Having put my move behind me, I’ve prioritized my writing again. This means I’ve been reevaluating my writing practices, including my critique groups.

I am currently a member of two critique groups. Both meet on Zoom. Prior to COVID, that wasn’t the case. One group met weekly at a local Barnes and Noble, and the other was hosted by a friend at her home. My friend cooked a meal and served wine, and we all brought side dishes and desserts. We ate and socialized while we critiqued. We used to joke that this monthly meeting had evolved into a cooking club. And, in some respects, it had. But looking back, I have to ask myself, was that really a bad thing?

Throughout history, writers have met casually, often dining together, to discuss their works in progress. Louisa May Alcott, Nathanial Hawthorne, Ralph Waldo Emerson, and Henry David Thoreau were all part of the Concord Writers Group. The Concord Writers met in Emerson’s study, and they talked about writing while walking together near Walden Pond.

The Inklings, which included C.S Lewis, J.R. Tolkien, Owen Bartuels, and Charles Williams, often gathered in Lewis’s dorm room at Magdalen College in Oxford. When they weren’t discussing their writing there, they could be found imbibing at the Eagle and Child Pub.

Similarly, the Stratford on Odeon Group—Ernest Hemingway, James Joyce, Ezra Pound, Gertrude Stein, and F. Scott Fitzgerald met at the Shakespeare and Company Bookstore in Paris.

Suffice it to say, these writers didn’t just stare at a computer screen for 40 minutes and comment on submissions. They socialized, bonded, and formed deep friendships. Granted, I realize that times have changed dramatically since Hemingway hung out with novelist John Dos Passos in Key West. And clearly, online meetings have huge benefits. Writers who don’t live near one another can exchange ideas, and those with health issues, demanding jobs, and time-consuming family obligations can attend meetings they would have skipped had they been in person. But I have to ask myself this: Are writers missing out by not meeting in person? Shouldn’t we try to get to know one another, not just as writers but as people, too? Wouldn’t familiarity build trust and lead to more honest discussions? Would we feel more emotionally supported and less isolated if we had time to talk about our writing struggles and joys?

Most research suggests that we would. It also indicates that feedback tends to improve when writers interact in person, as they are better able to read each other’s facial expressions and voice tones. Further, readers are less likely to be blunt to the point of being unhelpful when they’re sitting next to someone, and they usually make the effort to explain their points more clearly. And because they’ve made an effort and taken the time to drive to a meeting, members are usually more loyal and committed to the group. And let’s not forget Zoom fatigue. Constant video conferencing can lead to anxiety, feelings of social isolation, and exhaustion.

Recently, at one of my meetings, the group host informed us that he would be taking a month-long vacation. He suggested that we simply exchange work and give feedback via email and forget about meeting online. Not wanting to deal with the hassle of setting up a new Zoom account, people seemed okay with his plan, myself included. But now, after doing some thinking, I’ve decided to invite my fellow writers over to my house for a meal. Will any of them actually come? Not sure.  But in the spirit of the Concord Writers, The Inklings, and the Stratford on Odeon groups, I’m going to put the word out, splurge on some wine, and plan my menu.

Thanks for reading!

Does your critique group meet in person? What do you think of online vs in person meetings? Am I simply being old-school?