This is something I found on Facebook at one time. The ladies who have produced this have their names attributed – and I should add that this was posted by them in a tongue-in-cheek, self-critical manner. And the intention seems to be to illustrate some of the perils of writers’ groups, also to show the way writing fashions can change over the course of a hundred years!
We see the result of applying one group’s rules to Edward Thomas’ famous – and highly successful – poem Adlestrop. What, of course, the ‘corrected’ version loses is the rhythm and power of the original. There is a concentration on the deletion of redundancies and repetition, the conjunction ‘and’, ‘artificially poetic phrases’, anastrophes, and archaisms. Each individual correction is almost persuasive but when you look at the whole! Just look at what they did to that wonderful poem!
Think of your own group. Is there a penchant for deleting adjectives and adverbs for the sake of it? Is there a war against rhymes even? Rules can serve a purpose but shouldn’t be applied thoughtlessly. Nor should there be a thoughtless war against rules. Often, yes, if you chose a better noun, you wouldn’t need that adjective, or, if you chose a better verb, you wouldn’t need that adverb.
Of course, it is extremely good of anyone to take the time to make helpful criticisms and those ought to be treated with complete respect. Arguments about someone’s advice because you don’t like it aren’t helpful. But, though it is a good idea in a writers’ group to put your exceptionally patient hat on before even entering the room, that doesn’t mean your brain stops working. The best advice I received for this was from the poet Margaret Gillies Brown when she visited a group I was in. Listen respectfully, and if you disagree with something, say nothing, just pay no attention to it when revising.
Conversely, when giving helpful criticism in a group, the work shown by the writers should be treated with complete respect. Editors and publishers can be as cutting as they like. Their purpose is not the same as ours when we meet together to help each other. Their interest is in the finished product. As a teacher, I would say there are other purposes served by writing. Yes. There is an academic discipline. You try to help each other attain the best finished product you can. But the benefit to the individual from going through the process is just as essential. To the teacher, the activity itself is the important thing: you are trying to help people grow and develop through participating in it.
When people go to writers’ groups, they gain in confidence from improving their work, from helping each other, and from the socialisation. And hopefully, quite a few will also reach publishable standard.
Just please, don’t do to each other’s poems what this group did to Edward Thomas’ ‘Adlestrop’.
We see the result of applying one group’s rules to Edward Thomas’ famous – and highly successful – poem Adlestrop. What, of course, the ‘corrected’ version loses is the rhythm and power of the original. There is a concentration on the deletion of redundancies and repetition, the conjunction ‘and’, ‘artificially poetic phrases’, anastrophes, and archaisms. Each individual correction is almost persuasive but when you look at the whole! Just look at what they did to that wonderful poem!
Think of your own group. Is there a penchant for deleting adjectives and adverbs for the sake of it? Is there a war against rhymes even? Rules can serve a purpose but shouldn’t be applied thoughtlessly. Nor should there be a thoughtless war against rules. Often, yes, if you chose a better noun, you wouldn’t need that adjective, or, if you chose a better verb, you wouldn’t need that adverb.
Of course, it is extremely good of anyone to take the time to make helpful criticisms and those ought to be treated with complete respect. Arguments about someone’s advice because you don’t like it aren’t helpful. But, though it is a good idea in a writers’ group to put your exceptionally patient hat on before even entering the room, that doesn’t mean your brain stops working. The best advice I received for this was from the poet Margaret Gillies Brown when she visited a group I was in. Listen respectfully, and if you disagree with something, say nothing, just pay no attention to it when revising.
Conversely, when giving helpful criticism in a group, the work shown by the writers should be treated with complete respect. Editors and publishers can be as cutting as they like. Their purpose is not the same as ours when we meet together to help each other. Their interest is in the finished product. As a teacher, I would say there are other purposes served by writing. Yes. There is an academic discipline. You try to help each other attain the best finished product you can. But the benefit to the individual from going through the process is just as essential. To the teacher, the activity itself is the important thing: you are trying to help people grow and develop through participating in it.
When people go to writers’ groups, they gain in confidence from improving their work, from helping each other, and from the socialisation. And hopefully, quite a few will also reach publishable standard.
Just please, don’t do to each other’s poems what this group did to Edward Thomas’ ‘Adlestrop’.