Seek to Critique - March IWSG

I'm a big fan of critiques.  I like receiving them.  And I like giving them.

The benefits of receiving them are obvious.  The benefits of giving them, however, are varied and not always immediately evident.

I gave my first critique less than two years ago.  A dozen different insecurities flooded my mind as I did so.

• Who am I to recommend that this be changed?
• What if my suggestion ends up being the worst suggestion in the history of critiquing?
• How can I make sure my feedback will be received in the spirit intended?
• Did I word this comment so that its meaning won't be misinterpreted?
• Am I sure the writer's intent didn't just fly over my head?
• Maybe that section really is perfect and I'm just too dense to recognize it??

And on and on the doubts came and set up residence in my mind.  But had I never sent the critique, that residency would have become permanent.

As with anything we do in life, we improve with practice.  We grow more confident and strengthen our skills, both in analyzing another's words and in conveying ours.

But I've found that I'm the one who benefits most from the critiques I give.  I learn or reinforce grammar lessons.  I see the importance of word choice, sentence and story structure.  I discover new terms, new techniques, and get a feel for what works and what doesn't.  I find myself flagging a writer for something that I still do myself, and promptly make a note to change it in my own manuscript.

Critiquing enables a writer to view his own writing from different perspectives, making possible a more objective assessment of his own skills and tendencies.

Providing a good critique takes a fair bit of time if done well.  And when handled properly, the results will encourage as well as enlighten the writer who wrote the words under your microscope.

Almost two-thirds of my time reading over the past year has been for critiques.  And I do not regret it one bit.  I can only hope those who have received critiques from me have benefited from them as much as I did.

While receiving a critique benefits the receiver, giving a critique benefits everyone. So do everyone a favor. Seek to critique and learn from the experience.

(My apologies if this publishes as new again. I somehow managed to "unpublish" it.)

Sunday Surfing

Peggy Eddleman talks turkey: Pub Talk: Of Money and Book Deals

Jolly Fish Press reveals What We're NOT Looking for in a Manuscript and tips on Writing the Ultimate Query Letter

The YA's Dogtown is compiling The Ongoing List of Writing Round-ups which lists blogs that regularly link to other blogs' writing-related articles. (And yes, Sunday Surfing is included! Am I blushing?)

Short Fiction contest at The Kenyon Review (1,200 words max)

The One Thing An Author Should Never Do On Social Media...

A Special Thanks and Final Call:
I want to extend a most special thank-you to Lauren, Laura, Al and Liz. You read the initial version of The Bonding and provided valuable feedback.

I had planned to begin querying or submitting The Bonding by the end of January.  However, I feel a final round of proofing and critiquing is in order before I do so.  So, if you're interested in beta-reading The Bonding and providing honest feedback, please let me know.  (And I am happy to reciprocate.)

The Stages of a Geek's Manuscript

Most of you know that I'm a software developer (computer programmer) by trade.  As such, I've discovered a number of similarities between developing software and developing a manuscript.

Proof of Concept
A software developer will generate a proof of concept to determine things such as whether the chosen technology is stable or if the design can support the intended solution.

I liken this aspect of development to the initial thought process of writing the novel. This is the phase where the programmer determines if a project is feasible, or even doable.  The writer goes through the same process, proving that the story is worth the effort and can be written to satisfactory depth, length, tension, etc.

The Wireframe Model:
This is a high-level, mocked-up interface of the application. It reflects the developers' interpretation of the project's requirements and provides the customers with an expectation of what the programmers intend to deliver.  I equate this with all the planning, plotting and outlining an author must do in the early stages of crafting a novel.

Alpha-builds:
This is the early design delivered to customers for initial approval. Much of the actual program hasn't yet been written and much of what has will be deleted. The customers saw representations in the wireframe, but with an alpha build, they can actually do things and get a feel for how the project is progressing and where it's heading.  The customers' feedback then governs the project's continued direction.  Critique anyone?

Beta-builds:
At this stage, the programmers have taken all the feedback the customers provided and integrated it into a fully fleshed system.  All the major functionality is there.  Things should work--as expected.  People reading a novel at this stage of development should be able to provide more finely tuned suggestions.  "I was bored in this chapter" or "the pacing was a little off in this section" is the type of feedback I'd expect here.

Quality Assurance:
Developers have a love-hate relationship with QA because their purpose is to verify that everything works, right down to the mouse pointer's behavior. They'll catch the the typographical errors in dialog boxes and point out that things aren't centered or aligned properly. I find this similar to line edits and proofreading.

Deployment:
We're ready to submit! At this stage, manuscripts are in the hands of agents, sitting in a slush pile or are being self-published.  The programmer has incorporated each stage's feedback and produced a polished system. The author has also taken feedback from each stage and produced a polished novel.

Then we programmers either begin developing the next software application or enhancing the one just deployed. (Upgrades!)  For writers, that's either the next great novel or a sequel to the one just deployed.

Did you have any idea you had so much in common with us nerdy, geeky types?

Things With Which I Struggle

As writers, we all have our strengths and weakness.  When we identify our strengths we can exploit them.  When we identify our weaknesses we can watch for them.  I'm exposing myself in this post. (Don't worry, not like that!)  I'm revealing what I believe are mine.

Since I prefer my blog posts to be positive I'll start out with listing a few things that I think are my strengths.  I'll do the weaknesses list afterwards.  It's longer.

• Dialog.  I think this might be my strongest area.  I've been told by several kind folks that I write believable dialog.
• POV.  I'm pretty good at staying within the desired point of view.  I write almost exclusively in third person limited, past tense.  I'm most comfortable with it.  (I've tinkered more with first person lately, however.  Maybe I'm blogging too much?)
• Grammar.  I've got a decent handle on most of the more basic rules of grammar.  (How I ever managed this is completely beyond me.  I literally despised English in high school, a fact to which my grades bear witness.)  I break the rules quite often, but it's usually intentional.  Sometimes it's for effect.  Sometimes it's because I'm still a rebel at heart.

I've listed my numerous weakness in no particular order. If the day ever comes when you find yourself critiquing my writing, you'll need to watch for:

• Wordiness.  I'm too wordy. Period.  This manifests itself in everything I write and requires serious editing to correct.
• Prepositional Phrases.  Somewhat related to the above, these things spew from me like rain from thunderclouds.  (See?  Three of them in the very statement stating I have the problem!  How lame is that?)
• Repetition. I say something.  Then I say it again.  And again and again.  (Get my meaning?)  My thesaurus wants a raise.
• Passive voice.  It just comes so unbelievably natural to me.
• Proofreading.  I read what I intended to say, not what I actually wrote.  I know I'm supposed to read my sentences backwards.  It helps you spot duplicated or omitted words and makes catching typos a little easier.  But really, half my life is backwards.  I rarely do it.
• Commas.  Commas appear in my sentences everywhere I pause, before something I want to emphasize or set apart, when I take a breath, and normally before the word but.  I overuse them.
• Spelling.  This is how I know God loves me.  He gave me spell check!

So, when I post short stories, please feel free to comment on them.  Even those that have been up for a while.  Let me know if you enjoyed it--or if you didn't.  Heck, posting a critique in the comments is fine too!  I've got a thick skin and I like to know what worked and what didn't.  Constructive feedback helps not only me, but anyone else reading it too.

We learn by doing.  And we learn by feedback.  Our biggest weaknesses are the ones we don't know we have!

I'm all done exposing myself now.  What are your strengths and weaknesses?  And how do you exploit or watch for them?