Topic: Call for aspiring writers, wreaders, wreviewers…
Call for aspiring writers, wreaders, wreviewers…
who would like to form a group composed of 12-15 writers that would review each other’s work and review the reviews of each other’s work. The idea for this group springs from a workshop group of aspiring writers I hosted in my office for 10 years.
Within the 1st 18 months of formation, that group of 15 evolved into a group that met for 3½ hours biweekly on a Saturday starting at 9:00AM to review a writer’s work submitted at least 2 weeks prior. The writer being reviewed brought breakfast. I made coffee bought by the group.
In the 1st hour, we went around the table with each attendee except the author reviewing the piece for no more than 4 minutes, preferably from notes written during the previous two weeks. A member of the group volunteered to enforce the time limit and to keep other members from interrupting. If the group was below full capacity, the moderator was lax on the 4-minute limit. Folks were free to get up to go to the bathroom, get coffee, eat some of the laid out breakfast, etc.
At the end of the hour, we broke for 10 minutes to talk about my grandchildren.
In the 2nd hour, we went around the table with the attendees reviewing the reviews. This was pretty much a free-for-all, but the moderator had a rubber hose filled with lead sinkers to break up fights. Folks were free to get up to go to the bathroom, get coffee, eat some of the laid out breakfast, etc.
At the end of the hour reviewers handed their notes to the author and, we broke for 10 minutes to talk about my grandchildren.
In the 3rd hour, the author opened the hour by telling the group how he was helped by the reviews. Then the author asked questions of the group members and answered questions from the group members.
I would like to be part of a group of from 12 to 15 members that adapted the basic structure of the in-person group to fit TNBW’s capabilities.
I see the reviewing to be conducted as follows:
1. During week 1: 14 members receive a work with 5 of the members assigned to review it.
2. During week 2: 5 different members review the work and review the reviews submitted by the first 5 members.
3. During week 3: 4 remaining members and the author review all the reviews and all the reviews of the reviews. And the author thanks the reviewers by telling them what waves the stones they had cast into his pond caused.
The groups of 5 would revolve each week and a new piece would enter the spotlight each week. The spotlight would shine on the pieces in the order they were received.
I would like for the group’s wit and wisdom to be open to all the members of TNBW. I would like for the group to be composed of the 1st 15 TNBW members who survive a spirited discussion to help set the rules under which we’ll operate to wear togas when they write and refer to themselves as Charter Members when complaining about having to stand in line at the grocery store behind men talking about their grandchildren.
I would like for anyone in TNBW who becomes interested enough in what we are doing in our group to queue up in a waiting list to join the group. I would like for our group to be TNBW’s best review group and the waiting list to join it to be the longest.
After we’ve set the rules, but before we start work, I would like for us to agree on a name for the group. I would like to suggest Dante’s Inferno with a sign over the door that reads: Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
I would also like to talk frequently about my grandchildren during the weeks between reviews, reviews of reviews, and reviews of reviews and the author’s genuflections to the group.
I would like for all my likes to be subject to sharp and eloquent disagreements during the period in which we set up the group.
Memphis Trace
