By CaraMarie Christy

Every writing group should function differently based on its structure and goals, which can be anything from providing a professional setting for established authors workshopping their ideas to helping novice writers improve their craft. No writer attends a crit group to face pandemonium or demoralization, but many crit group experiences are wholly or partially dissatisfying. Although there is no set of universal guidelines that will provide solutions to every problem writers face in a workshop or state how exactly a critique group should be run, there are a few key procedures that will help bring order to chaos :

Appointing Leaders- Managing a critique group requires a writer willing to play “manager.” A group without a designated leader can find trouble in resolving conflict. It is rarely productive to consider everyone in the group as a “leader.” As the old saying goes, “Being leader-full is essentially being leader-less.” A leader of a critique group can also have a number of duties other than presiding over a meeting. These can be anything from figuring out when and where the group is going to meet next, to facilitating votes for deciding group objectives, and to filtering submissions from people looking to join the critique group.

For writers joining a critique group, they can discover that leaders have already been established. But writers that create new critique groups might consider founding members as candidates for leadership. In forming a new critique group, a leader should be selected based on availability and group consensus. A leader that is not available during most meeting times and cannot be present as an authority figure, despite any prowess they might possess in writing, will most likely hinder a group’s productivity.

Deadlines- Critique time should be spent equally on all members. That could mean giving each writer a specific day for receiving feedback or reserving time spots for each writer’s output to be workshopped. Writers should be prepared to either email or hand in hard copies of their work on days that they are assigned. Having a minimum and maximum word count on pieces to be critiqued can increase the group’s ability to keep within time constraints, without the risk of apportioning a writer too little or too much attention.

A Standard Time for Critiquing- Some pieces need more critiquing than others, but face the hazard of favoring or disfavoring members if they spend more time critiquing one writer than they do others. Having a timer on hand can keep members faithful to time constraints agreed upon by the group. A large piece of work could require more time than the critique group might have and a smaller one might barely take up any critique time at all. Below are rough estimates of word counts for a group to consider when deciding how long their meetings should be:
5000+ words = around 25 minutes
10000+ words = around 45 minutes
20000+ words = 1 hour to 1 hour and 15 minutes
50000+ words = around 1 1/2 to 2 hours

It is important to encourage equal use of this time by giving everyone a chance to share their notes. To promote this policy, members can implement a “no person speaks twice in a row” policy or engage those who are shy to participate by asking for their opinion regularly.

Breaks to “Cool Down”- There are times when critics might not agree on what is best for a piece. One person might like the piece in present tense and another in past tense. Studies show that both past and present tense have pros and cons, and that neither can be quantifiably identified as the “better” tense. In this example then, it is not an issue of who is right and who is wrong, but a matter of clashing ideologies.

Debate is healthy for a workshop, as it gives a writer a good sense of different readers’ expectations, but it is only productive if the writer’s final choice is respected. Conflicting advice is up to the writer to deal with; it is not up to the group members to hold lengthy debates until a “winner” is chosen. To avoid deliberations escalating into competition, a group should take short breaks when discussions become too heated, perhaps move on to a different piece for a moment or grab a snack in order to regroup their thoughts.

Percentage of Attendance- One last suggestion to manage a critique group is to hold writers accountable for attending, and participating in, a certain number of meetings. This ensures that writers are actively engaged in the group and that the group does not wither away. Writers can claim to be part of a critique group, and then never show up, for various reasons: they only want the group to look good on a resume; other obligations are preventing them from being able to participate; or they are unable to keep up with the amount of work that the group requires. In these cases, a leader should give the writer who is not fully participating a warning, and ask them to leave the group if attendance continues to be poor. Required attendance is by no means a punishment, but rather an incentive for writers to do what they joined the group to do– write!

By CaraMarie Christy

Location is key to the efficiency of a critique group because it will set the mood, the pace at which the group functions, and the rate at which its participants develop their skills. Just as a grim setting on the written page can induce a sense of nervousness in a reader, a positive work environment can create a feeling of productivity and energy for crit group partners. There are few places where a critique group could not meet, given new advances in online conference calls, like Skype. For those critics who wish to meet in-person, some potential work spaces offer more benefits than others. Here are some advantages and disadvantages of common meet-up locations:

Coffee Shops/Bookstores- “I believe humans get a lot done, not because we’re smart, but because we have thumbs so we can make coffee.” – Flash Rosenberg. These are some the best places to set up workshops, as they are often designed to promote “comfort”—e.g. big comfy chairs, tables, and internet access. The issues with this sort of location are lack of crowd control and the occasional need to get permission from store owners to use the facilities. Starbucks is famous for allowing people to use their facilities as work spaces for free but, because of this, there are hours in which the stores become overcrowded with business. Too many people trying to work at once creates a chaotic environment. To prevent this, writers need to schedule around store “rush” hours and plan alternative locations if the primary becomes impractical.

Library- “A library is the delivery room for the birth of ideas, a place where history comes to life.”- Norman Cousins. There is something to be said for writing literature in a sea of novels and novellas, as though creativity can be obtained through osmosis. Libraries are usually free to use and include numerous spaces with chairs and tables to hold meetings. However, in the middle of that sea, are other readers and writers trying to work, which can lead to whispered meetings or noise complaints. Often, libraries have rooms that can be reserved for community use, where critics can be free to be talk without disturbing other workers. Using these can require contacting library administration, who will clear up the regulations and terms of use of these facilities. Critics interested in using a library’s conference room should be prepared to justify their group’s validity and reasons for meeting. Some libraries allow only non-profit organizations to use their meeting rooms.

Playground/Park/Outdoors- “Nothing coaxes jumbled thoughts into coherent sentences like sitting under a shade tree on a pleasant day.” – Carol Kaufman, NY Times. Some writers benefit from fresh air. It can be relaxing and studies show that sun exposure helps establish a strong sleep cycle, increase Vitamin D absorption, and can cause stress relief and relaxation, all of which can lead to more energy to put towards writing and editing. There is also easy access to outdoor facilities. However, fighting the urge to lie out in the sun can be counter-productive to writing group goals. If the group is one for casual chat and critique, then this would serve its purposes. But a serious push for studying requires sitting up, paying attention, and having all participants actively engaged in discussion. There is also a problem for critique groups, in that if any one of their members has allergies, staying outside for an extended period of time becomes a challenge.

Home- “You will never feel truly satisfied by work until you are satisfied by life.” –Heather Schuck – This is a location with easy access and atmosphere control, having a critique group member volunteer their own home means that no one has to ask anyone in administration, like the coffee shops and libraries, for permission and there is no fear of disturbing other workers. The downside of using this environment is the distinction between a “work zone” and a “relaxation zone.” It’s important to have a work-life balance. Productivity increases with routine, at home routines can involve watching television and eating meals, instead of working on written content.

Diner/Restaurant/Bar- “First we eat, then we do everything else.” – M.F.K. Fisher. A favorite environment with many writers is a local diner, restaurant, or bar. These places offer the availability of substantial food and refreshment, unlike coffee shops which only provide sugary foods and drinks. Often times, if staff are tipped well and managers don’t mind, critique groups can meet here without having to confer with anyone beforehand. Typically, diners and bars are well-crowded and conversation is a norm, so there is no fear of interrupting another patron trying to work. The downsides of these environments are if the diner not selected well, the meals they provide can be expensive and that plates of food can often leave little room for writing samples and workshop notes. The work usually has to begin after the table is cleared.

By CaraMarie Christy

The difference between a book group and a critique group is that the former is created to study literature, usually without any of the authors present, and the latter is to share work-in-progress with other writers for the mutual benefit of each participant. Those who choose to form critique groups can desire different outcomes from the effort that they invest. Productivity is subjective and depends on the end goal of the individuals who initially decide to form the new critique group. An end goal can be anything from improving grammatical skill to discovering new story ideas, or simply obtaining a better understanding of readers. Forming a group is most fulfilling when the group’s activities match most of the participants’ end goals. The focuses of the critique groups below can be mixed and matched to create critique groups that will fit various writer needs.

Skill Building– “Am I doing this right?”- This is the best way to start off a critique group for new writers. The idea behind this type of group is to focus on construction rather than content. Many writers, even professionals, make mistakes in formatting dialogue, common grammar, and switching tenses mid-story. However, if these skills are drilled often enough, writers can see a significant improvement until formatting and grammar become second nature. A great way to get this type of critique, without having to dedicate copious amounts of workshop time toward it, is to produce hard copies or email copies of work to other group members. By making use of the Track Changes function of Microsoft, which can be found under the Review tab, writers can make comments on pieces they have received and then return them to the owner without altering the original work. Through this, group members can work on the grammar and formatting of their piece on their own time and reserve critique time for a different focus.

Concept Forming- “J.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis walk into a bar.”- This form of group is less about how the words are written, and more about the overall picture that the words form. To approach this style of group requires some form of mutual respect in its participants, because favorable concepts are going to vary based on a writer’s opinion. A famous partnership, and example of this, was that of J.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis, who used to throw around ideas with each other over drinks. Once J.R. Tolkien stated that no novel would ever be successful if it were to include a lamppost, which gave C.S. Lewis his famous idea for using a lamppost as the iconic image for his magical world in The Chronicles of Narnia.

Social Interaction- “Writers choose a lonely life.” Some writers are only out to touch base with other writers, read manuscripts, and receive/give encouraging comments. These kinds of groups give writers affirmation of their skills that they cannot provide for themselves. The problem with this sort of critique group is the heavy possibility for a lack of commitment. If meetings are only casual, members will not feel a strong need to prepare or show up to the meetings. To prevent this, a group can build into their workshop fun exercises (for example http://www.writersdigest.com/online-editor/7-creative-writing-prompts-to-spark-your-writing) which will help writers stimulate their creative senses and give them a reason to look forward to the workshop.

Mock Readership- “Would you buy this?”- This is a group to choose if the profitability of the work is the primary objective. This is the hardest type of critique group to form, as it requires a great deal of planning to form a group who will be subjective, with no personal bias to distract from the analysis and whether they would rate the piece favorably. For example, a friend might rate a piece of work at a higher value than a non-acquaintance. This type of group is also only productive if everyone in the group fits the “target audience” for the types of work that are being presented. If someone who writes mystery novels presents their work to a romance reader it might not receive the type of feedback that they are looking for. Few critique workshops are meant to be styled like this.

by CaraMarie Christy

There is no set of concrete rules for how to approach critique etiquette, or critiquette, as it’s been called. However, those who participate in a workshop/critique group should hold themselves to a standard of professionalism that encourages the productivity and continuity of the group. It’s difficult to know what these ideals are, what is considered acceptable and what is not, especially when most comments made in critique groups and workshops are, assumedly, an effort toward producing good literature and not an opportunity to vent. Here are some common critiques broken down into instances in which they might be acceptable and other times when they might be taken as counterproductive:

Character/Story/ Style Critique- “I don’t like what your character did.” These are the hardest critiques to give and receive, because they can often come across as unduly subjective and unhelpful. Characters in fiction cannot be censured for their misbehavior. However, there are some times when such comments are extremely beneficial to writers, though they should be more carefully crafted than the example given above. If a critic has a strong sense of who the character is, what they are likely to do, and can justify that “what the character did” is not in line with how the character has previously acted, then this critique is valid. A way to rephrase this opinion in line with useful critiquette would be to say, “I’m having trouble believing that your character would do this because of [insert reasoning here].” There are rare times when this critique is acceptable because of the character’s immorality. Numerous popular stories about serial killers fly off the shelves. If the character’s offense is so grotesque that it could be seen as a threat to readership (it makes readers stop reading) then it might be suitable to ask the writer to consider having the offense done “off screen” or, in other words, not in the view of the reader.

Format Critique- “Your story is too short/ long.” This is a critique that can work well, given that it has proper backing and the critique is also given with an identification of where the writer could shorten/lengthen the story. What a critic often means by this is that the pacing feels wrong. If a story is too short, then some of the scenes need to be fleshed out more, or there needs to be more background information. Focusing on description rather than action can also lengthen the feel of a scene. If a story is too long, then perhaps certain scenes need to be cut, focusing on those that would not impact the story’s arc. A solution for this problem is to take a favorite book, highlighting slow portions of the text with one color and the fast with another, to get a sense of how these even out in a story.

Factual Critique- “What happened in your story is impossible due to… (the laws of physics, human behavior, my experience, etc).” There are three versions of the factual critique to look out for: those that have been researched, hearsay, and overgeneralizations. Two of these are not professional and should be avoided during workshops: overgeneralization and hearsay. Overgeneralizations are not facts. An example of an overgeneralization is, “You can’t make the dog the hero in this story, because one time a dog bit me, so therefore all dogs are evil.” Hearsay is when a critic points out a flaw based on assumptions they’ve heard, but has not bothered to make sure that their critique is a fact. It allows for reasonable doubt about that comment’s accuracy. A well-researched and established fact is the most productive input.

Specific Detail Critique- “I don’t like when I can’t pronounce the character’s name. If you ever want anyone to read your work ever, you should change it!” –. The above statement, which is common in critique groups, is simply not true. A lot of great books have characters with difficult names, most notably “Hermione” in J.K. Rowling’s famous Harry Potter series. In her fourth book, after massive amounts of fans requested the pronunciation, Rowling cleared up the confusion by having one of her characters sound out the name phonetically. Few would argue though, that no one read the Harry Potter books until after book four. The best way to approach a specific detail critique is to look at the work as a whole. Does changing this detail cause any change to the theme as a whole? Does it help improve on the theme or verisimilitude of the piece? If not, then the detail might be inconsequential and a matter best left to the writer’s personal choice.

To start off can you tell us a little bit about yourself and your background?

I come from a land of successful people. It’s known as Brooklyn. I was one of the country’s top federal investigators, a forensic accountant, which can be described as a CSI for auditing: you find a pile of documents and determine whether they match the real world. In the process, you follow leads and interview people to separate guilty from innocent, and you try not to get hurt.

 

What inspired you to write Creds? How much is based on your own experiences with the IRS?

I began to write Creds as a journal on the day of my interview for the IRS. It was so evocative that I didn’t want to forget any of the details or the phrases that came to mind as events unfolded. When you’re a writer, you just start writing. But of course when I changed it into a novel I had to disguise everyone involved. For the sake of storytelling, multiple people are sometimes combined into one person. You have to shake out the complexities or no one can follow it. If you want to know which of the stories happened to me personally, that’s classified. I can tell you that more of it is true than anyone will believe, and that one of my audit subjects did try to kill me in the manner I described in the book.

 

Much of the book is critical of the bureaucracy that exists in the IRS, does that reflect your own opinions?

I actually see it in a more holistic way. As big as the IRS is, it’s part of a much larger process. You can’t even analyze the federal government unless you realize how big business drives it. What you have in the Treasury Department is a handful of heroes who overcome the handful of rogues and the multitude of nine-to-fivers to keep the machine marginally running for 325 million people who hope they don’t ever have to meet someone at the IRS. And every year you have thousands of stories of justice and injustice.

 

You released Creds in four separate parts, what was the reasoning behind that and does the complete edition differ in any way?

The four separate parts was a structure I chose mainly to keep the excitement level high. Each one has either a cliff hanger or a significant amount of dynamic tension. It’s my method of taking the story of a life—which is continuous—and making it episodic as they do in television because otherwise the multiple-year span with key events scattered throughout is a challenge in novel form. Since this was an Amazon serial release and part of a long roll-out, it was also a way to test whether the adaptation from pure memoir to what I would call a “memoir novel” was working.

 

When did you know that you wanted to be a writer?

If we ask when did someone become committed to an idea and the dedication it requires, that’s a gradual process. If we ask, however, where was the first key moment that you can identify on the path, then I would say that it was when my elementary school teachers first began to tell me that my book reports are unique, that my analysis of the stories were refreshing perspectives, far from anything they had seen before. By sixth grade, I had won a statewide essay contest in competition with high school students, and the last peg was when I got to high school and my fellow students paid me to write stories. By most definitions, you become a professional when people step up to pay you for what you do.

 

Do you have a process as a writer?

For me, a nexus of ideas creates a starting point. If those thoughts spark a key scene in my mind, that’s something I want to write down and test out, first to see if I have actual plot elements, which is what makes an idea a story, and further down the road, to see if it contains sufficient scope to be a novel.

 

What are you reading right now and what genres are you drawn to?

I’m reading The English Spy by Daniel Silva. So by genre, I can easily say spy novels, and broadly speaking, I can also add science fiction. I can rarely say mystery. After Agatha Christie’s Ten Little Indians, everything else lies in its shadow. Mystery is often a fun read, not a masterpiece. Crossovers that are part-mystery are a different story because they can be very challenging to create.

 

What advice would you give to aspiring writers?

Momentum. There are fantastic writers out there, who I know personally, that establish a pattern early in life that denies them an enriching writing life. (And I’m not talking about money at all, but rather the value of writing from the perspective of the writer.) Coming up short arises from the pattern of thinking that baby steps don’t count. Another aspect of the problem is knowing that you have a talent, and being satisfied with that knowledge instead of finding out how much further you can go. It’s the one-day-I’ll-go-on-a-diet mentality. Aspiring writers of all ages need to allow themselves progress by any increment they can muster and let it develop into a pattern of constant writing.

By Katherine Everett

Wayward Pines is a television series about Ethan Burke, a special agent who finds himself trapped in the small Idaho town called Wayward Pines, and discovers that there are far more disturbing things going on behind the peaceful, quiet windows and doors than he could ever have imagined. In our continuing coverage, we look at what’s great and what’s odd in each episode.

After this episode, I feel like the townspeople of Wayward Pines are going to be playing a very unpleasant game of “Who Shot the Sheriff?” It is pretty daring to kill off so many main characters this early in the season, but it definitely makes for great television. Sheriff Pope shared Beverly’s fate when he was killed by Ethan Burke at the end of this episode. There was also the added drama of Ethan’s wife and son joining him in Wayward Pines, which will definitely shake things up a bit. While I have some complaints about the legitimacy of their actions when they arrive in town, I will say that they made everything a lot more interesting for episode 3, “Our Town, Our Law.”

Hay-Makers:

“Our Town, Our Law.” More like the Sheriff’s town and the Sheriff’s law. This episode did a great job of amping up the tension even more on top of Beverly’s untimely death at the end of the last episode. Ethan Burke makes another daring escape attempt, his wife and son show up out of the blue, and Sheriff Pope finally loses his cool and is ready to kill. In fact, I’m surprised but thrilled by how quickly the plot seems to be advancing. I didn’t expect Ethan’s wife and son to make it to Wayward Pines until at least halfway through the season, and certainly didn’t expect to see the death of Sheriff Pope this early. Wayward Pines is wasting no time getting to the action and drama, which is fine with me. And just when you thought they weren’t going to throw anything more at you, they reveal there is some terrifying creature on the other side of the enormous fence running around the town. Let’s just say I’m beginning to understand why there are such strict rules governing the townspeople. It might be to keep them safe from whatever is out there. I can’t wait to see what happens next!

Head-Scratchers:

To start with the bad, I regret to say there are still some issues with characters behaving unrealistically in this episode. Theresa, Ethan Burke’s wife, seriously bugged me from the beginning. When she gets into town after having a car accident and finally reunites with her husband, she doesn’t question why he has a freaking house in town, why he’s been missing for days, if he’s having an affair, and why she and her son have to stay in the house. I mean, really? Nothing? It’s clear there’s something fishy going on, especially when the sheriff shows up unannounced to steal her ice cream and threaten her family. I thought that even after hearing that her husband might be having an affair, that she would at least stick around long enough to give him a piece of her mind! And as for Ethan, why wouldn’t he explain things immediately to her and her son? It just doesn’t make any sense. I’m worried that the show is so focused on the fast-paced plot that they’ve forgotten how normal people react in certain situations. Fingers crossed this doesn’t become a constant issue in an otherwise amazing TV show.

As for the wackiness in this episode, there’s definitely a lot to discuss. I really want to know how Sheriff Pope hasn’t overdosed on ice cream yet. Just kidding. Although he does seem to have an unhealthy obsession with it. The really interesting thing about him is that, while he clearly follows orders from whoever is on the phone, he’s not happy about it. This episode showed that the sheriff has some real issues with the way things are being run and would much rather have everyone believe that he is in charge of the town. So, what kind of relationship does he really have with the higher-ups? Is he really in league with them or is he just as imprisoned as the rest of the townspeople? I guess it’ll be hard to find out, seeing as he’s dead and all. Something else to ponder is why whoever is in charge is keeping Ethan alive at this point. He’s clearly important, but why? You’d think he would have caused enough trouble to merit being killed at this point, so there has to be a reason why they’re keeping him around. Also, it looks like Kate didn’t betray him at the end of the last episode after all, and Sheriff Pope just said that she did. Is she lying or telling the truth? Finally, the biggest question of all: What was that creature that took Pope’s body at the end of the episode? Is it a monster? Some government scientist’s creation gone horribly wrong? An alien, perhaps? We’ll just have to wait to find out.

 

By Sarah Tarabey

 

Reading historical fiction is, in many ways, like reading action and adventure novels, sci-fi thrillers, or romance series: we read them to take us just far away enough from where we are that we can explore what we know in ways we haven’t yet encountered. But historical fiction also provides us with experiences that other genres cannot.

While actual texts from the past are rich and alive, they can also prove difficult to parse. Have you picked up a copy of Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales lately? If you had, you would soon notice that the Middle English needs more than a little effort to get into. If they haven’t already been translated, most editions gloss several words, which is to say they provide marginal notations of their meaning, and include lengthy contextual explanations for nearly every tale. Ancient and medieval texts remind us that the past is a world unto itself. It’s doubtful that we’ll ever be able to enter such a milieu completely.

But that’s where historical fiction comes in. While we might not know everything that there is to know about a certain time period, writing historical fiction allows us to create worlds which, at least, resemble our understanding of the past. And that’s the key: historical fiction tends to reveal more about what we have taken from times long gone. And a nice Elizabethan backdrop doesn’t hurt, either.

So why else do we tend to gravitate toward this expansive, yet familiar, genre?

 

Social Commentary

Sometimes, all we need is to look at someone else doing the same thing we’re doing in order to gain a deeper understanding of who we are. Framing narratives in history creates an illusion of distance from our current reality. This separation becomes a useful tool for authors. It gives them freer rein to create worlds that closely parallel our own; to get into the psyches of characters who resemble parts of ourselves, or our collective identity; and to comment on or critique actions, ideologies, and events that we struggle with as a society. When reading historical fiction, we aren’t focused on preserving our own egos. Time separates “us” from “them.” For the same reasons, authors of these works feel less pressure to hold back their opinions. They can get away with making striking statements, and in this context, we may be more inclined to agree with them.

 

Rose-Colored Glasses

We tend to romanticize the past as a simpler time. Feel free to replace “simpler” with a bevy of other positive adjectives: more beautiful, more alive, more exciting. Historical fiction sometimes becomes a means for us to escape from the harsh reality of the present. Bemoaning trending short shorts and crop tops, we might marvel at the beautiful fashion of the Victorian aristocracy. We might wish to partake in a revolutionary Salon of the Enlightenment, displaying a Voltairean wit which might not be as well received today. Or we might want to reside in Mesopotamia, that mystical land where everything began, where men and women looked to the skies to foretell the quality of their futures. When we look at a past era, we might think that we would have had more important or fulfilling lives had we lived in that time. Historical fiction responds to our pervasive discomfort with the present. While our fantasies may suffer the limitation of being only partially based in reality, the appreciation that historical fiction awakens within us keeps us coming back for more.

 

Social Media as a Benchmark

Historical fiction fills in a much-needed gap in our collective subconscious for a connection with our past. Sometimes we can find social media overbearing. We feel like we know more than we want to about people leading predictable lives inasmuch as they are usually quite similar to our own. But the details of the everyday lives of people past are relatively unknown to us. And judging from the countless novels written about famous past figures, or purporting to utilize their perspective, we wouldn’t mind reading a play-by-play of their daily activities. The same applies to particularly intriguing time periods. Think of the success of The Other Boleyn Girl by Philippa Gregory or Ken Follett’s The Pillars of the Earth. We want to know how people used to live in order to gather clues about human nature, and the recurrent themes that unite people across time. Historical fiction provides the characters, the setting, and the conflict to help us bear witness to those themes.

 

Doing More with Less

The past still has barriers that the present has already solved. Consider that even a few decades ago, the internet wasn’t a tool for the masses. Only a hundred years before that point in time did the first gasoline-powered car come out.

How were peoples of the past able to overcome the same problems that plague humanity while working with what we might consider a deficit of knowledge and technology? They came to live, and even thrive, with “less” to work with than we have now. Historical fiction provides us with the stories of the struggles of individuals deeply embedded in the unique strengths and weaknesses of their times. Yet these individuals must still contend with eternal human concerns, striving much like we do today, to understand the purpose and meaning behind life. Historical fiction is unique in its ability to show us how people with capacities similar to our own coped with environments beyond our ability to fully comprehend.

 

 

(allgeektome.net)

By Katharine Everett

Is this 1984? Because it sure feels like George Orwell’s Big Brother has its gaze fixed on the town of Wayward Pines. Everything the residents say, do, and maybe even think seems to be observed by whoever is really in charge. It’s pretty unsettling, but in the best way possible for a TV show. Some mysteries are solved in this episode but even more are created in the process. Now we know the rules of survival in this town but that doesn’t guarantee anyone’s safety, especially Ethan’s. There were a few bumps and bruises as well in this episode, but I’m willing to smooth them over for the sake of the wonderful and creepy story unfolding in episode 2, “Do Not Discuss Your Life Before”.

Hay-Makers:

While there are still many questions left unanswered, this episode gave the audience a bit more information about the way life in Wayward Pines works. Kate Houston, now Kate Ballinger, gives Ethan the three most important rules to know to survive Wayward Pines: 1. Don’t try to escape, 2. Don’t talk about the past, and 3. Always answer the phone. While the last rule seemed quite odd at first, by the end of the episode it made a lot more sense. The townspeople’s sudden abandonment of smiling, peaceful suburbia to hunt down and kill Beverly was abrupt and terrifying in its enactment. The scene really illustrated the true menace of the town and that following the rules is truly a life or death choice.

I also loved the way the episode handled the subtle body language and dialogue that characters in the town have to adopt to communicate with each other under the eyes of whatever Big Brother figure calling the shots. Saying one thing but meaning the other hints at who might secretly be allies for Ethan. For instance, Kate seems particularly helpful to Ethan, although she betrays both him and Beverly at the end, and the Sheriff as well seems outwardly aggressive toward Ethan but also always seems to point him in the right direction. We’ll have to see if either of them become allies for Ethan later on.

Head-Scratchers:

While I thoroughly enjoyed the episode, certain actions and decisions on Ethan’s part seemed farfetched to me. Perhaps he handles situations under pressure differently than most people as a special agent but he doesn’t seem very fazed by the gigantic wall running around the perimeter of the town or the microchip in his skin. In fact, he doesn’t seem to question very much why anything is happening or who is in charge of the town. I thought he might ask more questions of Beverly who has lived there for a year and thus allowed the audience to get a better understanding of the town. I know we’re not supposed to understand everything just yet, but Ethan’s reactions felt a bit unrealistic to me and left me feeling frustrated. His and Beverly’s escape plan also seemed horribly planned out and executed. They couldn’t come up with anything better than what the dead secret agent planned? For me, everything just felt a bit rushed and the characters’ actions didn’t make total sense. Hopefully next episode will improve upon this problem.

Now onto the whacky parts. Seriously, what is up with the time difference in Wayward Pines? That is my biggest question at the moment. Neither Beverly nor Ethan seems to have an explanation or appear very interested in investigating it either. Maybe next episode? Also, is Ethan hallucinating some of the stuff that is going on? The shrink and sheriff certainly seem to want him to think so. It seems we’re dealing with a potentially unreliable narrator in this series. How much is real and how much is delusion? I also want to know the deal with the phones and the rule about not talking about the past. They literally killed Beverly just because she slipped up and mentioned her daughter. Why did they have such an extreme reaction? And why did Kate betray Ethan? She seemed to be helping him up until the dinner party. Did she only do it because her husband was there and she didn’t want to out herself as Ethan’s ally? What will Ethan do now that the town is out for his blood? I can’t wait to see what happens next.

 

(theblackox.com)

By Katharine Everett

Wayward Pines, the new creepy thriller brought to you by Fox, seems like the strange but wonderful offspring of the noire genre and the TV show Lost. Similar to Lost, Wayward Pines follows a formula where the intent is to surprise the viewer with its unusual writing style and plot while greater and smaller mysteries are slowly unraveled over time. This formula is immediately apparent in the first episode, “Where Paradise is Home,” as we meet special agent, Ethan Burke, who wakes up in the middle of the woods with various small wounds and no memory of how he got there. He is supposed to be searching for two missing agents in Idaho—Kate Houston, Ethan’s former partner and mistress (he’s married), and Bill Evans. After stumbling through the woods, Ethan comes across the quaint and creepy town of Wayward Pines, where not everything is as it seems and where the situation quickly goes from bad to worse. We’ll be examining each episode for its “hay-makers” and “head-scratchers” while analyzing the story as it unfolds.

Hay-Makers:
Wayward Pines is brilliantly set up from the beginning to leave its audience with more questions than answers but also desperate for more. Matt Dillon who plays Ethan Burke plays a very believable character who struggles constantly with his confusion and frustration while trying to maintain some semblance of sanity. Another memorable actor is Melissa Leo who plays the very scary nurse, Pam, who is guaranteed to send shivers down the spines of viewers as she threatens the main character with an agonizing surgery with no anesthetic. Besides the many talented actors involved in this show, the set-up of the first episode was done very well. One unsolved mystery after another is presented to the audience and everything feels like it’s on the verge of tipping at any moment. This is certainly a TV show that makes you think and keeps you on the edge of your seat.

Head-Scratchers:
There are almost so many questions that it’s difficult to know where to start. From the beginning, what is the deal with this town? Everyone seems to be in on some big secret that Ethan knows nothing about. How does time work here? The bartender thought she had only been there a year but had actually been there for more than a decade, while Kate, Ethan’s partner, was missing for five weeks but had actually been in Wayward Pines for twelve years! What is going on with the crickets? Ethan found a recording of crickets hidden in a bush and the bartender told him there were no crickets in Wayward Pines. Why is that significant? Who killed the special agent that Ethan found tortured in an abandoned house? Why can’t Ethan leave Wayward Pines and what is up with the gigantic fence that runs around the perimeter? Finally, Adam and the shrink are clearly in on what is happening in Wayward Pines and insinuate that Ethan was chosen for some reason? Is there some sick psychological experiment going on? Who’s behind it? It’s all a bit overwhelming but I’m sure we’ll just have to keep watching if we want any answers.