Summary: The Writing & Critique Group Survival Guide: How to Give and Receive Feedback, Self-Edit, and Make Revisions

Becky Levine, Writer’s Digest Books, 2010, 293 pgs.


The book is divided into several sections. The first and last sections deal with questions that arise in looking for and/or being part of a critique group: start your own or join an existing group; in-person or online; frequency, structure or format, expectations and responsibilities of members of a critique group; etc. A relatively minor section towards the end sketches a plan for the writer to utilize critique comments in revising and/or rewriting his work. But the bulk of the reference deals with critiquing a writer’s submission; there are separate sections for critiquing fiction, non-fiction (magazine articles, non-fiction book proposals, how-to/self-help, memoir, travel writing), and children’s books. Each section, save the last, concludes with worksheets and examples that also serve as a summary or highlight of that particular section.

Regardless of genre, Levine starts off each chapter within the various critiquing sections with a call to the critiquer to pay attention to his feelings or impressions about what he’s reading; e.g., areas of boredom, lack of tension, disconnectedness, hero passivity, confusing dialogue, etc.: something that either frustrates, confuses, or bores you as a critiquer/reader. Such impressions are basically symptoms that generally signal weaknesses in the writing. After listing the possible feelings you might experience, Levine discusses probable root causes for such symptoms and suggests not only remedies, but ways to “soften the blow” and provide constructive criticism in a positive light. By way of illustration, Levine shows us actual excerpts that “get it right,” followed by a fictitious negative example of writing that falls flat, along with possible critique comments.

The critiquing fiction section seems to have the lion’s share of the book, as there are separate chapters on the different foci of critiquing fiction: critiquing for plot, character, point of view and voice, dialogue, description, and scene structure. The critiquing non-fiction section has a chapter on each of the types of non-fiction writing, and the section on critiquing children’s books has a chapter each on picture books, beginning readers, and chapter books. Irrespective of one’s particular genre interest(s), the reader would benefit from reading all sections rather than skipping the ones pertaining to other genres.

I think this book will prove helpful not only for the person interested in learning how to give a worthy critique, but also for anyone who wishes to improve his writing. Knowing in advance some of the common writing weaknesses can assist the writer in avoiding these pitfalls in the first place. I am looking forward to implementing some of the tips and suggestions I’ve gleaned from reading this book.

Speaking of the Revolutionary War...

...I just finished re-reading Johnny Tremain. I recall having read it when I was in the third grade (or thereabouts), but honestly the only part of the story that I actually remembered was the accident that resulted in his having to abandon his dreams of becoming a silversmith.

Favorite quote (p 283):

Robert Newman, suspected of having hung the lanterns in Christ's Church the night before, was thrown into jail, and John Pulling, merely suspected of having helped, was forced to hide in his grandmother's wine butt.

Now it turns out that in context, "butt" is nothing more than a large cask, or, alternatively, a unit of volume equal to two hogsheads (ha! more weird words: a hogshead is about 63 gallons).

But to contemporary ears, "wine butt" conjures up a whole different image ;)

The Aquariums of Pyongyang

I got The Aquariums of Pyongyang the other day. It is the eye-opening story of a nine-year-old boy who was sent, along with his father, grandmother, uncle, and seven-year-old sister, to one of the North Korean concentration camps. Their "crime"? The grandfather had been marked as a political enemy, which condemned the entire family (save the mother) to ten years in the gulag for "reeducation." It is nearly impossible for us to imagine life in the hellhole he describes, and what is even more astonishing is that the particular camp that he and his family were sent to wasn't even considered one of the hard labor camps. Imagine being brutally kicked and beaten for the merest infraction of the rules. Imagine being so hungry that you would literally eat anything that moved - centipedes, earthworms, salamanders, rats, frogs. Imagine working outside in single-digit (or colder) temperatures dressed in nothing but rags. Imagine cleaning out a latrine by hand. Imagine digging mass graves for the hundreds that didn't make it through the winter. Imagine plowing a field with rudimentary tools, and discovering rotting corpses in the overturned earth. Imagine that despite the horror of these conditions, there are other camps that are far more hellish.

The book is a very compelling read, and although I didn't intend to, I ended up reading the entire book from cover to cover in one day; it sounds like a cliche, but I really didn't want to put the book down. It should be required reading by anyone who thinks that man is basically good, or thinks that the efforts of man (i.e. socialism, fascism, communism) can create paradise on earth. It should be read by anyone who thinks that they can cozy up to a totalitarian regime and not get burned because they're somehow special or will be protected. (Liberals: You would do well to remember this about Islam.)

Listen: Whenever one of these despots gets into power, the first ones to be purged are always those who were unquestioningly faithful to the man and the principles - and the purge doesn't stop there.

Like excrement, a purge starts at the top and runs downhill, sparing no one.

May God have mercy and depose the tyrant of Pyongyang. May He bring freedom and righteousness to that tortured nation.

How Exciting!

I recall reading some of these twin books as a kid. I had no idea that the series was so extensive, though.

Glad to see that some of them have been made available at Project Gutenberg. Too bad there aren't more illustrations available, though.

Generous? After a fashion. Orthodox? Well---

I've not posted for a few days, due in part to my current project - slogging through "A Generous Orthodoxy" for the purpose of being able to make intelligent comments regarding the book. I will not pretend to offer a comprehensive review of the book; others far more competent than I have already offered their learned and esteemed opinions about Brian McLaren's book. Rather, I hope to present a layman's impressions and concerns about the "emergent" church in general and McLaren in particular.

Admittedly, I am approaching the book with a healthy dose of skepticism. Some might say "suspicion," but as one of my cinematic heros (James Bond, if you must know) replied when asked why he was so suspicious, "I tend to live longer that way." And for the sake of theological soundness, healthy suspicion is called for, particularly when it comes to "a new way of 'doing' church." As the old saw goes:

If it's new, it ain't true - and if it's true, it ain't new...

Another take on the TNIV

Dr. John Mark Reynolds has some good observations about the TNIV, as well as about Zondervan's promotion of it. Wouldn't it be better in the long run to teach the younger generation how to read, instead of coddling them with some translation that's going to show its age within a year or two?

I see the TNIV, and Zondervan's promotion of it, as indicative of the "emergent church" philosophy. Among those that buy into this philosophy, it is axiomatic (and therefore unquestionable!) that, since the culture has moved on to postmodernism, the church needs to follow suit. Never mind Paul's admonition to "not be conformed to this world" (Romans 12:2). Never mind that Jesus said we are not of this world (John 15:19). "I want my MTV - er, TNIV! That other stuff is just too hard to understand, and I sure don't want to spend any time thinking about it. It just doesn't speak to my generation, so it's up to you to make it relevant to me. Otherwise, I'm just not gonna play ball with you." Wah, wah, wah. Somehow, I suspect that any reluctance to read the Bible has far more to do with the Bible's message and the reader's heart than it does with linguistic style or generational insensitivity.

Keeping up with the Jones's is an enslaving philosophy, for it dooms one to a perpetual race. Technology (and worldly philosophy) always promises that something newer, bigger, and better is coming down the pike. What's "in" today will be an embarrassment tomorrow - think leisure suits and Boy George. "Today's NIV" will become "Yesterday's NIV" a lot quicker than Zondervan would care to admit. (But that's okay - newer Bible translations help keep the cash flow positive.)

The church is in danger of losing sight of its mission, its raison d'être, when it focuses on being relevant and hip, rather than focusing on the timelessness of God's truth.

The church that marries the spirit of the age will become a widow in the next.

TNIV - A Layman's 2¢

Zondervan has a new Bible translation, Today's New International Version (or TNIV). I've not read it yet - being on dialup, I'm not about to download the PDF version available at their website; however, I do have a TNIV New Testament that I'm planning on perusing in the near future. (Besides, I just found out that you can order a free paperback of the entire TNIV, so I'll wait for that to arrive.) So, at this point, my opinions are formed more by Zondervan's own promotion than from actual, personal experience.

Now, I will be the first to admit that I have absolutely no experience in Greek and Hebrew (although I would like to take a year or two of NT Greek someday when I have the time to do the class justice), so I can't really comment on the details about translation. I do, however, have some experience with languages, and consequently I understand firsthand that translation is far more than finding an equivalent word and plugging it into the translated sentence. Every language has its own set of idioms and expressions, and something that would make perfect sense in one language would, were it translated word-for-word into another language, make little or no sense, or be unwittingly hilarious, or even crude. Add to this mix anachronisms and obscure cultural/geographical references, and it's not that hard to imagine the thoughtful labor that goes into producing a new translation of the Bible.

However, I do have some questions as to the introduction of yet another English translation of the Bible, especially when there are still people groups that have only a portion of Scripture, or even no Bible at all in their own language. I understand, though, that there is a lot more money to be made in the publication of another English translation than there is in a "juba-juba" language translation of some obscure tribe somewhere.

Zondervan's justification of this new endeavor ostensibly boils down to an attempt to reach the postmodern generation. Speaking of the 18- to 34-year-olds, Zondervan writes,

Part of the reason for this mass exodus is that today's generation thinks differently than previous generation [sic]. For example, they're more likely to relate to stories and personal experiences than to traditional expressions of propositional truth. For them, authentic religion is a [sic] much about HOW they live as WHAT they believe.

Sounds like the same kind of stuff coming from the "emergent church" crowd. "Propositional truth" tends to be a disparaging buzzword used to identify us old farts who still believe in moral absolutes, making it sound like "truth" is just something that the old guard cooked up one day and decided to impose on everyone else. Just replace "propositional truth" with the "truth" of "personal experience" and then the postmoderns will feel right at home. (So would Timothy Leary, I bet.) "Revealed truth," however, is a more Biblically sound term. "Revealed truth" is the kind of truth that man himself would never come up with in a million years, because it's contrary to his sinful nature. It's also why atheists come up with stuff like "Irrefutable Bible contradictions" and why unregenerate people will never concede the authority of the Bible.

Zondervan's response also ignores the fact that WHAT a person believes determines HOW they're going to live. Nothing like putting the cart before the horse, I guess. This "authentic religion" sounds like a good way to produce plenty of people who think they're Christian just because they act like one.

While older forms of English may not present a problem for some readers, they can present barriers to understanding and fully engaging the Bible for today's generation because they've grown up using more contemporary English. In addition, the TNIV translators were mindful of what they were working on: Today's New International Version. It is intended for English-speaking readers no matter where they live.

Let's see - the NIV is a whopping THIRTY years old ("Never trust anyone over 30," right?), so we need "more contemporary English" so this Nintendo/Play Station/X-box generation can better understand the Bible. How about removing ALL barriers to understanding, and produce a fully-animated and/or graphical Bible? Japanese animation seems to be pretty popular, or maybe Pixar could be recruited for the task. The written word is so passe! Pardon my cynicism, but I find that line extremely hard to swallow. Even if this generation is cocooned, I doubt that they are so out of touch that the NIV is that incomprehensible to them. Even Zondervan admits that over 90% of the TNIV's NT parallels the NIV. So why is this new translation necessary, again? The differences must have been doozies to prompt a whole new Bible version.

One thing that I find interesting, however, is that Zondervan promotes the TNIV as a "gender-accurate" rather than "gender-neutral" translation.

Q: Is the TNIV gender neutral?

A: The TNIV is not gender neutral; it is in fact “gender accurate.” Gender neutrality suggests the removal of specific male or female attributes. The TNIV does not remove these attributes or “neuter” any passages of Scripture. The TNIV uses generic language only where the meaning of the text was intended to include both men and women. These changes reflect a more precise rendering of Greek and Hebrew words.

I have no problems with this, really. But then again, I have no problems with using "man" and the accompanying male pronouns to refer to people in general. You see, I managed to learn a long time ago that "man" doesn't exclusively refer to males, and so I don't get all bent out of shape over this issue, and I will happily continue using perfectly fine words such as "chairman," "congressman," and "mailman." (After all, we have "mailmen" who are "female men" as well as "male men." "Mailmen" covers both.)

So, when my free copy of the TNIV comes in the mail, I'll review it, and keep it on hand. There is value in having various translations available for comparison when doing personal Bible study. Sometimes it's helpful to view the different renderings of a particular passage, especially when one lacks the ability to read the original languages. (Similarly, those that know contemporary languages other than English can benefit in reading Scripture in those languages. It's not unlike viewing the same scene from a different perspective.) However, for personal devotions, I'll continue to read my "old" NKJV.

Mark who?

I honestly wonder what kids are learning in English Lit these days. I'm tutoring some junior and senior high students in English, not because they're stupid, but because their parents believe that extra instruction in reading, composition, and vocabulary would be beneficial to them.

So, I'm starting things off by going through some short stories with them. In particular, we are reading The Californian's Tale, by none other than Mark Twain. Yes, that same Mark Twain who wrote (among numerous other things) such classics as Tom Sawyer, Huckleberry Finn, The Prince and the Pauper, and A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court. Granted, I myself have not plumbed the depths of Twain's writings, but at least I have read the first three just mentioned.

However, upon questioning my students if they know who Mark Twain was, all I get are mumblings and blank stares. It's incredible that the name of one of the giants of American literature should elicit no other reaction than a shrug of the shoulders and an "I dunno"! (To give credit where credit is due, one student did mention, "I think I read something of his once," but when pressed for the title of the reading, couldn't provide any clue.)

They know nothing about Mark Twain - what he wrote, when he lived (not even the general time frame), where he was from, what his real name was - NOTHING. It's inconceivable to me that any American student can get through junior (let alone senior) high without possessing the foggiest idea who Mark Twain was, without reading even an excerpt from one of his numerous writings. I remember reading Huckleberry Finn in fifth grade; don't tell me that Twain's writings are inaccessible to any junior/senior high student of at least average intelligence.

I think it's safe to say that if Mark Twain is a stranger to American students, then James Fenimore Cooper, Washington Irving, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Herman Melville, and Edgar Allan Poe have hardly fared any better.

What are they learning, indeed? PARENTS! An "A" in English doesn't mean that your junior or senior high school student is actually learning anything....

Caveat Emptor

Thinking about getting the kids educational software for Christmas? You might want to think again.

In "Failure to Connect: How Computers Affect Our Children's Minds---for Better and Worse", Jane M. Healy, Ph.D., presents evidence that computers are not an educational panacea, as so many seem to think. Here is my brief review of the book:

In this day and age, we often hear talk about the need to be "computer literate," and this concept is taken for granted - even among the teachers and administration of elementary schools. But how necessary is it for children - not only teens, but young children, sometimes as young as three or four - to use the computer as a regular part of their education? Healy explores this issue, which is usually given a pass by school boards, faculty, and administration alike.

Most people tend to think that children's use of computers is permissible, at least as long as it is employed in some sort of academic exercise, a "tool for learning." But Healy, who has been involved with computers and educational computing since the late '70's, points out that the vast majority of so-called "educational software" is of atrociously poor quality, and is more fittingly termed "edutainment." Even software that measures up to standards of educational merit beg the following questions: 1) Does using the software result in a significant improvement in understanding and mastery of concepts, vs. "old-fashioned" methods? 2) If there is no real difference between using educational software and "old-fashioned" methods, why spend all the extra money on computer equipment and software? (The wisdom of doing this becomes all the more questionable when one considers how quickly equipment and software becomes obsolete.) How many school have fallen prey to the idea that computers in school are a "must," and have consequently diverted scarce resources (time, space, money) from programs such as art, music, and even physical education to the money pit that computers represent? In addition to the obvious, computers are a drain in other ways as well: unless a school budgets for and hires technical support (most schools don't), there is going to be a significant percentage of computers out of commission on any given day - kids are notorious for their bravado in trying different things, and crashes are a common occurrence. Even if the teacher is computer-savvy enough to get the machine up and running, it takes away valuable instruction time.

There are other pitfalls of using computers as a learning tool. "Edutainment" issues aside, few children possess the maturity to use software as a means of sharpening their logic and thinking skills, instead preferring to point and click until they come up with the right answer and are rewarded with some inane diversion. Other serious issues which arise from indiscriminate use of a computer involve the negative effects on children's attention and motivation. In short, the more the computer "runs the show" for the child, the greater the negative effect on the child's attention and motivation. Instead of helping to teach the child to think logically and critically, the child learns to do whatever it takes to get the "reward" - not unlike Pavlov and his salivating dogs. Understanding is minimal, and learned response is the chief driving force.

Another significant issue is the relationship between computers and children's health. Like adults, there is concern about postural and skeletal problems, vision problems, decrease in physical activity, and radiation risks. Radiation in particular is a potentially serious issue, since we lack long-term studies examining the effects of cumulative exposure to computer monitor radiation. This is in addition to the fact that children, since they are still developing, are more vulnerable. There is also a growing number of incidents of so-called "video-game-related seizures," caused by the electronic stimulation of some games. In VGRS (which seems to be most common in teenaged boys), the child can actually "blank out" for several seconds before coming to.

I would suggest that at the very least, more research is in order before we as a society rush into a Faustian bargain regarding our childrens' physical, mental, intellectual, and social development.