|
QUESTIONS
& ANSWERS
Q.
Is this a course?
A. No.
Q. Is there a tutor?
A. We are all tutors on what we think we know
about writing and share that for what it is worth.
The facilitator doubles as the group's main guide
to how the format is designed to work.
Q. Is this a discussion group?
A. No. You listen to what is said and, when it
is your turn, you say your piece. You retain control
over what you learn by debating things in your
head (noting down whatever you feel you can use,
ignoring the rest). In the words of Peter Elbow:
"Everyone is right AND wrong (i.e., from
some point of view or other in what they have
to say)."
Q. Can I read long works?
A. If your extract or work is 2000 words or more,
you can book a session in advance to read it out.
But
see next Q&A. Note it is usual to read it twice.
Q. What are the main rules?
A.
- No
verbal introductions made on the nature of what
is about to be shared.
- No
direct questions to the author about the content
afterwards
- No
defence made by the author of any part(s) of
his/her own work
- The
needs of the author are deemed secondary to
the needs of the respondents (who outnumber
her/him) i.e., members are there for their own
needs not those of other authors.
Note:
it is all right to respond to another author's work
freely in your own terms without trying to second
guess what that author's intentions are for a work
just read e.g., if you are a poet and you just heard
a piece of prose, it is acceptable for you to say
how you would turn it into poetry.
Q.
How does the format help me with my writing?
A. You learn from responding in your own terms to
each extract by others read out,
from mentally evaluating the comments made on it
around the table, and
from listening to the comments on your own work.
Q. Are beginners welcome?
A. The input of beginners is widly underrated
by groups in our opinion. Generally it is overlooked
that their comments on others' work are reliably
those of readers (later, they become unreliably
those of writers, arguably!). Also, what they write
often strikes starkly effective or the opposite,
which is helpful to others' learning if not always,
at first, to theirs. Therefore, at our group, when
serious about improving their writing, they are
very much valued and indeed most welcome.
Q .Is there a charge?
A. £3 per session (£2 concession) -
paid as you go.
GUIDELINES FOR MEMBERS OF THE WRITERS' TECHNIQUES STUDY GROUP, CHARLTON HOUSE, CHARLTON, SE7
The rules of our format are designed to
1. maintain you in control of what you learn (through uncluttered exposure to extracts of text read twice and the undiscussed, uninterrupted, comments round the table which follow), whilst, at the same time,
2. enabling you to share/teach what you think you know already about writing as a skill/craft (with direct reference to the extracts that have just been read) when your turn comes round to comment.
Often the above will function covertly through feedback to the author.
(Whilst always intended to be constructive and helpful, feedback is but Priority 3, as it were, at our sessions. This is because new writing is vulnerable to bad advice that sounds good and to good advice that turns into bad when misunderstood and improperly applied. Our original writings are so close to the best that we can do ‘at the minute’ that it is hard to grasp and apply really good advice after we have received it. The flaws in our work are invisible to us or they would not be there – invisible and hard to isolate and address, not least for those attempting to deliver useful feedback after an all too short exposure to any given work. We risk being beguiled, and disastrously misled, by virtues in what seems good advice that, in a final analysis - beyond the reach of this, or any, writers’ group - are spurious or misconceived.)
Rule One: TAKE YOUR TIME WHEN COMMENTING, TRYING HARD TO DRAW SOMETHING USEFUL FROM EACH EXTRACT.
Rule Two: COMMENT AS THOUGH THE EXTRACT IS YOURS TO CHANGE AS YOU WOULD WISH. TURN EACH PIECE READ OUT TO YOUR OWN ADVANTAGE.
(YOU ARE HERE PRIMARILY TO SERVE YOUR OWN NEEDS, AFTER ALL. SO BE RUTHLESSLY SELFISH, FOR BY THIS MEANS YOU ACTUALLY GIVE MORE OF YOUR SELF AND, THUS, IN FACT, ARE MORE GENEROUS IT TURNS OUT IN THE END THAN SUPERFICIALLY WOULD SEEM TO BE THE CASE TO A CASUAL OBSERVER.)
Rule Three: COUNT ON THE AUTHOR (AND OTHERS) TO IGNORE ANYTHING YOU SAY THAT IS NOT RELEVANT (OR TO WHICH HE OR SHE CANNOT RELATE). COUNT ALSO ON ITS POTENTIAL TO BE OF USE TO OTHERS PRESENT – FOR THEY ARE LISTENING, TOO.
(THE ORIGINATOR OF THE BASIS FROM WHICH THIS FORMAT EVOLVED - THE LATE PETER ELBOW - ATTESTS IN HIS BOOK “WRITING WITHOUT TEACHERS” THAT ‘EVERYONE IS BOTH RIGHT AND WRONG.’)
Rule Four: DO NOT BE ASHAMED TO WAFFLE AND/OR BORE AS YOU GROPE FOR WORDS TO IDENTIFY WHAT YOU LEARNED FROM AN EXTRACT.
(LIKELY THERE WILL BE ENOUGH CLUES IN WHAT YOU SAY FOR OTHERS TO BUILD ON WHEN THEIR TURNS COME ROUND TO COMMENT.)
Rule Five: DO NOT PROVIDE A VERBAL INTRODUCTION TO EXAMPLES OF YOUR OWN WORK; SAY NOTHING AT ALL ABOUT THEM/IT. READ YOUR EXTRACT EVENLY AND A SHADE FLAT I.E., DO NOT ‘ACT’ (THE WORDS ARE TO WORK UNAIDED).
Rule Six: INTERRUPT COMMENTS ONLY TO SEEK CLARIFICATION ON A POINT BEING MADE.
Rule Seven: SEEK LESS TO EXERCISE YOUR SKILL AT LITERARY CRITICISM AND MORE TO DEEPEN YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF HOW, OFF THE PAGE, THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE WORKS.
|
