Category Archives: Civility

6 Steps to a Winning Writing Workshop

When you’re just starting to share your work as a creative writer, you hear people say they’ve been “workshopped.” When, you might ask, did the word workshop become a verb? It sounds painful, like you’ve been bent over a sawhorse and violated with a jigsaw. When done right a workshop is far more pleasant than that, but the process of having your writing critiqued by peers and instructors is an inexact science. Someone who has been “workshopped” could find themselves bursting with new ideas for their writing. Or they simply could feel happy that nice people said nice things to them about their writing without learning anything new. Or they could feel resentment and anger.

Don't let these cute penguins fool you; they're leading you to Santa's Workshop, not a writing workshop. There are no elves in a writer's workshop (unless it's a fantasy fiction group) but there can be magic. (Taken at the Gaylord ICE show Dec 2009 at National Harbor)

Conducting a writing workshop is delicate, because the human ego is delicate. Last month I was blessed to participate in an amazing week-long workshop at my first MFA residency in Montpelier, Vermont. The Vermont College of Fine Arts all but invented the low-residency format back in 1981, and has had 30 years to fine-tune a workshop experience designed to maximize the time students spend on campus, a mere 20 days per year.

Below I’m going to list the 6 key characteristics of the VCFA residency I experienced. Please note that these basic strategies could apply in any setting in which writers are offering other writers feedback on their work, whether it’s in an academic setting or among friends at a coffee shop or living room. I’ve been in various formal (but mostly informal) workshop experiences over the last 20 years, and I never experienced anything as magical or powerful as the VCFA workshop. My local writer’s group has since adopted these basic principles and we’re loving every minute of it. Here goes:

  1. Submit something a bit rough. We all want to look our best, but if your work is perfect, what are you hoping to learn? The writers who seemed to get the most out of their workshop were those who submitted something that wasn’t final but was clean of typos and grammatical challenges; solidly structured; with some passages of true beauty. Knowing it wasn’t a final draft left them open to valuable feedback for improvement.
  2. Give your time and energy in advance. Several weeks before the workshop all of us received the workshop packet, 220 pages of submissions (11 participants, 20 pages apiece). We were expected to read each submission several times before arriving on campus, and encouraged to mark up the manuscripts with notes, questions, etc., with the idea that they would be given to the writer after the workshop. It took a lot of time to analyze that packet, but what a great gift to the writer to be critiqued by 10 well-prepared peers.
  3. Honor the clock. We gave each writer one full hour, always starting precisely on time. The writer would begin by reading a paragraph or two of his/her choosing, then 55 minutes of discussion would commence, with the last 5 minutes left for the writer to respond.
  4. Impose a gag rule. In other words, once the critique begins the writer doesn’t say a word. This can be very difficult indeed, especially when as the writer it’s tempting to explain, elaborate, correct, dispute. The key reason for writer silence is to encourage candid discussion; if there’s no defensiveness that can come from the writer, commentators will be less likely to be intimidated. What if you’re biting your tongue and they go off on some ridiculous tangent? Do you let them? Yes. This is their honest response as readers, so there are no tangents.
  5. I mentioned a workshop could be conducted in your living room. In December of last year I reproduced Santa's workshop in my living room when I created the Crustacean Christmas tree (click image to learn more).

    Encourage free flow of conversation. When the critique session begins, each participant takes a brief moment to mention key points and then passes it on to the next person. This leaves the bulk of the time free for a back-and-forth discussion. Just as in a panel discussion, the real nuggets often occur when someone says something surprising, another responds, and a debate ensues. Long monologues, one after the other, are not the goal here.

  6. At the end the writer has the floor. Just as the writer must remain quiet during the critique, when the critique is done the writer can do with their five minutes what they like. They can ask questions. They can say what they agreed with and point out where they differed. Or they could do what several writers did at VCFA, which was to simply say “Oh. My. God. Um, thank you, that was overwhelming and wonderful and now my brain is dead.”

I mentioned that my writing group has adopted this model, by and large. What I mean by that is that we recognize we have our own realities in terms of how often we meet, the amount of time we have to be together when we do meet, how often people can produce work they can submit, the length of works we have time to read, etc. We’ve done two meetings now with our own hybridization of these guidelines, with some tweaking the second time, and I’m sure we’ll continue to tweak. But we’re all loving it, especially the gag rule.

VCFA’s guidelines are designed to encourage workshop participants to take their responsibilities seriously, to offer criticism in a constructive manner, and to receive criticism in a respectful manner. Any workshop system that embraces those three principles will be a success.

What has worked for you as a workshop participant?


Expanding the iCivility Campaign

As some of you know I have another project in addition to this blog. Since 2009 I’ve been promoting an increase in civility through my iCivility campaign. For a fair while now the only digital manifestation of this campaign was a web site that, well, was pretty stagnant.

When The San Jose Mercury News last week ran an oped by me calling for all of us to work to increase civility and recognize our roles in causing it, I received a tremendous inflow of encouragement. I also received a little finger-wagging at being so out of touch with social media. Folks wanted to follow the campaign on Twitter and Facebook. Why wasn’t I there?

Cluelessness? That’s about the only response I had.

So I’ve taken heed. I’ve just launched a Twitter feed appropriately named @iCivility, and a Facebook page called The iCivility Movement.I’d love you to join the movement, and forward it to your friends!

One problem with the web site was there was no easy way to keep visitors abreast of the latest developments regarding civility. This became very clear after the recent tragedy in Tucson, which has returned civility to a front-burner debate. I promise to keep the Twitter and Facebook feeds active with the latest news and insights.

Together we can all make a difference.


The Importance of Civility

ATTENTION: See update below (1/21/11)

There is no debating the rise of incivility in our political discourse here in the United States, or the reality that vitriol is undermining the very functioning of our democracy. What is often overlooked is that we are all to blame for this crisis. That is the message of my editorial today in the San Jose Mercury News newspaper.

Here in the United States the topic of civility has been front-burner, given the tragic shooting in my native state of Arizona of U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords and many others. The motives of the killer remain unclear, but the anger-filled rhetoric we hear and read every day is very real.

The current debate is why the San Jose Mercury News ran my editorial, and I’m grateful to the editor there for giving me a platform to espouse my thesis of a “digital hollows.”

I have argued for some time now that the onslaught of information in our interconnected age has combined with our use of self-filtering technology to isolate us from points of view that clash with our own biases. We place ourselves in hollows — often pronounced “hollers” — little different than the rural residents of early Appalachian settlements.

This isolation leads to a hardening of positions and an increasing intolerance of other opinions, and it spreads rapidly and virally.

A little over a year ago I launched a movement to increase civility across the globe, at least online, with iCivility.com. I didn’t set out to radically overhaul the political discourse here in my adopted home, Washington, D.C. I set a more modest goal — improving discourse in our online world.

About a year ago I was introduced before a speech. The think-tank president introducing me commented on my launch of iCivility, and said “Patrick Ross has accomplished a lot of things in his time in Washington, but I’m afraid with this new effort he’s doomed to fail.”

I suppose it all depends on how you define success. If success is an Internet free of vitriol and ad hominem attacks, then yes, I am destined to fail. But if I manage to a few open-minded individuals with my message of civility; if those individuals share the message with a few friends; if as a result a handful of those online proactively moderate their own rhetoric and encourage moderation in the rhetoric of others; then I would call that a success.

If you share my view that civility is critical to society and political discourse, I encourage you to share this blog post with your online friends. Together we can make a difference together.

UPDATE: (1/21/11) I’ve received a lot of positive feedback since my call for increased civility ran in the San Jose Mercury News, and traffic at iCivility.com has been up. But many people have told me I need to expand the campaign across other social media, and I now have done so. Please “like” iCivility on Facebook and follow iCivility on Twitter and let’s make a difference together.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 348 other followers