Critiques and Discussions:
How to get the most from your workshop

As we prepare our notes for the upcoming workshop, here a few things to help make this the best possible experience for everyone. For those of you familiar with academia, think of this as a sort of syllabus - also guidelines for future workshops and professional submissions.

Prepping Your Story
Critiquing Stories
Live Workshopping
Closing Thoughts
McKitterick Bio

Some useful stuff to prepare for my Speculative-Fiction Writing Workshop and AdAstranaut "Science into Fiction" Spec-Fic Workshops:

Prepping your story

First off, to keep them organized for everyone, please title your files with your last (and first if you want) name; the title or a word or two from the title; and something that identifies whether this is the outline or the chapters. This is a good idea not just for our Workshop, but also helps editors when you submit for publication. An example might be McKitterick-Lutefisk-Monkey.doc. Please make them .doc (or .rtf if you're using some program that can't do .doc) so everyone can read them (note that new Word programs save as .docx, which can be a pain for some). Some people like .pdf files, but most of us can't mark those up, and many like to comment directly in the document file itself, so don't send .pdf files except on editorial request. And as much as you might appreciate the virtues of Scrivener or your 1997 copy of Word Perfect, avoid oddball document types.

Practice being a professional right away. Here's how you need to format your manuscripts so editors will take you seriously (and so we don't get bogged down with minutiae):

Manuscript Preparation (pdf), by Vonda McIntyre

Proper Manuscript Formatting, by William Shunn.

Also, to keep them organized, please title your files with your last (and first if you want) name and the title or a word or two from the title (when submitting books and such to editors, also use something that identifies if your submission is an outline or specific chapters). An example might be McKitterick-Lutefisk-Monkey.doc. Your best option is to save them as .doc files (or .docx, or .rtf if you're using some program that can't do .doc) so everyone can read them.

When submitting elsewhere, follow the instructions if a magazine is looking for a specific file format (a market I recently submitted to wanted only .rtf files) before you submit for publication. Following these guidelines makes you look more professional: When you practice being a professional, you'll soon become one.

If you have specific questions or concerns about your story, please have those prepared to ask at the start of your story's live critique session. This ensure we address your needs while avoiding interfering with your cohorts' fresh reading experience.

Okay, let's get on with the process.

Critiquing stories

We'll use an ever-evolving process I've found most useful over the years: Everyone reads and critiques everyone else's stories, and then we discuss them in a round-robin format (more on that below) focusing on the author's questions and concerns about their work, keeping in mind the level of support vs. critique they request. I prefer this over random discussion or lectures because a writer learns as much from critiquing others' stories as from hearing critiques of their own. It also makes for a much more interactive, lively, and involving discussion for all.

First, some preparatory stuff:

How can you be the best critiquer possible? A few things. First, check out SF Grand Master James Gunn's short and excellent essay:

"How to Be a Good Critiquer and Still Remain Friends."

Go ahead and read it now. I'll wait.

Okay, now that you've seen the theory, I recommend starting your critique with what you liked about the story and why:

Discuss what you found moving, meaningful, evocative, interesting, exciting, beautiful, and so forth in the story.
What did you find appealing about the characters?
What about the plot or narrative structure drew you through the story?
What aspects of worldbuilding, idea, and other details did you enjoy or love?
What language particularly appealed to you or moved your heart?
What imagery, metaphor, and other literary techniques did the author employ well?
Did the story teach you something new about the human condition?
Did it stretch the boundaries of its genre or mode of storytelling?
And any other good stuff.

This isn't just to soften up the author (though it helps!); it helps improve this story if they can enhance those elements. But the primary value of starting like this is that it helps us recognize things that work and encourages us do those things again and write ever-better work in the future. It's easy to miss our successes. By recognizing them, we can grow those strengths and then enhance other aspects that could use more attention.

Then move on to address Goethe's recommendations for critics by framing these questions:

What did the author intend to do?
How well did they do it?
(Last and least important) Was it a good, worthwhile, or interesting thing to do?

Let this guide your recommendations. Don't think about what you would do with this story; think about what the author was trying to say or do. This makes the critique sessions much more interesting and swifter, as we can focus on the important stuff and areas for general improvement, and wrap up before the night terrors begin their rounds.

Feel free to copyedit, mark typos and spelling and syntax issues, and whatever else comes up. Mark up formatting issues, and make other such markups on the manuscripts (printed or e-doc format), as this helps authors improve their micro-writing and professional appearance - two things vital to publication success. But don't forget to make substantive recommendations about how to best improve the story, and in the larger sense how the writer can improve their next story. It's also important to create a written critique of the stories, too. Here are some thoughts that I share with my undergraduate writing classes - useful for experienced critiquers, as well: Critique Guidelines Sheet (.doc) and the "Live Workshopping" section, below, as your guide.

To prepare for this, read these stories not only as a critiquer, and not only as a reader, but also as an acquisitions editor. These pages are all you know about this story. What works? What doesn't? Would you buy it or recommend that the Big Editor buy it? Why or why not? Does it work for you as a reader? Do you believe in the characters and their situation? Is this a solid, believable story? Does the language and the pacing pull you through? Are you in the presence of genius?

Your written critique need only be a page or two long for each story. What should it contain? Try to frame in your mind the "Platonic ideal" version of the story at hand. What is the author trying to say? If it's not apparent in the story itself, that suggests something the author might need to address. If it's a bunch of things that aren't really focused, that's something else. What gets in the way of the story's perfection? What does it need to attain its optimal state?

Identify these:

Strengths you notice. Areas to pay attention to include story, character, plot, details, setting, conflict, ideas, language, imagery, sensory detail, structure, theme, dialogue, or a hundred other elements that all need to work together to create great fiction - and why does it work well?
Issues or problems that you notice with those elements. Consider these in terms of what the author was trying to do.
Questions that arise for you as you read the story.

Some people prefer to write by hand on a printed manuscript, some prefer to use the digital-editing tools in their writing software, while others prefer to create a separate document file with all their comments. However you want to handle it is fine - pay attention to what the writers request, if they have a preference. But always provide a written critique.

Writing down your critique has two purposes: It forces you, as the reader and critiquer, to really solidify your thinking about a work before discussing it live; and it allows you, as the writer, to have a set of documents about your story, including things we maybe didn't get a chance to talk about. It also means many of us have a piece of paper on which to draw dragons and robots during the conversation. I do both, mark up a print copy and then add larger comments in the digital copy. Go ahead and mark typos, spelling or syntax comments, and whatever else comes up as you read.

Want more on the critique process? Check out "How to Give and Get Good Critique" (.doc), by Randy Henderson.

Live workshopping

During our live critique and discussion sessions, we'll go round-robin (alternating between clockwise and counter-clockwise) starting with the person next to the author, each of us speaking in turn without interrupting one another. Please don't use the discussion time for copyedit-level comments - except, if you must, on the larger scale, such as, "I noticed that your sentences use commas in a random fashion." Put those markups on the manuscript itself or comment about them in your critique. In addition to offering specific story comments, I usually use a little time to also discuss general writing theory and practice, micro-writing technique, or other professionalization tips, so leave that to me.

I've recently added a new stage to critique sessions: We'll begin by addressing the author's specific questions (if they have any) that they shared when turning in their story - they'll restate them and any other questions first. Everyone makes sure to address these in context of offering their own observations and suggestions. After asking their opening questions, the author remains silent until we've all had our say, unless asked a direct question or the discussion is going in a direction that's unhelpful.

Sometimes that's tough to do when everyone seems to be missing the point. Use this as a time to practice your Zen mastery and to learn from the experience of listening, rather than waste energy defending your work: Why has everyone read the story differently than you intended? How can you make it work in the way you meant? Why didn't your genius shine through to these pedestrian minds? When everyone's had their say, the author has a chance to talk again if she or he wishes, or to ask questions for a limited open-discussion time. But try to hold your tongue until then! Same for the rest of y'all - respect the current critiquer who has the floor. Whether you post your work on a critique forum, or you ask someone for a critique privately, the etiquette is the same:

While your story is getting critiqued live, write down the comments that get you thinking - especially those that confuse you - whether or not you agree with them, because some of what's said aloud arises from other people's commentaries, and might not show up in the critiques you receive.
Say thank you as soon as possible. Sure, you can say you might want to ask questions later, but that's not the point. Someone has just invested a lot of time and effort reading and analyzing your work, and preparing a thoughtful reaction to it. Be polite.
Do not argue. Do not explain. Does this mean you have to agree with the feedback? Of course not. But arguing is pointless. Your story or novel must stand on its own, as it will when being read by an editor or agent.

Does that mean you can't ask questions? Well, that depends. Don't do so during someone's critique, because that distracts and can lead down rabbit holes. I'll leave time at the end for open discussion. Also, some critiquers don't want to answer questions. Or they don't have time. Or they've come across someone who confuses "conversation" with "OMG, here's how you were wrong to hate my story." However, most critiquers are happy to clarify what they meant. If they are, they will tell you. If they don't say, ask. Then abide by their answer.

When it comes around to my turn to talk (I'll go last, or just before our guest author if they're on hand), in addition to my own response to the author's questions and my critique, I'll use the story to discuss writing recommendations relevant not just to this story but to writing in general, things such as thoughts on character, plot, setting, senses, and more - kind of micro-lectures. I've put together a ton of documents about each of these things and will share those that the story and our discussions bring up, rather than flood you with a bunch of theory right away (you can find many of them here, and linked from there, if you feel like drinking from a fire-hose; I post things there mostly for reference after workshops).

While everyone is giving critiques, you'll see me writing more notes about each story during the discussion. This is because hearing others' thoughts often stimulates more of our own, or responses to other people's thoughts. I find the discussions really useful for my own writing, too, and urge you to consider the same. Half the value of critiquing others' work is what we can learn from their successes and misses. How can you use the feedback you're hearing about other people's work to improve your own?

Last up is our guest instructor, if we have one. They'll provide their own unique perspective and expertise.

After each story critique's round-robin is done, I'll leave a little time for open discussion where we can discuss the larger issues and awesomenesses of each piece, things that have arisen during critiques, and writing in general. The author can ask additional questions, others can respond to those who went after them, we can talk craft and art theory relevant to the story at hand, and so forth. Let's cap this time at no more than 5-10 minutes per story, though it'll often be shorter - especially when the author is overwhelmed with feedback and has no new questions yet. Please be respectful of when someone wants to process before getting additional feedback. There's plenty of time to continue the conversation at dinner, in the evening, at dinner tomorrow, online, or a month from now via our Discord channels or email discussion group.

"What if I hate my feedback?" Fair question. At least give your readers' comments careful consideration. Think about why they didn't like a character, why they got bored or lost with the plotting, why they felt the setting was uninteresting, or whatever else didn't work for them. Do that not because you need to placate them, but because it helps your writing. Your job as author in a workshop is to listen to feedback, analyze what worked and didn't, and come up with solutions about how to address the comments. Likely some people will simply not get what you're trying to do. That can be on them or on your story. But if everyone misses the point or misreads your story, it's probably something to ponder.

Closing thoughts

Chris with one of his telescopes in Lawrence, KS Informally, these writing discussions might go on past the scheduled times - for the summer's residential spec-fic workshops, pretty much day and night for the full two weeks, when you'll probably interact with folks in Kij's workshops and other writers, as well. Now is when you might make writing connections that last a lifetime! Take advantage of this rare opportunity. There's time enough to sleep when we're done. Use our workshop-specific Google Group, the larger alum Google Group, and Ad Astra Discord to stay in touch, continue critiquing, post publication news, and so forth. Workshop cohorts stay in touch regularly with writing updates, support, and other discussion. A writing group like that - people with shared drives and experience - is a hugely valuable resource.

Keep in mind that the most important thing you'll learn is not specifically how to revise these stories. You read that right. Optimally, what you'll come away with from our sessions is how to write your best new work in the future based on what you learn over the period of our workshop. Keep your mind open for the big picture, rather than narrowly focused on the individual story at hand - and not just for your own story, but for everyone else's, too. How can you learn from everyone else's successes? What can you learn from other people's misses? How can you avoid making the same mistakes again, or others' mistakes? How can you re-create your own or others' successes?

If you strive to do all of this during our time together, I guarantee that you'll get the most out of the experience, and your writing will vastly improve. Optimally, honing your critique skills on other people's work translates into self-critique mastery, and that leads to writing publishable work. My experience from serving as guest author in James Gunn's SF Workshop from 1992-2010, and then from leading my own ever since, shows that anyone - given enough practice, passion, effort, and an open mind - can eventually write publishable stories. You can, too.

Who's this Chris McKitterick guy?

Writers need to have short bios on hand and ready to go whenever you sell a work or an event comes up. Here's what I use:

One line:

Award-winning author, educator, autodidact, public speaker, restorer of machines and injured wildlife, astro-guy, and founding director of the Ad Astra Institute for Science Fiction & the Speculative Imagination.

100-ish words:

Chris McKitterick has lived in seven states and two countries, but calls Lawrence - where he teaches science fiction and writing at the University of Kansas - home. His short work has appeared in many publications (his newest in Analog won the 2019 AnLab Readers' Award), and his debut novel was Transcendence. Current projects include Ad Astra Road Trip, Empire Ship, Stories from a Perilous Youth, and more. He's a popular speaker, Campbell Memorial Award juror and chair, long-time director of James Gunn's original Center for the Study of Science Fiction, and founding director of the Ad Astra Institute for Science Fiction & the Speculative Imagination. He sees surviving his youth as evidence of quantum realities.

Short bio:

Since first seeing print in 1984, McKitterick's award-winning short work has appeared in markets including Abyss & Apex, Aftermaths, Analog (where his newest won the AnLab Readers' Award), Argentus, Artemis, Captain Proton, Discovery Channel Magazine, E-Scape, Extrapolation, Foundation, Global Warming Aftermaths, James Gunn's Ad Astra, Libraries Unlimited, Locus, Mythic Circle, NOTA, Ruins: Extraterrestrial, Sentinels, Sense of Wonder, SFRA Review, Synergy, Tomorrow Speculative Fiction, Top Deck magazine, various TSR publications, Visual Journeys, Westward Weird, World Literature Today, a bowling poem anthology, and elsewhere. A poem of his was also set to music. His newest stories are available in Mission: Tomorrow and the Analog.

His debut novel, Transcendence, is available in its second edition through booksellers everywhere, plus as a free download on his website. He recently finished a far-future novel, Empire Ship, and has several other projects on the burner, including The Galactic Adventures of Jack & Stella and Stories From a Perilous Youth, a humorous memoir of surviving childhood and the Cold War. He wrote the introduction for a nonfiction book about James Gunn (the first ever!), by Michael Page.

McKitterick speaks regularly about science fiction and writing at conferences, conventions, public events, schools, and on webcasts and NPR. Some highlights include giving the keynote talk for the University of Iowa Medical Scientist Training Program's annual research event ("Positive Feedback Loops: Science and Science Fiction") and the UCO Liberal Arts Symposium XXIV ("Science Fiction: Mythologies for a Changing Age"), and serving as a guest of honor and workshop leader at the 2019 China Science Fiction Convention.

Taking a writing workshop with SF Grand Master and Hall of Fame inductee James Gunn launched a 30-year relationship with science fiction at the University of Kansas. After completing a graduate program in SF under his mentorship, McKitterick co-taught Gunn's month-long SF summer program while living in Seattle and working in the gaming and tech industries for several years. In 2002, KU recruited him to teach writing and SF literature full-time. In 2010, he succeeded Gunn as director of his original SF center, until shortly after Gunn's death in 2020, when it was reconfigured into an academic department's unit. In 2021, McKitterick launched the predecessor to the Ad Astra Institute for Science Fiction & the Speculative Imagination to continue his SF mission. McKitterick reorganized and led the Theodore Sturgeon Memorial Award for best short SF, and now serves as juror and chair for the (to be renamed) John W Campbell Memorial Award for best SF novel.

Here's my full (work-oriented) bio, and here's the one I usually use.

I'm also on a bunch of social networks (links). Probably the best place to get to know me is through my Tumblr blog (where I go to great length to tag stuff, including useful writing tips - check out this curated writing-tips collection for my SF and fiction-writing classes).

See you soon!

Best,
Chris

"Science into Fiction" Spec-Fic Writing Workshops:
  Series 1: "The Higgs Boson in This Particular Universe"
  Series 2: "Creativity and the Brain"
  Series 3: "Writing in (and about) the Age of Artificial Intelligence"
  Fall 2024 Series 4: "Six great stories and what makes them work: The science of SF writing"

Chris McKitterick's Spec-Fic Writing Workshop & Repeat Offenders Workshop

Kij Johnson & Barbara Webb's SF&F Novel Writing Workshops and Masterclasses

Speculative-fiction writing resources

Scholarships