by Tosh McIntosh
After beginning my first novel in the early ’90s, I split my effort between devouring how-to books and writing the story. I completed the first draft in about two years without so much as a single critique input from an outside source.
Flush with the thrill of having succeeded in one of the hardest things I’d ever done, I revised the book a number of times until I considered it ready for submitting to literary agents and promptly received in return a heavy dose of bad news. The numbers: 50 submissions, 45 rejections, and the remaining five were no replies or undeliverable as addressed.
After joining the Writers’ League of Texas and taking a sponsored six-week novel-in-progress course, I tried again with my second novel and failed to get an agent. When a member of the WLT staff suggested that participation in a critique group could broaden my understanding of the craft and help me become a better writer, I joined NIP and have been participating actively for over 10 years.
My very first meeting convinced me that I had discovered a group of like-minded writers who weren’t interested in a mutual-admiration-society fluff group nibbling cookies and drinking tea. These folks were serious, and it didn’t take long to appreciate the multi-layered advantage of participation in a critique group. The subtitle of this post could be . . .
ADJUSTMENT OF EXPECTATIONS
I joined up primarily to put my writing in front of others under the assumption that this opportunity would provide the most benefit. But it didn’t take long to realize that while being critiqued is essential to leaving the isolation of the writing desk, three other crucial advantages accrue to NIP members, each of which offers invaluable learning opportunities.
Surprise expectation number one arrived in the form of expanding my knowledge of other genres, which I think by association helped me better understand my own. My comfort zone in both reading and writing is commercial fiction, and primarily mystery/thrillers. To be handed a submission outside that narrow area of interest forced me to critique stories that I wouldn’t normally read.
There’s a downside for the writer being reviewed, in that I can’t offer much in the way of genre-specific advice, but it is my belief that the majority of story-structure principles transcend the boundaries we choose to market fiction to a target audience. By doing my best to offer something of value and trusting the recipients to accept or reject my comments as they see fit, that process in and of itself has benefited me.
The second revelation proved to be even more valuable. Multiple writers read the same material for a roundtable, and each of us approaches critiques from a unique perspective. Time and time again, other NIPers have seen things I missed completely, and my own writing has been enriched by incorporating these wordsmithing nuggets.
The last value-added component is the potential for developing critique-buddy relationships.
We don’t meet for roundtable during the month of December, and sometimes lose another meeting due to closure of the Austin Recreation Center on the Easter weekend. At our current membership, that equates to no more than receiving two critiques per year if everyone is actively submitting.
During the years I’ve been a member of NIP, individual members have often traded material to obtain the benefit of more frequent outside input. This has also led to creating smaller spin-off critique groups, some of which meet weekly. One group meets at my house, and the association has been worth every moment of commitment required.
Not all writers are meant to participate a critique group, and not all groups are compatible with every writer who joins up. But when the union works, a synergism develops that makes collaborative exploration of the craft an invigorating experience that helps us keep on writing.