Craft of Writing

The Writer's E-Zine Home

Writers' Village University - F2K: Free Fiction Writing Course - ePress-online
Writers' Village University Membership Information

Craft of Writing

Nannette Croce

The Objective Reader
How Outside Help Can Give You A New Perspective On Your Writing

Maybe you are a new writer receiving one rejection after another, or an experienced writer hitting a block. In either case, you need some feedback on your work, and if you are not one of the lucky few with a mentor to turn to, then you might be considering those ads in the writing magazines for editing/critiquing services. But how do you know which service is right for you? How much should you pay? And what can you expect to gain in the end?

David Ebenbach is an award-winning writer and writing instructor who also has his own critiquing service. He recently answered some questions about the services he provides and editing/critiquing services in general.

In this first part of a two-part series, we discuss the value of having your work critiqued, the different services available, and how you can choose a service that is right for you.

T-Zero: Many famous writers had a trusted person who reviewed their work and made comments. What are the benefits of having your work reviewed by another person before submitting for publication? Do you think all writers need to do this?

Ebenbach: I believe all writers, no matter how famous or brilliant, need, at some point, to turn their work over to people they trust, to get some critical feedback. It’s not a matter of being a beginner or an expert—all writers eventually look so long at their own words that they can no longer see them objectively. It’s as simple as that—you become so intimate with the writing that other people are in a better position than you to say what’s successful—and what isn’t successful—in the piece.

T-Zero: Who are your clients—mostly new writers, a mix of new and experienced?

Ebenbach: I’m amazed at the diversity of people who send me their writing. I have had clients who were putting words to the page for nearly the first time, or taking themselves seriously as writers for the first time. And I have had clients come to me with full-blown, highly accomplished novels, just needing one more pair of eyes before declaring a final draft. Each person comes with different experiences, different questions, and different needs. Of course, that’s what makes it interesting.

T-Zero: If I were a prospective client, what would you tell me about the services you offer?

Ebenbach: What I offer is a careful, close reading of a person’s writing—usually this involves several readings, actually—and my analysis of what’s working in the piece, and why, and what isn’t, yet, and why. I look at the grand scale of, for example, plot, character development, voice, and tone, throughout the piece, and the smaller scale of the paragraph and sentence, including grammar and word choice, and everything in between.

Sending your fiction to an editor/critiquer/professional book doctor is a very different experience than the experience of sending your fiction to a literary magazine, where the vast majority of the time they’ll just say yes or no, without any explanation. Most of the time that my writing has been accepted for publication, I haven’t been told why—and that goes 1000 times for rejections. The publishing world is not there to teach you. Critiquing, on the other hand, is about making the particular piece work, and about learning more generally what makes fiction work. The person who critiques your writing is there to teach.

T-Zero: Are there people who offer other types of editing/critiquing than you offer, or a different approach? If and when might a different approach be more beneficial to a writer?

Ebenbach: To some extent, all professional critiquers have the same goal—making the writer’s work “better,” on every level—but “better” is an incredibly subjective word. Each person has a different idea of what that means, and a different path to get there. Some will ask lots of questions of the author, to try to spark revelations on the author’s part as to how the piece ought to be rewritten; others will be quite directive about what they believe ought to be done, and how. People will vary in the particular techniques they’ll describe. Some will even be generally biased in favor of or against certain kinds of writing, like mysteries or historical novels or novels with birds in them.

Each person inevitably brings his or her individual personality to bear on the task of offering critical feedback. That’s why it’s often a good—if not always economical—idea for a writer to get a second opinion on work, especially when an editor’s advice feels wrong. Most likely, going to two editors will leave the writer with two sets of feedback that in some ways agree and in other ways disagree—and that points to the inescapable truth that, in the end, the writer is the one who must be the final judge. Both things are crucial: turning to others for objective advice, and making the final decisions yourself.

T-Zero: Is it possible to have a bad “fit” with someone who is critiquing your work? If so, how can a writer evaluate whether the person they are dealing with is the right “fit”? Alternately, what might be some signs that the writer is not getting her money’s worth?

Ebenbach: Absolutely. A writer may find a particular critiquer too blunt, too directive, not directive enough, difficult to understand, or any number of problematic things. In these cases, it might help to tell the person that you’d like a different style of feedback, and see if that changes the situation. If not, it might be time to switch to someone else; it’s hard to have a successful relationship around one’s writing when there’s a serious personality conflict.

Writers also sometimes bristle when they are told that their work needs a lot of changes. On the one hand, it’s possible that the editor has different goals for your writing than you do—wants your novel about inner torment to have a car chase scene, for example, just because she likes car chase scenes—and that’s a problem. The editor should adopt your goals for the work, whatever they are. On the other hand, the editor might be uncovering real problems, and, as hard as it is, the writer has to be willing to hear and accept painful truths about the writing, if the writing is to improve.

As to the money, this is a largely unstandardized business; critiquers generally try to charge some approximate average of (a) what they believe people can afford, (b) what they believe they can get for their services, and (c) what will make it worth it to put in the time required to give a good critique. Clients will usually agree to pay if they can afford it and if it feels like they’re getting what they want out of the situation. Either one is free at any time to end the relationship, and, of course, a client might want to shop around for a sense of prices before getting started with anyone.

Next month we'll discuss what a writer can and can’t expect to get from a critique and how to use the feedback you receive.

About The Author
Nannette Croce is an Assistant Editor at T-zero, and writes both short stories and articles from her home in Chester Springs, Pennsylvania. Visit her Web site at homepage.mac.com/nannettecroce.

About the Interviewee
David Ebenbach has an MFA in writing from Vermont College, and is currently teaching at Gotham Writers Workshops. His work has appeared in numerous publications including The Denver Quarterly and Crazyhorse. His novel, My Brother, the Prophet was a finalist in the Mid-List First Series Awards. He also recently contributed a chapter for the Gotham Writers Workshops’ Books, Writing Fiction. Contact him at ebenbach@world.oberlin.edu or visit his Web site at www.davidebenbach.com.

Craft of Writing

The Objective Reader How Outside Help Can Give You A New Perspective On Your Writing

The Objective Reader
How Outside Help Can Give You A New Perspective On Your Writing