Grouping

Writing is, by its basic nature, a solitary activity.  There's only enough room for one at the keyboard or the notebook page.  To write, you're taking things out of your head and transferring them to paper.  Nobody is going to do that better than you because only you have the front row seat to that show.  You can try to get someone else to share your vision.  That's pretty much the point of writing.  But no matter how good you are at describing your ideas, the succeeding versions will always be just a little different.  It's just the way it is, and it's not a bad thing.  I've commented before on the nature of art being a collaboration between artist and audience.  Half the magic is in what your reader brings to the experience.  Still, to draw this back to my original point, nobody else is as close to the source of your story as you; so you write alone.

At the same time, writing's basic nature is social.  Yes, authors are often stereotyped as odd, reclusive sorts who don't mix much with the rest of the world.  Think again.  Writing is communication.  To write well takes observation and empathy, and a fundamental desire to connect with others.  They may tend to be introverted and thoughtful, but writers are always reaching out in their way.

In my own life, I've generally followed that pattern, reaching out to share ideas through writing, but doing the actual writing alone.  There were some corrections and critiques offered in school, of course.  Some advice, I agreed with and some, I didn't.  I'd like to think my writing has improved from the input of others.  If nothing else, a critique forces you to ask yourself "do I think their point is valid?".  There was quite a bit of this while my husband and I were writing our novel.  We wrote separately, crafting scenes or chapters, then sought the opinion of the other to fine-tune the work.  In that way, we became our own little exclusive writers' group.  But aside from this, I've never really cared to submit to a critique group.  My writing was my own.  The choices I made were made for my own reasons.  No outsider could know as well what effect I was trying to achieve, and I wasn't inclined to change my work into something somebody else would have written.  It is what it is, like it or not.

Recently, I've found myself dipping into the world of writers' groups.  It happened gradually.  First, there was the social tool of Google Plus.  Here was a platform that didn't just keep you connected to the people you know, Google Plus encouraged you to seek out strangers with similar interests.  Naturally, I found myself enjoying communities of readers and writers.  Then, I was asked to spearhead some author visit programs at work.  That led to finding opportunities to meet local authors and readers in book clubs and writers' groups.  A few of these groups are mostly social, casual meetings where writers talk about their lives and their writing - who has been reading what, how someone went about self-publishing, or what to do to overcome writer's block.  Others focus more on readings and critiques.  I've gone one night to write quietly next to others in a cafe, and on another night, submitted pieces of work to the advice of freshly met fellow authors.

And it's weird.

I've written countless stories and articles for all sorts of reasons.  I've handed them over to agents and editors.  I've given them as gifts, posted them on this blog and on the website.  I've entered them in contests.  Writing as long as I have, you get a thick skin, but you also get a kind of confidence in your identity.  You learn to hone your own work, then present it and stand behind it for what it is.  This is it.  This is me, now.  Maybe it's not immutable.  You can always be open to a little more fine-tuning, to correcting mistakes or phrasing a little more elegantly.  Not immutable, but still, damn close to it.

To let others in on those vulnerable, imperfect stages when he story is still coalescing is a new kind of experience.  Some will approach respectfully, evaluating what  they hear for trouble spots.  Others repeat the bits of advice they have embraced as "what makes good writing."  Not one to believe in one-size-fits-all good writing, I mostly take those opinions with a grain of salt.  The best situation is when those critiquing comment on the story itself, wanting to know more about a character or the context of the larger work.  That's a win because if you've succeeded in wrapping up a writer in your ideas rather than the way you presented them, your writing is pretty sound.

I've found I like the groups.  The extra eyes can find things I might not have thought twice about.  There are logical leaps you might miss in your own work, however many times you try to read it from a stranger's view.  There are troubles you might slide past because it all makes sense to you.  I'm still choosy about the suggestions I take, and I may not offer all my work for review.  Still, the exercise is a positive one.

More important than any of the work, though, is the companionship.  Writing is a solitary activity, and while it's also social in that you're communicating with the reader, you don't often get feedback on that end.  It's easy to feel alone in your experience, stranded on  deserted island.  Mingling with others of your kind can be a comfort.  I've been lucky to be married to another who shares my interest, so I've been on more of a peninsula than an island.  But, having writers' groups and Google communities has been refreshing and invigorating.  That can only be good news for the writing.