Showing posts with label Critiques. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Critiques. Show all posts

Monday, December 26, 2016

Let's Celebrate The Season With A Holiday Writing Contest!

Contest Rules:


1. Write a 100-word story using the following words:
  • Santa
  • Reindeer
  • Elves
  • Candy Canes
  • Sugar Cookies

2. Post your story in the comments section OF THIS BLOG POST.


3. Include your email address in case you are the winner. (Email addresses and story titles do not count as part of your 100 words.)


4. Contest closes on January 2, 2017. The winner will receive a 5-page middle grade manuscript critique from me, Stefanie Wass, a three-time Pitch Wars mentor and member of the MG Beta Readers team.








Monday, June 20, 2016

Google is Good Enough Right?


Shrine in Kyoto, Japan
Let's talk about research for a second. We all know it's important to do our homework when writing about other locations, times in history, cultures, and people different from us. And Google is a wonderful place, surely that gets me everything I need to know to write an amazingly accurate book right?

Here's the thing, Google is pretty awesome, and will get you a good chunk of the way there, but if you want something accurate you need to go to a source. Here's why.
Kobe, Japan
I expected a modern city, but I also expected cool temples, and shrines. You see those in the movies all the time right? They must be every where. Not so much. In fact the city I stayed in, Kobe, was more industrial than anything. There were shrines but they were few and far between, and often quite small. And that grand city I thought I'd see wasn't really what I expected at all.
Kyoto Street Corner
Sure when I went into Kyoto on the weekend, I saw castles, temples, and shrines, but they weren't on every corner there either. We walked about 10 miles toward one temple without seeing any other shrines, castles, or temples. What we did see, a modern city which was more of what I had expected to see in Japan.
Kyoto street on the way to a temple
Another surprise, cities in Japan don't appear to have a beginning and end like they do in the US. When riding the train, one city seemed to meld into the next with no apparent city line or less populated area in between. Buildings and houses just seemed to go on forever with no break. In the areas I visited, there didn't seem to be any places where there were large fields and open spaces. In fact space is a premium here. You will frequently see rice patties right next to houses and other buildings. Not an inch of space is wasted.
Japanese Rice Patty
And the cosmetic differences were just the beginning of my adventure in Japan. The more I explored, the more alienated I felt. I found myself in a world where I didn't understand street signs, because not only were they in Japanese, but they were in characters I didn't recognize. I didn't understand the words being said to me on a regular basis. Ordering in a restaurant often proved challenging and we frequently resorted to pointing to pictures on a menu. We often passed by numerous restaurants before stopping at one because we had no idea even from the pictures what that place was serving. And with a seafood allergy, I had to be extremely careful to make sure I wasn't getting things I shouldn't be eating. On the flip side, in a lot of places, there was more English than I expected. I was able to get by, but things were still challenging.

Even the little things put me on my toes at times I didn't expect. The Japanese drive on the other side of the road, so that means looking the opposite direction when crossing a street. You don't realize how much of a habit looking right is until you almost get run over by a car. And that means the escalators are backwards to, you go up on the left. I lost count of how many times I tried to go up the down escalator in the hotel. Even just walking the path around the edge of Rokko Island I was constantly playing chicken with people and doing the back and forth dance because I'd move the wrong way to allow them to pass.
Nijo-jo Castle - notice the people walking in on the left and exiting on the right.
Even queuing up for the train was an adventure. Yes, there's a line, and if you get in the wrong one, you either aren't getting on the train or you're going to make people mad. I'd like to blame some of my ineptitude on being a stupid American, but after a while I just felt like a complete idiot. I started to wonder if people here would hate me for being such a moron. But even that is hard to believe, with how incredibly gracious, polite, and accommodating the Japanese people are. They always say thank you, they speak quietly and almost never raise their voices, and I can count on one hand the number of times I heard a car honk it's horn while driving and walking around.
Rokuon-ji - The Golden Temple
So why do I make a big deal about all these seemingly inane details about every day life? Because those are the details that can make all the difference between writing a book, and writing a believable one that your reader can get an immersive, true experience in. And because I never would have known all these things without visiting Japan in person.

So the next time you write about a place you've never been, a culture you've never experienced, or people that are different from you, stop for a minute and think about the ways you can learn about the things you don't understand. Take a vacation to the place you are writing about, interview people from the cultures you know nothing about, find beta readers who understand the experiences you are trying to portray.

While the internet is a wonderful place, nothing can replace having lived the experience. If you can't live it yourself, I implore you to find someone who has. Writing without having the source at hand, is the equivalent of using Google translate on another language, it generally gets the message across, but some things are lost in translation. And is that really how you want your book to be?

Translated sign in the restroom. Funny but somewhat lost in translation.

Monday, August 24, 2015

MG Minded Talks - Critiques

This month MG Minded is talking about Critiques. Here are the questions:

1) How do you prefer to give your critiques? On a line by line basis vs big picture? Focus on the positive? Something else?

2) We as writers are told we need to develop a thick skin, but how do you deliver constructive feedback in a way that doesn't completely cripple a writer's spirit?

3) What have you learned from critiquing others work?

Dan K
1) I focus on big picture and focus on the positive. If I can find something that will help them improve craft, I bring that up. 

2) To me the worst critique is the critique that gets people to stop writing. Lots of us are dealing with newish writers who are really only going to get better by writing more. Sometimes "constructive" criticism causes people to stop writing.




Brooks
1) I feel the most comfortable giving big-picture crits. Pacing has always been a strength of mine. But I'll give line edits any time a CP wants them.
 
2) By keeping in mind that stories we critique aren't our stories. They belong to another writer and
our job isn't to change the story, but to help it to be better. In doing that I always make sure my crits align with what the writer wants to say. That doesn't mean I won't suggest major changes to characters or plot, but I only do that to ensure my CP is going to be able to tell his or her story the most effectively. I'm also a big believer of adding in comments to lines or scenes I love. Not only do we need to know what isn't working, we need to know what does.

 
3) I've learned so much about building character relationships and dialogue. My CPs are incredible writers and I always feel blessed when I get to read something of theirs.


Jamie
1) I tend to be better with line by line. Even if I'm doing big picture, I always end up commenting on awkwardness of lines, my reactions as I go, and correcting mistakes. I feel bad not telling people about mistakes I see for fear they and/or someone else missed them.

2) I use the sandwich method. I always start and end with something positive. It's never hard to find at least two nice things to say about someone's work. I tend to be blunt but not harsh about the feedback I deliver what's working and what's not and possible suggestions for fixing things. But i always remind people that my feedback is one person's opinion and to use what works for them and ditch the rest.

3) Oh my gosh, so many things. What my strengths and weaknesses are. How to build up to stakes. How to set scenes so they are more visual. How to make characters that have depth and feel real. And it's increased my strengths in pacing, tension, and writing action scenes. Critiquing others also helps me see what areas I need to work on.
 


Tom M.
1) It depends on who it is and what they want. I'm okay with big-picture comments or pointing out things line by line. I'll highlight things I think are working, and sometimes offer open-ended suggestions in spots when alternatives might be explored.

2) If I ever feel I need to make a comment about something that doesn't work for me, I'll remind the writer that it's just my opinion about that one element and not an overall comment about the work. And I'll be sure to temper that by highlighting more positives in other places.

3) The biggest thing I get from critiquing someone else is being able to look at my own work with a more critical eye. 

Stacey
1) big picture mostly, but I point out what I see as I go. 
 
2) I point out what I think needs work and explain why. They why is big. It's never that you are just a bad writer, it's gaining new perspective. It's learning. "If you do this, instead of thi
s the reader will be able to...." that sort of thing. Anything subjective I tell them that I might be wrong, if they don't or agree they can/should find another set of eyes for a second opinion, or they might be able to come up with a better solution than me.

 
3) tons! Just a few examples: 


  1. Not everyone agrees. Some writing styles don't mesh. Some folks have a different idea of what makes good writing (like following all the rules or breaking them for style/voice purposes) 
  2. Starting in the right place is an art. Starting too soon, or with too much detail is boring, starting in action is confusing. Conflict right away is needed. 
  3. Also that the story should be moving towards something we can see coming (even if we don't know what "it" is yet, or you surprise us with a twist). Things just happening isn't good enough. It needs to build to keep the reader interested. (Some things you " know" already but you need to see it for it to sink in.) 
Jason
1) Big picture. I'm terrible at critiquing line-by-line. I end up swimming in the story instead of eyeing the water for fish out of place.

2) I never give the "constructive criticism" part of a critique until I've delivered the "what's great about this" part. No work is without some merit, and, in my experience, if you tell someone what works before you tell them what doesn't, they take it much more as "how to fix it" than "OMGIAMTERRIBLEIQUIT!"

3) How to think critically about story, even if I didn't make it up. 



Tom T.
1) Typically I give critiques by reading it as I would any book, letting stew a little bit, then going back and really thinking if the whole thing flows and makes sense in terms of big picture. I'm all about continuity, and making sure things connect the way they should, as that's the core of the story. You need to make sure that works before anything else. In my editorial letters I'm always just going off that, and I'll write notes in the actual MS but as Jason A Rust said, I'm atrocious at line-by-line also. Also...sandwich method for me - postive-negative-positive

2) SANDWICH METHOD. I learned the hard way what it takes to take and accept constructive criticism. Go-go art school

3) I've learned more from critiquing someone else's work than any other "book" on writing methods. Seriously, catching someone elses mistakes, and seeing what they do better than you improves your craft 10 fold
 

Friday, August 14, 2015

How To (Not) Be An Awful Critique Partner

I’m not going to mince words or tap dance around the pink elephant blowing bubbles in the family room last Thanksgiving*…I’m probably the last person in this particular sliver of the Milky Way you’d want to come to if you got a manuscript or some other work and need a critique. I mean, if your options are me, Simon Cowell, and Donald Trump, I guess I’d do, but totally only in that “lesser of three evils” kind of way.

Technically, I think that’d actually be one of those “lesser of one MG writer and two arch demons” situations, but let’s not split hairs.

The point is, if you want a good critique, I shouldn’t be your first stop. Believe me, I know a good critique partner when I see one. In fact, I have several excellent critique partners imprisoned in my basement, who I’ve apparently befuddled in some kind of inexplicable mystic thrall which keeps them willing to continue reading my scribblings despite that fact that I’m about as helpful a “partner” as a T-Rex is at a team LEGO building competition.

The problem is, when I read a book or watch a movie, I tend to have a singular, binary reaction to it. That is, I either love it or I hate it. And while love and hate are fantastic sources of conflict for a story, they aren’t so helpful when it comes to making something better.

“I LOVE this! It’s like rainbows and pixie dust are dancing in my head! Don’t change a word!”

“I HATE this festering pile of armadillo puke! It makes me want to burn things. ALL the things! You need to change every word!”

See? Not so constructive.

But if you do this writing thing for long at all, you’re soon going to want another person’s opinion of your work. But nobody wants to be the kind of leech who asks someone to critique their own stuff and then seizes up like a startled clam when asked to return the favor. Seriously, that’s how Bond villains get started. One day it’s, “Sorry, no, I don’t feel comfortable critiquing your ode to Jessica Rabbit” and next it’s, “I’m going to unleash my plasma sharks into the world’s oceans, which will destabilize the currency markets allowing me to rule from atop my mountain of actual gold bars!”

Ahem.  Sorry.

Anyway, in the interest of making sure I didn’t end up sporting an eye patch and a fancy polyester suit, while spending my weekends shopping for Secret Subterranean Hideouts, I figured I needed to get a handle on how to read someone else’s stuff and give them useful feedback. Here, then, are the things I try to keep in mind after reading something I’ve been asked to critique:

  • Be Upfront – I’ve finally gotten to the point that I’m happy to read something for a writer friend, but only if I deliver my caveats first. This doesn’t have to be the legal fine print of a car commercial, but you do want to set expectations. I always tell whoever I’m reading for what it is I’m good at, and not so good at, when it comes to critiquing. While I don’t particularly like admitting that my eyes fly over misspelled words in a story like a squad of F-18’s at the start of a NASCAR race, but the fact is that I’m terrible at copy-editing. Seriously, I even need a proof reader for my tweets. My brains sees what it wants, not necessarily what’s on the page, and it’s only fair that my critique victim partner knows that. Likewise, though, I do well when it comes to evaluating plot, and pace, and picking up odd character threads within it. As long as all parties know what to expect, everyone is happy.
  • Be Selfless – This is critiquing business is important, and it’s not about you. In fact, let’s repeat that, because it’s something most people (myself included) struggle with these days and it’s sorta basicall critical: This. Is. Not. About. You. It’s not about what you want from your writing or even what you want from the story your reading, it’s about helping your critique partner developer their story into the Most Fabulous Awesome Story possible. Put yourself aside, then, as you make your way through the critique, and focus on what’s important. 
  • Be Specific – Telling someone their story has less conflict than an aisle full of Strawberry Shortcake figures isn’t giving them anything to build on. Even if their story does need more conflict, a good critique means offering examples and suggestions. For instance, “Hey, that part when Muffet sits on her tuffet all day and enjoys the sunlight is great – I loved that we learn about her obsession with curds and whey there – but it kind of drags a little. Maybe toss in a visit from a lizard or a mouse or spider or something to spice it up and keep the reader on edge!”
  • Be Honest – This is kind of a no-brainer, but you’re not helping anyone if you can’t be square with them. Whoever you’re reading for wants to query or submit the very best work they can create, and if you offer a critique that glosses over parts that need serious work but might be difficult to discuss, you’re not helping anyone but yourself. And if that’s all you wanted to do with your day, you could have stayed at home and binge-watched Netflix.
  • Be Thoughtful – As a human, there are few things worse than bearing your soul to someone else and getting a kind of “meh” reaction in return. In fact, for every first “I love you” in life that’s met with “I need to pick up the dry cleaning”, a puppy morphs into a bridge troll. And let me tell you, a writer sharing their work with you is every ounce that same defenseless, soul-bearing experience. Don’t give them the feedback equivalent of “meh”, give them something with meat, something they can really chew up and digest. Think hard about what could make their story stronger, and would keep you turning from page to page to page.

Is this all likely to make you Critique Partner of the Year? No. Actually, I’m pretty sure that’s not a thing that’s real. But a thoughtful approach to a critique, even when you know it’s not you’re a-game, is, at least, likely to help your critique partner developer a better manuscript. And at the end of the day, isn’t making sure we all help each other share our best stories with the world pretty much the whole point of all of this?

Well, that, and making sure you keep from getting the critique cold shoulder yourself.

Did you ever suffer from Critiquing Cold Feet? How did you go about conquering it?

Pud’n


*Was that pink elephant only at my house? I knew I shouldn’t have sipped Aunt Edna’s “Coke”

Monday, July 27, 2015

The Power of Positive Critique – The Sandwich Method



I hate having to tell people what they did wrong. It’s hard and I don’t like disappointing people. And that is one reason why writing is so great--it’s subjective. Writing doesn’t have a lot of right and wrong to it. So when you critique you can focus on feedback that is telling the writer what’s not working for you as the reader. That said, if feedback isn’t delivered with care, it can be debilitating to a writer, especially one just starting out. This is why I love the sandwich method.

Yes I said sandwich, but unfortunately it’s not the eating kind. It’s the critiquing kind. So let’s decompose the sandwich method. In a standard sandwich you have the bread and the meat/veggie center. The bread is the good part. It’s got to be there otherwise you can’t have a sandwich. So when you critique someone it’s always helpful to start with something you liked about their work. Between characters, concept, story, setting, voice etc. you should be able to find something good about the work you are critiquing.

After first slice of bread comes the core of the sandwich. This is where you need to decide if you are a turkey sandwich, a ham sandwich, a BLT or something else. (I’m starting to get hungry) What goes on the sandwich is the things you want to discuss, what worked, what didn’t what might need some tweaking etc. You may choose to make this a turkey sandwich only and focus on just one issue that needs a lot of work, or you may decide you want a turkey with all the fixings, in which case you might discuss a lot of things you noticed. Just make sure you pile that sandwich with care. If you put the wrong combination of items it might not taste good. Or if you pile too high, the whole sandwich might topple over. Just like this…

I know that’s a bacon sandwich and what could honestly be wrong with bacon, but look at the structural integrity of that sandwich (sorry, I’m an engineer). That thing is a few strips of bacon from toppling onto that dirty table, and who wants gross bacon? Certainly not me. The same goes for meat of the feedback. If you pile too much on at once you risk knocking over the writer’s feelings. People have a threshold on how and what they can handle, so make sure you aren’t serving them a sandwich they can’t eat.
Yeah, I know, it’s all about the bacon. But you can’t have a sandwich without the top piece of bread. And that bread is again the good stuff. (Yes better than the bacon I SWEAR!) So make sure you cap off your feedback by again saying something nice. Start with good and end with good. If you do that, you’ll reel the writer in with what they really need to focus on without crippling them. Otherwise you might end up like this guy…
And we all know things didn’t turn out so great for him. So stick with the sandwich method. It allows you to deliver feedback in a nice way that will help the writer see what needs work without sending them home sad and hungry.

How do you like to give and/or receive your feedback?