Seattle Philosophy Club

This critique group is kept private to preserve the privacy of critique submissions. Most don't RSVP on Meetup.

To join, please email Erik at tigurini@protonmail.com and include in your message: (1) A description of your current writing project(s), (2) Your goals for joining this writer's critique group, (3) And a brief history of yourself as a writer, including past projects, education, and related. Your message doesn't have to be anything fancy. We just wish to make sure that you're serious about observing and that your intentions/projects are a good fit for this critique group.

About:
As the title suggests, we critique writing that is speculative (sci-fi, fantasy, horror, surrealism, slipstream, etc.), philosophical (idea-driven, writing with a message, etc.), and experimental (unusual language, visual/musical aspects, transgressive, etc.). All writing submitted for critique should fit at least one of these categories. We are happy to include work in all formats (poetry, prose, playwriting, screenplay, libretto, graphic novel, and hybrid) and for any audiences (adults, YA, and kids).

Some Example Works:
Of course, the written works and authors that inspire us may vary, and widely. Nonetheless, here's a list of some written works and authors that have inspired us, and which we might use as an (incomplete) list of the kind of writing that could be submitted to this critique group.
One Hundred Years of Solitude, Gabriel Garcia Marquez; Ice, Anna Kavan; Blade Runner, Philip K. Dick; The Waves, Virginia Woolf; The Fire Next Time, James Baldwin; The Street of Crocodiles, Bruno Shulz; Stories of Your Life, Ted Chiang; The Faerie Queene, Edmund Spenser; The Book of Disquiet, Fernando Pessoa; The Dreamquest of Unknown Kadath, H. P. Lovecraft; Don't Bite The Sun, Tanith Lee; Illuminations, Arthur Rimbaud; The Rings of Saturn, W. G. Sebald; The Three Body Problem, Liu Cixin; Moby Dick, Herman Melville; Kindred, Octavia E Butler; The Handmaid's Tale, Margaret Atwood; The Divine Comedy, Dante; The Last Unicorn, Peter S. Beagle; A Doll's House, Henrik Ibsen; Les Fleurs du Mal, Charles Baudelaire; Blindsight, Peter Watts; The Left Hand of Darkness, Ursula K. Leguin; Sweat, Lynn Nottage; The Song of Maldoror, Comte de Lautremont; Solaris, Stanislaw Lem; Blood Meridian, Cormac McCarthy; Dune, Frank Herbert; Star Maker, Olaf Stapledon.

Critique Group Structure:

• Meets weekly Thursdays from 6:00pm-7:30pm PT / 9:00pm-10:30pm ET
• Submission length maximum: 20,000 words (many submissions are shorter).
• Back-to-back weekly submissions for novelists + long form writers are encouraged.
• Participants are expected to closely read the submission and arrive prepared to discuss it in depth for 1.5 hours.
• If, for whatever reason, a participant can't read the submission in time for our meeting and/or can't attend our meeting, that participant is urged to provide a written (or audio recorded) summary of feedback to the submitting writer through DM on our Discord.
• Active participation is required to ensure all members' best interests. A member can be removed from the group if found absent in critique sessions for more than 3 months. Should one wish to rejoin the group, please message me directly either in Discord or via email.

Community:
We're a serious yet fun group of writers with eclectic projects and tastes. We're always looking to meet new friends and grow our community, so we hope you'll consider observing a critique group - and if we're a good fit for one another, continuing to hang out with us Thursday evenings!

We meet on the Blinding Cyclops Discord server. Join link: https://discord.gg/urPBsNTWuK

You can read our full syllabus under the category "Writer's Critique Groups." The rest of the writer's critique group channels are kept hidden to preserve the privacy of critique submissions, but will be opened up to you when your observation has been confirmed.

Commitments:
This critique group's structure expects a weekly attendance commitment, so it's only right for writers who are committed to writing and critiquing.

How did you become the thinker you are? What early books, teachers, or experiences nourished your childhood curiosity? Which thinkers have been most formative of your intellectual development? Who or what now most shapes how you think, read, write, or doubt? Whose questions do you continue to grapple with? What counts as an influence? Are they authors you agree with? Or the ones you struggle against? Or both? Have your intellectual influences been mainly philosophers and thinkers unknown to you, or have they included people in your own life? Has your worldview ever changed in response to a crisis or disillusionment? How?

This Friday, Sober Philosophy will be looking within. Please join us for a discussion on your intellectual influences.

Symptom-free (of potentially contagious disease) people with the capacity to listen considerately to diverse viewpoints are invited to attend after successfully RSVPing.

We begin the discussion at 7:30 pm sharp in the mezzanine of the Graduate Hotel. Feel free to come up to 30 minutes early and hang out with us beforehand. After you come down the stairs we may be in either the main room on your left or in the conference room around the corner on your right.

AUDIO RECORDING (AR):
This meeting will be audio recorded for conversational dynamics analysis and testing purposes. This recording will not be made publically available.

OPENING ROUNDTABLE FORMAT (ORF):

1. The topic presenter begins the discussion by explaining why they are interested in the topic and some introductory thoughts on it.
2. Each participant in turn going clockwise from the presenter describes their general thoughts on the topic.
3. If one is not ready to speak they can just say “pass” and the next person speaks.
4. After we've gone around once anyone who passed will get a second chance to comment.
5. Once everyone has given opening remarks or passed twice, Opening Roundtable is completed and the meeting shifts into its main format.

TIMED DIRECTION FORMAT (TDRF>5):
If there are more than 5 people present we will use the format below.

1. We will divide up the timed direction discussion time by the number of participants plus one (for a buffer). A timer will be set for this amount of time.
2. Each participant in turn will become a Discussion Director and lead the group discussion.
3. If one is not ready to direct they dimply say “pass” and the next person becomes the Discussion Director.
4. Anyone who arrives after step 1 (above), may participate but will not get a turn as Discussion Director.
5. The Discussion Director can make statements or ask questions, or interrupt or redirect the discussion at their discretion.
6. The discussion participants can state their own opinions only when asked by the Discussion Director, not Interrupt others and accede to the Discussion Director’s interruptions or redirections.
7. When the timer goes off the person speaking finishes their thought and then the next participant clockwise becomes the next Discussion Director.
8. After we've gone around once anyone who passed will get a second chance to direct.

At the end of the meeting, participants will have an opportunity to vote on the topic and format for the following meeting.