage his possibility whenthey aren't strong enough to keep order in the group. EllenWehle described er in-person group leader as "a nice per-son," but one who refused o take charge. Members nterrupt-

ed, argued with, and belittled each other," Wehle said.Small groups bring their own problems, especially when

a "fishbowl" view of publishing keeps members rom tacklingareas of deficiency. When one anonymous espondent oined

a small, ong-established roup, she quickly realized hat dis-senting opinions-no matter the source would not be toler-ated. Feedback rom contestjudges nd ejections rom agentsand editors were not analyzed with improvement n mind, butwere instead ridiculed to help members feel better. "Theywere hindering hemselves," aid he source. They had nsidejokes, pithy comments, and group stories o bind them. They

had ceased o be a critique group and had become a clique."

"l tr*st r*{*{t* **ntinu*wr:wner*g d*** *t{ t*l\:tr,'

awtk*r rixnd* ** th*n g*tting *psy vryvtty **t*

rg*d&rg.u '

- %kt&*k'fr:lV"*r

This same anonymous author advised, "Friendships ingroups like that are great, but when the friendships becometoo tight, friends cease o be critics." Interesting, hen, howthis realization stands n direct contrast o what many writersclaimed as a major reason or oining a critique group, name-ly camaraderie and supporl during their publishing joumey.

The very bonding process hat helps some women invest inone another's uccess an become a barrier o growth.

Another conflict stemmed from issues of self-worth.

Some people oin critique groups o find validation: deservethis dream of becoming a successful writer. But, that need orsupport can become an mpediment o honesty. Author MarciaJames said one critique pafiner "couldn't separate er writingfrom her self-wor1h. Any gentle suggestions made about hermanuscript were perceived as attacks on her, her intelligence,her writing skills, etc." On the flipside is this comment fromLori Brighton (Wild Heart) regarding forceful personalities:"Bullies can be very detrimental o your self-esteem, special-ly when you're f,trststarling out." A budding storyteller mightjoin a critique group with the intention of educating herselfabout the craft of writins. but that same newbie can have her

voice, story and ove of writing co-opted y toxic members.Dominant personalities can dictate the tone of any critiquegroup. Joelle Charbonneau (Skating Around the Law)explained it this way: "While everyone means well, some-times people get caught up in showing how much they know

about he craft of writing, instead of focusing on what is real-ly useful to the person asking for the critique." Without cleargoals and he selfless pplication fthe authors'knowledge,critique group can deteriorate nto a contest of egos or, as oneanonymous respondent offered, "like one of those realityshows with people forming alliances." Such tendencies areonly exacerbated hen you throw publishing success nd pro-fessional ealousy into the mx.

A Friend's Success

Oscar Wilde once wrote, "Anybody can sympathize with thesufferings of a friend, but it requires a very fine nature o sym-pathrze with a friend's success." My, oh my, is that true amongwnters.

My own decision to leave a large online critique groupcame when I sold my debut novel, What a Scoundrel Wants.Contributors, who had once regarded me as a newcomer, andthen as an equal, began to defer to my judgment. Their cri-tiques became ess horough and heir feedback ess assured.hesitated o share good news for fear ofoffending or upsetting

unpublished members, and I no longer felt comforlable shar-ing unpublished deas with online group members 'd nevermet n person.

Time commitments also became a significant issue, asthey did for Shayla Black. She explained, Before I left, therewas definite grumbling about me treating my deadlines as ifthey were more important than anything else. In my mind,they were."

For these easons, nd because my need or wide-rangingopinions and nformation had been empered by experience,now work with critique paftners ather han a large group.

The process of narrowing one's field of influence wasrevealed across he majority of my respondents. Marilyn Brant(According to Jane), a long-time member of the ChicagoNorth chapter, wrote, "I, personally, prefer ncreasingly small-er circles of critiquing." As writers become more confrdentand skilled. rve often require fewer opinions to judge the suc-cess of our ideas. Even authors such as Shiloh Walker(Hunter s \-eed) and Ava Gray (Skin Game), who eschew par-ticipating n formalized groups, have nothing but praise ortheir creatir.e nner circle.Walker said, I just prefer o contin-ue bouncing ideas off fellow author friends and then gettinginput tiom my beta readers." Such personal, ow-key altema-

)i:(.,i\/E lF. ?{)i)? Fi}'lF

8/14/2019 Writing by Committee / Carrie Lofty

4/5

tives to more strucfured critique groups may be ust what youneed o balance desire or objective eedback with issues ftime management nd nterpersonal drama.

An Oceqn of Good Will

If you take anything away from this article , remember hat cri-tique groups must f,rt your needs n order to provide theirpotential benefits. Poor groups hat spoil your love of writingor damage our creative self-worth-or, conversely, hose hatoffer nothing but constant, growth-hindering praise-will beto your detriment as an artist.

When it comes ime to leave, he authors who replied tomy survey offered this advice: do so politely. Some simplystopped attending in-person meetings or stopped postingonline. Others mentioned having waited so long to leave adestructive group that the break was difficult and fraught withhurt feelings. "I regret some of the things I said," wrote CaraMarsi. "Lesson eamed: don't let frustrations eat at you." And,always keep n mind how unpredictable his business can be.Lori Brighton finished her survey with this bit of advice: "Be

respectful. Connections are always a plus, and you neverknow who could be the next best seller!"

Within the confines of a successful, areer-enhancing ri-tique group, a friend constifutes omeone whose ntentions andambitions align with yours and, above all, is honest. Many com-plaints I received about rotten behavior and tetchy dynamicsstemmed rom members' nability to give or receive honest

feedback. Remember hat a writer who wishes to submit herwork to the wider world must be strong enough o accept hemyriad opinions hat work can produce. And, while no singleopinion is entirely correct or unbiased, we can expect he cri-tiques we give and eceive o come rom a generous lace. EllenWehle said t best when she wrote, "It takes only a drop of intel-lect to gleefully point out a story's flaws; to actually help theauthor, howeveq equires an ocean of insight and good will."

E:t fi lG ffii gl

Born in Califurnia and raised n the Midwest, Carrie Lofly

found the love of her life in England She earned her master'sin history with a thesis on Old West outlaws and the signifi'cance oflegend,Iler January 2010 elease, Scoundrel's iss,

featuring a Spanish warrior monk and the troubled womanhe's sworn to protect, is the sequel to her debut, What aScoundrel W anIs. www. ar e offv. o m / F o ow fw tt er. om/carrielofQ.

: "lt

o

6rc

rco

L

?

Meet Ol'ler UTHORSJearAdamsl*raAthianFllizebethAmberAngelique{rnrml\anD,AmoldBelindalarnesjenniferBnrselAmandalrianD:niellaBrodikvRavnenelilrgess

Chrisfine utierCarolynn ueCan1,

Ji'anne ailoCadyC;usnntalla ChaseJoriil,ynn)ryelandPaqCoprlardlisaDalel(M,I]:rughtemGaillhyton

JosieDennisSnan Diekinson

tlnn hlanMA.duBany1'eri DulnngMichele un:rvayArianDupreMuv ,a.sonIlam BthnondEon

PattiischerfiellyHtupilIrickMarie txceCarolne SeDebhie authierJudithCilbeflPepper oodticltJillizrn allowellJennn'rrie {anillonNarury enderson

Carerlw ughrySanSJamesMeKennaJeftiesLea.me{'alellaErinKelliffnRutirD. KerceSve {nighfAnne elarulMichr:lleibbvCathieinz

Janiee nnAblnryM*clnnisPhoebedadison

MariluMannJuliaMorinlpNa&u4haMorrel',iicole orlhBreilaNovgkClaudia ernbenrm

JudiPhiliipsEfiznbeiliinaJane eopold uinnConnie aihal

Tex;aRadlryMonaRiskliumne Ru:kRaqqel odriguezIacq $avagePuliShenhergerArianna$lweTenl Spuu'Cricket uffHeien cott avtorXathyc homtonBerh risselCarolina\hldezliusan aughanJeanMnrieWmdfindaVan'enlbnvLeeWildeBrcrd:rWiliianxonjVihon

Frwn The Hesrt Rmnunce WritersRWA Online Chapter 177 I wwrv.fthrw,colrl

8/14/2019 Writing by Committee / Carrie Lofty

5/5