Groups which gather regularly to encourage people in their writing, can sadly turn into something less than encouraging. Writing can be intimidating in the privacy of our own rooms. But when others are called together to point out the errors, shortcomings, weakness, or plain lameness of our writing, we all may cower.
I have found a few simple ground rules make this process more human and more constructive. When I lead groups, I essentially break the discussion of each piece of writing into two parts: (1) What worked? and (2) Where could it be improved?
Responses in both parts should be specific (an apt word choice or metaphor, an aspect of structure, a strong illustration, a good use of building drama, etc.). “Something I thought was strong was . . .” is a good way to begin.
Also, responses in both parts should be brief. No lectures, please. Aim for one or two minutes. Get in and get out.
Then in part two be positive by focusing how it might be improved rather than what was weak. The shift may be slight but it’s important. I encourage comments like, “I wonder if it could be made better by doing X.” Or, “Here’s something I wondered about…” Stick to “I” statements rather than “You” statements such as, “You were weak when…” which can feel like a personal attack.
A final key rule is this: Content is off limits. We don’t discuss whether we agree or disagree with a viewpoint, only whether a point is well expressed or well researched. We focus on the writing, not on the merit of the ideas. If someone wants to discuss content, go out for coffee or a beer afterward. This rule keeps the discussion and the group both focused and constructive.
Content is obviously an issue regarding nonfiction. It can also arise for fiction if the discussion moves to theme (which some may find problematic).
Certainly gray lines can appear when it comes to, for example, “Was the writing persuasively argued?” That can lead to comments like, “Well, I wasn’t persuaded because I think X.” Soon we are diving into the deep waters of content.
In such a case, I try to refocus the question: “Did the piece clearly and honestly reflect opposing viewpoints (i.e., not set up straw men)?” If so, we move on. If not, we encourage the writer to do better.
The purpose of writing groups, you see, is not to show how astute I am but to build others up in the challenging and rewarding work of creating good, true, and beautiful writing.
Photo credits: Pixabay–suju (sparrows); padrinan (pencils)



“
Eventually something that finds its way into our morning pages may trigger and idea or project we want to pursue. That’s fine. We can work on it outside of our time set aside for morning pages, and that we can show to others for input if desired. But we never show others our morning pages themselves. A friend of mine, Bill, who didn’t think he was very creative undertook Cameron’s disciplines and started producing some remarkable poetry.
I think the answer is a lesson in our tendency to take things out of context. Understanding what’s going on depends on seeing the whole sweep of the narrative in all thirty-six chapters of Numbers and the whole sweep of Psalms, not an isolated chapter or verse.
When we firmly, completely, uncompromisingly put our trust in a particular way of viewing the Bible, ironically we put ourselves at risk of disbelief. Why? Because if one brick of the structure we have built crumbles, then the whole edifice falls. 

The emphasis on conversionism has had another effect. It has made evangelicals more individualistic than Catholics, who are oriented more toward the community of faith as a primary means for drawing closer to God. Certainly American individualism has had a tremendous impact on American Catholicism as well. American Catholics are much more willing, as mentioned earlier, to disagree with and act contrary to the Church’s teachings than Catholics in many other countries. Nonetheless, when it comes to spirituality, it is primarily a matter of the community.
I said, “The Road to Emmaus is a paradigm of Catholic spirituality, right? Spiritual growth is a journey that we go on. And Christ travels with us on this journey even though we may not know he is there. But we recognize him in the breaking of the bread, in the Eucharist. And our immediate instinct at such times of significant encounter with Christ is to go to the community, just as the two on the Road to Emmaus did. So we have in this paradigm the key elements of the journey, the presence of Christ, the Eucharist and the community that make up much of Catholic spirituality.”2 He looked completely bored, as if I were telling him the sun rises in the east and sets in the west.
“Exactly. Spiritual growth happens in crisis events when we are suddenly thrust to a higher or deeper level of intimacy and commitment to Christ. From that moment we are radically changed. Spirituality proceeds dialectically. There is a radical discontinuity of the past from the future. Sometimes that moment is the crisis of conversion. Sometimes it is hearing a calling or some other new spiritual experience. So I think your Protestant friends may be expecting a Damascus Road experience.”