Snark and the Writing Workshop
This week a reader named Siobhan wrote with a question and asked that I post it in the blog. So here goes: "After a long period of just writing and not getting feedback, I've recently taken a writing class and joined a writing group. In both cases, I encountered a snarky, dismissive tone I hadn't faced before in a writing community. In the case of the class, the snarky tone came from the teacher and infected other students, making it seriously demoralizing. So I dropped it and joined this group, where it again reared its ugly head. What should I do now?"
I've noticed an increase in snark, too, and have been bothered by it, so I decided to do a little research. In Snark: It's Mean, It's Personal, and It's Ruining Our Conversation, David Denby defines snark as "a strain of nasty, knowing abuse spreading like pinkeye through the national conversation." He blames the Internet for the rise of snark. Snark invites others to link, it spreads quickly, and it's easy to pull off, far easier than reasoned criticism. But forums that can support actual cultural criticism are dying out, leaving us, largely, with snark. So maybe it's no wonder that it's finding it's way into the workshop, and probably into other spaces designed to provide constructive criticism as well.
So what can we do to combat it? In Siobhan's case, a discussion about what tone the group wants as a whole, raised at a neutral time, might do wonders. And if it doesn't, leave the group. Start your own and establish expectations from the beginning. The class is a harder call. Like Siobhan, I'd probably drop, especially if there was still a chance to get my money back. If I really liked the teacher, apart from some snarky comments, I would talk to her after class one day in a non-confrontational way. If the teacher is defensive, drop, money back or no. Writing takes too much courage. Keep your distance from toxic people.
Are other people finding snark in their writing groups and workshops? Why is it popping up? And what can we do when we find ourselves in Siobhan's situation?
Another possibility: workshops have always had the potential for cruelty, and snark is just harder to call out. Denby again: “It pretends to be all fun, and anyone who’s annoyed by it will be greeted with the retort of ‘How can you take this seriously? What’s wrong with you?’”
I’ve been a long time member of a large online critique group (Critique Circle). The snark factor in the critiques varies from person to person, and I have had to learn to sift through demeaning opinions to get through to useful suggestions for improvement.
I admit that the snark has hurt my confidence in my writing, and my participation in the online group has gone down because of the increase in snarky crits.
Funny thing is, the online writing community my friends and I established in 2001 was based on the concept of “snark.” We used it more as a term for the crap in your writing and the community was our idea of a way to get rid of it. WD quoted our “snark” concept in ranking us a Best 101 and in a review of the site when it was new. We still use our “snark” idea but the community is quite the opposite of a place where your writing gets mocked. We don’t blow smoke either.
I think the proliferation of rudeness into in-person writing communities/groups/classes is about the anonymity we feel online. We don’t self-edit our comments and I think that’s spilled over into face-to-face interactions. I know when I took writing courses in college, people would leave their names off the copies of stories they’d commented on so they would feel freer to be critical. The people who signed their names to critical commentaries were the ones who knew how to do it well, in my experience. It was quite a while until I felt that that level of confidence in critique.
It could also be jealousy or it could be that the people in the class don’t know how to critique properly. Given that the instructor doesn’t either, I’d say the better choice might be to find a (free) online or in-person group or two to join. You’ll get the feedback w/o the snarkitude.
To be honest, part of me wonders if calling comments snarky is overreaction on the part of someone who’s been critiqued harshly. I review a lot of work and critique fairly–I point out the good and the bad, give constructive criticism but am never dishonest. If a work has problems, the writer feels hurt. I’ve found that writers get very sensitive about their work and often overreact. One example I recall is when a friend of mine and I simply asked questions about a story premise online. We were fairly polite–we didn’t compliment her, that would have been lying, but we asked about plot holes so she’d think about them. Her response? Accuse us of trying to make her commit suicide! Some people simply react too much. Be careful that the “snark” you’re hearing isn’t just simple, honest, blunt criticism.
I think it is tough to assemble a group of people who are: a)knowledgeable in the field,(this may be the MOST important) b)personally secure, and c) skilled in the art of critique. If you are participating in group experience, it is likely to be bumpy, and you have to learn to roll with bumps/punches and discern what is valuable. Those skilled in the art of critique know how to critique the work and not the person. They make critiques by posing the point as a question, or deferring to a third person i.e., “Have you ever thought of ….? or “The author ____, faced with a similar challenge solved it by ______.” Or, “In my own work, I have found _____, maybe you could try ____?” I have found that workshops often suffer from a “life or death” complex. There is a need to keep things in the perspective that this experience is about learning, and learning can be fun. I don’t think you would find these same kind of personality dynamics in say, a knitting group. There people are just focused on the stitches and skeins. The whole personality cult that has grown up around being a writer/artist is annoying, needlessly dramatic, and in the end, utterly boring. I have been tempted to say, “I have hobbies,” instead of entering the drama.
I’m wondering why the teacher or group leader didn’t set boundaries from the beginning about how comments should be framed? I think everyone has made some valid points – including the sensitivity of the person being critiqued and the need for some people to feel important and have drama… But I still see it as the leader’s responsibility to set guidelines and maintain the tone. Since writing is such a solitary pursuit, I think having feedback can make a huge difference to the quality of someone’s writing and their self esteem, but what’s the point in everything turning negative? Anyway, that’s my two cents worth!
Warmly,
Cheryl
I don’t know where Siobhan resides. But I belong to a branch group of the California Writers Club and while critism is not presented with kid gloves (we call a bomb a bomb)it is always offered with the intention of helping the writer correct or improve the writing. But before I joined the critique group I sat in on a gathering to determine the tenor of the group. Had they been snarks I would have found elsewhere to go.
Hi Siohan
snarkiness might be a result of online anonymity, but I see it on the rise everywhere, on and off line. Along with rudeness and bad manners. I believe it to be a result of poor leadership and low self esteem. I have found over the years that the strengths of compassion, moderation and understanding aren’t recognised as readily as the appearance of strengh portrayed by cruelty and arrogance.
A number of posts mention the manner in which the critisism is offered. I do not see this as an excuse. As writers, language should be something they understand. It is their only tool. If they frame critisism in a hurtful manner, it is because they chose to do so. You are not oversensitive, you are right.
You have two choices Siobhan. Name it and shame it at every opportunity. Start when the group is snarking someone else, not yourself. Build your own powerbase within the group. Do not make it personal. do not fight fire with fire, fight it with water. Be stong enough to hold up a mirror to their behaviour. The good ones will stop. Those who don’t, well, they’re not worth spending even a second of your one and only life on anyway.
Option 2 is to quit. Personally the difference between the two would come down to this: are there people in the group who deserve rescuing.
Do not be afraid or disheartened. This is simply another of life’s experiences. It will make you stronger or it will kill you. That choice is yours always and forever. It is harder to learn from weak examples, from weak people, but the lessons you can learn are stronger and more meaningful. Take from them what you can.
Best of luck,
Noobiewrita.
p.s. when considering this, you should know that since age 12, my friends have called me ‘take no prisoners’ Lee. I love critisism, positive and negative I see it as a learning experience. But no one is ever snarky with me. I stomp on all forms of rudeness and disrespect immediately. Whatever the situation my answer is always the same. Attack.
Lee.
I think that with an ever-leveling playing field, the dynamics of competition are getting more grueling in many industries and communities. There are a lot of special interest groups vying for authority in one particular area of their respective interest and people within those groups might even find themselves competing against each other. With the use of blogs and online identities, anyone can be an authority on anything and critique anyone else, even if they may not be the most constructive critic.
I think in writing there are still some people who believe that there is some sort of hierarchy or ladder of authority in the industry. It’s as if some make the decision on their own as to who is good enough. In writing courses, I wonder if the “snarky” attitude may not actually be a sign of hard feelings over past rejection. Perhaps an instructor, while still instructing, passes judgment upon his pupils as an outlet for his disappointment.
The way I see it, we all have a story to tell so go and tell it. Worry about the rest later.
Snark is demoralising. Even after my book Daddy’s Little Spy was critically acclaimed by historical novel society in america, locally people have been snipping away at me because the book is partly based my childhood with a mother who was a witch during WW2. So far from being theraputic to write about what you know in my case this has proved disasterous. Difficult to deal with snark as no one nasty to my face they rely on malicious gossips to run round saying don’t buy this nasty book, written as Isabella.
Unfortuniately, the snark has become increasingly popular and even fashionable. The quick jab, the clever put down, the TV sitcom remark. This has become the style. And it has infected the classroom and workshop. People imatate what they see and here. Words and phrasing seem to be very easy to mimic. The person doing this feels clever and softiciated. (not) but they feel that way.
Try to lisen hard for something that might be true, see if you can find that grain of truth in what they say, but dismiss the snide comment of someone not capible of making a real critquie.
Hi all,
Interstingly, in Abuja Writers’ Forum (Nigeria), of which I am the Secretary and at which critique sessions I have been serving as the moderator for almost a year, we do not experience what can be called snark.
In fact, it struck me as strange that in an informal, relaxed, friendly setting such as a workshop or critique session, anyone would want to bad-mouth another person’s work. What I have seen in our group however are rare occasions when a writer took fair criticism badly.
I say ‘took fair criticism badly’ because as the moderator, I took time to state the rules each time we were to start our meetings. As such, I was always on the edge of my seat lokking out for comments that tends to be nasty or unfair. If this happens, I quickly call the attention of the person commenting.
Much of the time, the cooperation and readiness of everyone to maintain a level of camaraderie was commendable.
There are simple rules to follow when one critiques a work. We mostly follow these and it has helped to ensure an enjoyable reading and critique session. Many of us also try to display a level of maturity. Actually, there is a deliberate effort from everyone along this line from what I have noticed in our group where the youngest person is about 24 years. There are occassions when people in the gathering call my attention to someone who has broken a rule or is about to.
Various reasons may be responsible for snark. In my opinion, it is often a reaction to percieved injury done by an earlier critic. I think the moderator has a lot of work to do here. In my group, I often say that the penalty for breaking a rule in any of our sessions is two hours of community service spent working at the literary group’s secretariat. This is just a joke, of course, but it served the purpose of reminding everyone of the need to be as ‘good-natured as possible.
Cheers.
Tunji Ajibade
tunjioa@yahoo.com