Skip to content →

A Case for Workshop Alternatives

For a long time, I’ve noted a problem in the field of creative writing. Strangely, it strikes me as a crisis brought about by a lack of creativity.

It’s not necessary to spend much time in a writing class or program before it becomes clear that workshopping is a repetitive experience—and the sameness of the experience from one workshop to another impedes students’ chances to experience true insight.

On the one occasion I scored an assignment to teach an MFA poetry workshop, I vowed not to give my students sixteen identical weeks of sitting in a box while everyone talked about the weaknesses of their work. In my syllabus, I offered a number of different styles of workshop, and I allowed my students to choose their method (with a few restrictions). Here are some of the workshops I permitted, straight from the syllabus (with some edits for length):

  • Old Faithful. You’re in a box and must remain silent while workshoppers offer their insights about your work. Typically, this format will include a few words of praise followed by a list of negative critiques. We’ll try to avoid that formulaic approach in this workshop, thus pulling this method from the scrap heap and making it vibrant and useful again.
  • Question-and-Answer. You’re in charge of the discussion. It is up to you to lay out the issues that you want to address in the poem and to ask appropriate questions to help you revise. (There is a danger that you will control the discussion to the point that you fail to get any useful advice from your peers. Resist that urge.)
  • The Oprah Method. You’re in the hot seat, and your fellow workshoppers have freedom to ask probing questions about the poem—what it means, how it was written, what you wanted to accomplish, etc. I’m fond of this method, as it’s useful to practice articulating your ideas about your poems. You will have to have an oral exam one of these days, after all.
  • The Generative Method. You offer your work as a spark for fellow workshoppers, who spend a few minutes writing in response to your work. They then share what they’ve come up with (or at least a portion of it). A discussion of similarities and differences ensues.
  • Description. Workshoppers attempt to explicate a poem and talk about how it’s working. You’ll get insight into the decisions you made (perhaps unconsciously), and you’ll see where those decisions worked and where they fell short. This method differs from Old Faithful in that personal opinions about a poet’s strategies take a back seat.
  • Traditional Criticism. Here, you choose a recognized critical tradition, and workshoppers try their hand at working within it. The danger is that your fellow workshoppers may not be well versed in, say, New Historicism or Marxism or Semiotics. If you provide some guidance, though, we’ll be glad to give it a shot.
  • Other. Do you have suggestions? We’re open to most of them.

Karen Craigo is the author of two full-length poetry collections, Passing Through Humansville (2018) and No More Milk (2015), both from Sundress Publications. She is a business journalist in Springfield, Missouri, and she serves as the nonfiction editor of Mid-American Review, the prose poetry editor of Pithead Chapel, and the series editor of the Moon City Press Poetry Award.

Issue 34 >

Next >

Issue 2 >

Teachers’ Lounge >