Help on giving verbal critique?

[DarlingNikki]

So I joined a writing group in my city. It's great, I love it.

The problem is I have a hard time participating. I took two workshops last year, so I got lots of experience giving critique--when I had a whole week to read something a couple of times and write on it.

In this group people read their work aloud and then everyone who wants to can give comments. Unfortunately I'm not such a great listener. Unless something is absolutely fascinating, my mind wanders. Even if I try to force myself to pay attention, I start thinking about whether or not I'm paying attention and how I could do better, which is just as bad.

Even when someone reads something really cool, all I can formulate is "wow" or "I liked it" which, as we all know, is nice to hear but not helpful.

I really want to be helpful, both for the sake of my fellow writers and for my own sake... it wouldn't be right to read my stuff if I'm not critiquing other people's work.

Do I just suck or does this happen to other people? How can I pay better attention? Is there something in particular that I should be listening for when someone reads? I mean, I guess it's the same as what I should look for when I read to myself, but it seems so much harder. I want to be able to really examine something the way I would if I could read it for myself. What can I do?

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Typically giving critique on something you have heard versus something you have read is more difficult. Since you aren't seeing the written word much of what I think of as critique is impossible. Listening to someone read, especially if the work isn't something you really are into can be quite difficult.

One suggestion I have would be to train yourself to listen. Pick up an audio book or better yet, watch a TV program you have no interest in. Force yourself to listen to the words. Concentrate on things you can give feedback on. Does the dialogue flow? Do people really speak to each other like that? Do the words conjure mental images or are you relying on the words themselves to give meaning?

I suspect the reason you cannot concentrate well is beacuse the stories don't have a gripping flow when read aloud. We all tend to tune out when we aren't being stimulated mentally by something. If you do start to tune out, try to decipher why you did. Were the characters uninteresting? Was thelanguage too flowery or too stark? Did the flow of the story loose you because it bogged down in unnecessary details?

Best of luck

-Colly

 

[Guest]

I wonder -

if you would do better with the written story in front of you?

My children are not strong auditory learners. They easily miss what the teacher says because their minds tend to wander. . .

If the assignment is written on the chalkboard, however, they are able to process and retain the information.

Can you get a copy of the story to read while they read it aloud? It sounds as if you can critique, so the difficulty may be with the way you process the initial information.

It's worth a try, anyway!

Good luck!

 

[Guest]

Ooooh, Colly!

I just have to say - Delicious AV!

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Re: Ooooh, Colly!

I just have to say - Delicious AV!

Thanks bunches

*HUGS*

-Colly

 

[Gary Chambers]

So I joined a writing group in my city. It's great, I love it...In this group people read their work aloud and then everyone who wants to can give comments. Unfortunately I'm not such a great listener. Unless something is absolutely fascinating, my mind wanders...

Nikki, I joined one of those about five years ago and had exactly the same experience. In the end I just left the group. I belong to two online writer's groups and feel I can give and receive much better critiques online than in the scenario you describe. I found the biggest problem with the real life version was that some pieces may have been well written, but covered topics that could not hold my attention. We had one lady, for example, who wrote endlessly about her gardening hobby. She was a personal friend and I enjoyed sitting outdoors in her garden some days sharing snacks, cold drinks and stimulating conversation, but reading about it or having it read to me just left me numb. I couldn't tell her that because I knew it would hurt her, so I allowed myself to drift away instead. Perhaps the ideal thing would be an online group with members who are close enough geographically to get together for social events now and then, but keep their serious critiques and debates confined to cyberspace. The other group I belong to does hold an annual dinner and dance for members, but I've never attended because it's always in Washington DC and I live in British Columbia.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I’m really not sure that doing a critique of a reading has much bearing on the author’s writing. Certainly Books-On-Tape has a great following, and hearing an author read his/her works can be very enlightening, but I’m just not convinced that written prose and oral prose are equivalent and interchangeable.

Certainly you can’t say anything about an author’s mechanics when they read you their story, because you don’t have access to their spelling and punctuation. But more than that, it’s possible to read something aloud in such a way as to make it better than when it’s read silently. Writing, unlike speaking, has no access to inflection or gesture, intonation and timing.

I’ve never had to critique a piece of writing when I didn’t have a copy in front of me, and off hand I’d guess that it’s very difficult to say anything meaningful about a spoken story except in terms of the broadest macro features like plot and character motivation. Even in a playwriting class I had we all had copies of the script.

Personally, I think I’d write differently if I knew I were going to be reading a piece out loud, and I have a lot of reservations about the value of this class in improving your writing.

---dr.M.

 

[Black Tulip]

Not really helping maybe, but you could be a very visual person. I know I could never react to sound alone, I have to see.

The suggestion of reading along with the listening is a good one I think.

I agree with dr. M on the value of reading.
My writing would be something completely different if I had to read it out loud.

For starters I could never pronounces my sentences the way they sound in my head.

 

[Gary Chambers]

Not really helping maybe, but you could be a very visual person. I know I could never react to sound alone, I have to see.

The suggestion of reading along with the listening is a good one I think.

I agree with dr. M on the value of reading.
My writing would be something completely different if I had to read it out loud.

For starters I could never pronounces my sentences the way they sound in my head.

Yes, Doc has probably hit the nail on the head, except perhaps for poetry. I believe poetry must be read aloud to be appreciated, and sometimes it must be read by its author if it is to make any sense at all. You still can't critique the structure, punctuation etc., however, so maybe even poetry requires us to have hard copies in hand as we listen to the reading. As I said earlier, I think the main advantage of real life writer's groups is the social contact. I never got much from them in terms of improving my writing.

 

[Guest]

Chuckling -

I wonder how you could read erotic stories out loud to a group like that?

I mean honestly, just how would you say, "I'mmm cummmmmmiiiiinnnnnnGGGGG!!!!!!"

(I have NEVER used that in one of my stories, by the way, it's just a thought!)

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Re: Chuckling -

I wonder how you could read erotic stories out loud to a group like that?

I mean honestly, just how would you say, "I'mmm cummmmmmiiiiinnnnnnGGGGG!!!!!!"

(I have NEVER used that in one of my stories, by the way, it's just a thought!)

Usually at the top of your lungs, with a few grunts, groans and moans for background

-Colly

 

[Guest]

Yes!

But I need props!

And visual aids!

And - and - and -

Well, hell! I'll need a partner to help with this demonstration, please!

 

[Pure]

Hi DarlingNikki,

I can appreciate your being intimidated, and maybe you're not interested, and there's no cure. And maybe they're bad writers.

That said, I don't see the great problems mentioned by dr. m,., as in 'can't see the spelling.' We all have been to movies, haven't we? Don't we come out and say (leaving aside visual and cinematogrphic issues), "That stunk. The dialogue was shitty. The plot unbelievable. [etc]"

I don't see that you're stuck with only 'broad macrofeatures." You just can't see the written word, just as for all of us for most movies, unless one lays hold of the screen play. I believe the same would hold for a play I heard on the radio.

Perhaps DN, if you had some specific questions in your mind, at the start, possibly supplied by the author, as is done in the story disc.circle at lit, that would help.

I'm not sure of the type of 'story' you're hearing, or if it's maybe just a passage. The latter would be harder, but even if it's a paragraph describing a mountain, there are a number of critique questions that might be posed, such How fresh/boring is this description? What mood is conveyed?

Final note: It IS relevant if you're bored. It's just possible that the writing *IS uninspired and boring, and the writer may benefit(gain in knowledge, at least) by hearing "That put me to sleep. IT did not capture my imagination or interest at all."





Just some ideas.

 

[Guest]

Based on experience I agree with Mab. and Gary. I was never in a writing group where we had to merely listen. We were always provided the copies (for prose, poetry is another issue). Why not bring this up with the instructor, Nikki? Couldn't hurt.

The film analogy doesn't work. However much the script is important you cannot "leave aside" visuals and cinematography, they are what make it a film.

Perdita

 

[gauchecritic]

I'm pretty sure that anyone who has done any 'public speaking' will be able to spot straight away what is 'wrong' with the experience Nikki.

Writing is not speaking. Someone mentioned inflection, this is the crucial point.

Reading is as much a skill as writing (witness the stories with audio) and a poor reader can kill a well written story as much as an experienced reader can enliven a poorly written story.

When I was regularly called to speak to audiences my script bore only a resemblance to what I actually spoke whilst conveying the same message. I found I could leave out sentences, sometimes a paragraph because of the way I spoke a previous sentence.

If you're supposed to critique writing then you need the writing.

If this isn't possible then pick one (maybe two) things to speak up about.

Otherwise, learn shorthand.

Gauche

 

[Pure]

One buys a 'book on tape'.

One listens to it.

One can deliver critique/comment focussing on dozens of issues.
I fail to see the problem at all, though I agree one can't comment on spelling and punctuation.

It's of course a more pleasant experience if the reader has some oral-reading/ speaking skills, e.g., those that go with acting. I've heard well known authors give readings of their stuff, and some have that skill and some do not.

 

[DarlingNikki]

Thanks all.

Well... I joined this group as much to improve my social life/skills as my writing and it's been great for the former, so I'm planning to stick with it. I also just like being around other writers.

As for the critique part... you guys raised some good points. I am definitely a reader more than a listener in general. Even when I was studying Spanish, I needed to see the written word in order to properly hear it when it was spoken, same with French, despite the differences from English in pronounciations of letters.

It's not entirly practical to have people bring in copies of their work because of the nature of the group. We never know who's showing up or how many. (Which is one of the things I like--once it becomes an obligation, it stops being fun) But I will bring up my concerns to the guy who started the group. Maybe we can post stuff on the message board or something.

 

[Dirt Man]

Here in is the truth...

I'm pretty sure that anyone who has done any 'public speaking' will be able to spot straight away what is 'wrong' with the experience Nikki.

Writing is not speaking. Someone mentioned inflection, this is the crucial point.

Reading is as much a skill as writing (witness the stories with audio) and a poor reader can kill a well written story as much as an experienced reader can enliven a poorly written story.

When I was regularly called to speak to audiences my script bore only a resemblance to what I actually spoke whilst conveying the same message. I found I could leave out sentences, sometimes a paragraph because of the way I spoke a previous sentence.

If you're supposed to critique writing then you need the writing.

If this isn't possible then pick one (maybe two) things to speak up about.

Otherwise, learn shorthand.

Gauche

Gauche is absolutely correct as your question pertains to critique. Poets read their work outloud all of the time, but never for critiquing by others. That is done with the work long before it is ever read outloud in front of people, and with the poem in front of all concerned with critquing it. The same can be said for prose in that since you don't have a copy of it, then all you can critique is the reader, and the way that they are reading it, and not the prose itself as they may or may not be an inspiring reader. And too, just like some poets they may be saying outloud what isn't exactly there right in front of their faces.

Now if these people want honest critique of their work, then they should supply a copy of the work so that you can do just that, and bring it back the following week. However if they want critique on their reading skills, then listening to them read is the way to go, very similar to an audition for a radio show, or voice over performer. And to be honest you should bring this up at the next meeting for as it stands now, these meetings are useless to all concerned in their present state of affairs. You may find out that you aren't the only one there confused by the way this has been run thus far.

Now if they go for real critique then the thing to do is make the critique annonymous as possible. The leader could take one copy from each of the group, take the manuscripts out of sight long enough so that he can shuffle put them in folders, then bring them all back and redistribute them amongst the group. In this way people can give real critique without having the author get pissed off, and signaling anyone out for their verbal tantrum.

As Always
I Am the
Dirt Man

 

[The_Fool]

Movies and plays are meant to be seen. Songs are meant to be heard. Written works are meant to be read. When a written work is read aloud, the reader is offering an interpretation. Written works are meant to be interpreted individually by each reader. The writer, of course, paints the scene and provides the cues, but the reader provides the color.

Offering up a written work in oral format to me is providing entertainment, not a method of seeking criticism.

 

[Guest]

Fool,

Thy wit shall ne`er go slip-shod. Lear, I.v

Perdita

 

[Pure]

Hi Fool,

You said,


Songs are meant to be heard.

Are not some songs (also) 'meant to be read' by the singers?

Would the critiquing of them require a look at the sheet music?

What counts as a song?

Taking the example of a symphony (which perhaps you did not intend to address), is it 'meant to be heard'? would a music critic have to study the score?

Written works are meant to be read.

On the face of it, nonsense. Are not ad jingles 'written works'?

what does "meant to be read" mean? "meant only to be read"?

does it mean "only to be read, NOT aloud."

What is a 'written work'?

Is a radio play a 'written work"? It seems so.

It's of course "meant to read (aloud)" by the radio actors,

but one could equally say, it's also and primarily "meant to be heard."

Is a movie script, or the directions to the cinematographer, not written work? Yet that's meant also, perhaps primarily, to be seen.

Children's books are often equally 'meant to be read aloud.'

-----
In all, you propose a bunch of unthoughful and vague slogans:

I suppose they're "meant to convince", but they fail, utterly.

You utterly confuse issues of writer's intention, intended audience, and possible intentions of (varied types of) critics, which may all differ.

Nothing precludes a pop music critic, say, of the Beatles's Song,
"Revolution," from looking at the written music, if he pleases. Or not. The 'meant to be heard', the possible author's intent, does not bind the critic.

"Wise words in mouths of fools do oft themselves belie."
Monty Python.

J.

 

[Rumple Foreskin]

DN,

IMHO, the type of critique session you described is the least helpful. I agree with Gary C (poetry doth flow from my fingers) that an online group would be much better. As Doc pointed out, short stories and novels are written to be read visually. It's true that a lot a folks, me included, listen to more books than we read. And when it comes to things such as names in Russian novels or postmodern fiction lacking standard punctuation marks having someone else deal with all that can be a blessing. However, most recorded words first appeared in print.

Some folks just have trouble focusing on spoken words. After all, bedtime stories are supposed to put you to sleep. Since that seems to be your situation, find another group, if not locally, then maybe online.

In theory, the Story Discussion Forum here at Lit should be available for that purpose. But while a few of us such as Doc, Pure, and Colly try to help out, in reality it's fallen on pretty hard times.

Rumple Foreskin

 

[MathGirl]

I agree with Dr M (yes, really), DMan, Rumple, etc. Listening to someone read his stuff is much different than reading it yourself.

I tried a book-on-tape once, and the author was reading his novel. It wasn't an erotic book, but there was a sex scene. When he had to read aloud, ""Oh, fuck me, fuck me," she groaned," you could tell he was embarrassed and it sort of ruined the whole thing. Some things are best left on the printed page.

MG

 

[gauchecritic]

Pure,

I realise that for whatever reason you ignore me but in answer to your indelicate response to The Fool I'll paraphrase one of the US Presidents. "Read. My. Post."

Either that or tell me you have an inordinate amount of public speaking or acting experience. If not, you know not of where you speak, and I dub thee fool.

Gauche

 

[Guest]

Better a witty fool than a foolish wit. (12th Night)