Critiques and Subjectivity

 Thanks to Skye for another intriguing blog hop challenge! This time, it’s about whether or not we work with a critique group or partner.

 Over my sixty-plus years as a writer, I’ve had varied experience with critique partners.

 My first experience came in Grade 4 at school when my teacher, Mrs Ting, went above and beyond in her response to my stories. She not only marked spelling and grammar but put little comments in the margin and actively encouraged me to write at home as well as at school. I used to bring in my “home” stories and she’d mark them for me. My handwriting was terrible, so that was pure dedication.

 My high school English Expression teachers, Mrs Collis and Mrs Rockliff, were equally engaged so I was very lucky.

 At home, I had my elder sister, who is also a writer. She knows my writing inside out, and always puts her fingers on my chief weakness which is a general avoidance of drama. Decades on, she remains my best critic.

 When I started in the publishing business, my editors wrote long and detailed assessments and suggestions for my mss. I didn’t always agree with their points, but eventually I came to understand they were critiquing from a publishing view rather than an artistic one. They always wanted more explanation and simpler words than I wanted to write. Readers won’t understand this… That always puzzled me. Why wouldn’t they? I understand this, and my IQ is nothing unusual. Besides… there are such things as dictionaries.

 The first critique groups I entered were in the age of the internet. For the first time I encountered writers who worked in my genres but who lived in the US, Canada and the UK and New Zealand. I found the styles and ideals very different. American writers always wanted more explanation and every step of a journey detailed, whereas the UK writers, like me, were content to use bridges and allusions. The differences went far beyond a trifling difference in spelling. The tone was different.

I once mentioned in a forum that I could pick the difference between an Australian writer, a UK writer and an American from a single paragraph without any tell-tale or/our/am/amme spelling or placename on show. I was surprised at the hostility this brought down on my head. Prove it. In a blind test, three writers, UK, US and AUS, produced a paragraph of narrative and a fourth member posted it.

 I had no trouble proving my point. I will admit that if a Kiwi and Canadian had been tossed into the mix I might have had to back down.

How did you do that?

 Easily. The tone was a dead giveaway. People often mention British humour as being different from American humour. Well, this is like that.

 Fast forward to the 21^st Century. I belong to an international critique group where I am constantly reminded that critique comes from many directions. Some members simply paraphrase what I wrote. Some fix on a word (Mrs) and enquire why I missed the period. Others jump in at Chapter Eleven and ask why I didn’t describe the main character. Still others query my syntax… got? Surely you mean gotten?

I continue to post to that big group though, because their comments are salutary reminders that not everyone has the same mind furniture as I do. The experience has improved my own assessment and editing work because I have learned to always take into account the author’s cultural background and the culture of the expected readers.

 I also occasionally swap mss or published books with writer friends who will either critique or review as required. Again, these trusted allies (Hello, Dr Bob!) keep my feet on the ground and make me see my work as ithers see it.

 I would like to belong to a physical critique group, but as far as I know there isn’t one close enough for me to attend. Also, in rural areas, the chance of finding enough writers at the same level writing the same genre (or for the same age group) is low.

So… I go on critiquing and editing for others, using all my own experience of being critiqued, and providing the kind of service I would wish was more available, more understanding, and more affordable for more people. The more affordable is a strong point. A paid critique such as I provide is less likely to be subjective because I and my fellow editors know when we’re being subjective. It’s intensive work—much more difficult than writing—and yet to price it at its intrinsic value would put it out of reach for the people who might need it most. My rates are well below the minimum wage and still some clients have to ask for extensions and payment plans.

In an ideal world, they’d find a capable critique partner with extensive knowledge, no axes and no preconceptions... maybe they'd find their own version of Dr Bob or my sister!

 Please check out my fellow bloghoppers for their post links...

Victoria Chatham
 Bob Rich 
Anne Stenhouse
Diane Bator
Skye Taylor