Critique Group Panel Discussion

I sat on a critique group panel a few weeks ago for Pikes Peak Writers. There was a lot of information exchanged, with several different types of critique groups, so I thought I'd pass along a little of the information discussed in case you're thinking of starting one or looking to join one. I couldn't take notes, really, since I was up there and wanted to stay engaged in the conversation, so this is what I remember.

Damon Smithwick, me, Donnell Ann Bell, Chris Mandeville, & Ron Cree

Type of Critique Group

First, we discussed the types of groups we had. They fell into the following categories:

Hybrid (some online via Facebook, some in person)

Online Only

Classic (in person)

Critique Partner instead of a group

For the hybrid group, they post a certain amount in a closed Facebook group, but do not give feedback there. They then print it up, critique it at home, then meet in person to go over their critiques. Note: If you are interested in something like this, be aware that Facebook claims ownership of anything posted (the reason I don't post my photos there if it's something I think I might want to try to sell someday.) If you'd like to know the specifics of this hybrid group, Damon posted about it on his blog. (And he said nice things about me there, so hey, go check that out. ;) )

I was in an online only group, where there was a free forum created specifically for that purpose. We had an area to chat, plus an area to post our pieces for critique. We were expected to critique all work posted once per week by replying under that post with our critique. Another way to do an online one is to simply exchange pieces and critiques via email or another online format. 

The critique partnership is just what it sounds like. Two people exchange work back and forth. This gives them the freedom to set the pace, so if there's a deadline looming they can agree to submit more of their work, and to submit it more often if needed. This is probably the fasted way to work through a novel other than just sending it to beta readers. (For a definition of beta readers vs. critique groups, you can view this post I did previously.)

I saved classic for last, because it was the most common. It can work in several different ways, but the general idea is to exchange your pieces then meet to go over the critique. You can exchange them on paper at the previous meeting, over email at some designated point in advance, and an audience member said they exchange them via Drop Box, where they have a folder for that purpose. 

How do you do the critique?

There are also a couple different ways to do the critiques (and I'm sure more than this, but these were ways discussed). One group reads them aloud, then gets comments from those around them. You have to be able to quickly give feedback with a format like this. The typical format is to send them out in advance, as mentioned above, and to critique them on your own time. Then you can discuss what you wrote down and what your thoughts were after having had time to give it more thought.

What do you critique?

It was addressed what is actually critiqued. By this I mean, do you critique the grammar/spelling/punctuation, plot, character, details, etc. Overall, it sounded like everything is usually covered. Whatever catches your eye. My group will specifically ask if there's something they want you to look at when they send it out. Otherwise, each of us brings our own personality and style to the critique, addressing those things that we tend to look out for. 

Are you all at the same writing level?

In general, the groups were at the same level. One of the panelists said he hand chose his group to have only already published authors in it. My group has a range of experience, from beginner to a member who worked as a journalist before switching to fiction. One panelist said it can be valuable to have someone who is more advanced than you in the group (of course, there is a point at which someone has to be the most qualified.) 

In my experience, someone at a higher level is going to address the specifics, the rules, the technicalities. Whereas someone at a lower level tends to view the story from the point of character and story. Both of these are valuable (and my experience is by no means the be all and end all.) One group will catch the things others will miss.

What do you do if there's a member who isn't participating/following the rules?

This one was split along gender lines, which was interesting. The ladies wanted to try to be polite and/or nice about it and find a discreet way to encourage that member to either step up or step out. The men both said, "Tell them to leave." 

Do you set rules? What are they?

Overall, having rules was thought to be a good idea. For my group, we didn't set them in the beginning which has complicated things at times and led to frustration. Rules to consider would be: a required participation level (how long can you go without submitting/critiquing before being removed), frequency of meetings, how much to submit (words/chapters), how often you'll meet (weekly, monthly), when/how to submit, and anything else you feel should be established in advance.

Where do you meet?

Meeting places vary from homes to libraries to restaurants/coffee shops. If you meet in a restaurant or coffee shop, you have to take into account background noise, interruptions, and if you write something like horror, mystery, erotica, or anything else that might be tricky to discuss in public. Given, sometimes it's a kick to discuss where the body's hidden or how you killed victim in public, but will there be kids there? In that case, not a great idea. Homes seem to allow for better concentration and less interruption.

Do you socialize or just critique?

This varied, as well, but it seemed like most of the panelists did a little socializing at the beginning then jumped into work. One panelist said she was in it to work, not to socialize. My group chats for about half an hour before getting down to business.

How do you form a group? Where do you find other members?

As I said above, one panelist hand picked the members of his critique group from published authors he already knew. My group was made up of friends, and started when two of the ladies discussed the need for a group and put it together from there. In general, they were started with friends with mutual interests.

If you don't have a bunch of writers living around you or in your social circle, try checking out local writer's groups. Look at meetup.com for writer's groups. Attend local writer's conferences and talk to people. Join online groups of writers and see if you can put your own online group together. After you've found likely candidates, you just get together and talk. Put together the group you'd like to have.

How do you choose who to let into the group?

Overall, it was preferred to have a closed group. By closed group, I mean you choose who you let in and keep the number relatively small. Choose people you get along with, whose opinions you will respect, and who won't be too nice or too nasty. You don't want someone who will berate you, but you also don't want someone to just pat you on the back and not say anything helpful. 

I had to submit a writing sample and answer a questionnaire to get into the online critique group I was part of. These were posted on the forum and voted on by the other members. They agreed to let me in. This isn't a bad idea. I'd definitely recommend it if you're putting together a group of people you aren't friends with, so you have a means of screening the group and seeing who is a good fit.

Do you all write in the same genre or does it matter?

For the most part, each group had a variety of genres. However, it was important that you had an interest/general knowledge of the other genres. My group has a horror/fantasy/young adult writer, an urban fantasy/mystery writer, two fantasy writers, a memoir/fantasy writer, and a middle grade fantasy writer. As you can see, there's a variety in some ways, but a lot of fantasy is represented, as well. It's also worth pointing out that, while most people in the group are submitting novels for critique, out of all the panelists and my own group, I'm the only one currently using it for short stories. 

How do you know a critique group isn't right for you/that it's time to leave?

If there is someone in your critique group that makes you feel bad about your writing, that discourages you, leave. If you aren't getting a helpful critique, leave. If all they do is pat you on the back and tell you how great your writing is without contributing any helpful criticism or feedback, leave. 

If it's not working for you in any way and it's not something you feel you can work on changing, leave. Only you can know if your group is helping you or holding you back.

How do I know I'm ready for a critique group?

If you are just starting, it may not be a good time for a critique group. Getting criticism that hurts you and kills your desire to write, or that makes you think you're writing crap and should just give up is not what a critique group is for. You need to not only be at a point in your writing where feedback is going to be valuable, but you need to be confident enough in your writing to wade through the feedback you're going to get. Some things they suggest will be right for you, and some won't. I comb through the feedback and keep those things that make me nod. Chances are, they've said something I was already thinking. If more than one person says the same thing, it probably at least deserves a second look, even if you ultimately decide not to accept that change. But you need to be at a point in your writing that you won't just blindly accept every suggestion of a change you get. You need to know what works for your piece and what doesn't. And you need to have the conviction to ignore feedback that doesn't benefit you.

In closing

I can't remember what else we discussed, but if you have questions feel free to leave them in the comments. I'm sure I forgot to mention a bunch of things that were discussed. The panel was a success, with lots of audience questions and interaction, which was wonderful. We panelists agreed on some things, but not on others, which was perfect and allowed for some discussion. 

Basically, what I'd like to leave you with is that you should look at your personal needs before deciding whether to join a group, and which group to join. What do you want out of it? What are your expectations of the group? Can the people in this group help you? Can you help them? Are you prepared to give critiques, as well as receive them? What is your end goal? What do you feel you bring to the table?

Finally, I figured I'd share my fellow panelists' books.

Damon Smithwick (writing as Damon Alan) - Amazon Author Page

Donnell Ann Bell - Amazon Author Page

Chris Mandeville - Amazon Author Page

Ron Cree - Personal Author Web Page

And me! - Amazon Author Page

Do you have a critique group? How does it work? Online or in person? Did you set rules? What are they? How often do you get together? What has been your worst critique group experience? Do you agree or disagree with anything above? Any questions I didn't address?

May you find your Muse.

MHC and Marketing

I attended the annual Mile Hi Con up in Denver this weekend. This was my third year attending. It didn't seem as busy to me as it usually is, which was pleasant, though probably not for folks trying to sell books, artwork, and other products. I didn't run into many of the interesting characters I've run into in the past, which was odd, but there were still plenty of costumed folks.

This year I focused more on fun than on the learning aspect. Yes, I still attended panels, but not as many as I have in the past. One I attended was on the future of the publishing industry, but all four panelists basically agreed on what was going to happen (traditional publishing won't die, but it will be diminished, and e-books are The Thing for the future.) A panel who all agree is dull. There was a side conversation that began that raised interesting questions, though, and that was how to find ways to assure readers a self-published book is quality. Reviews on Amazon and Goodreads have been bought in the past, and the argument we've all heard about self-publishing is that the original gatekeepers in the form of agents and editors are lacking when someone self-publishes, and sadly, the bad creeps through with the good. So how do we reassure the reader that this book they're considering buying is good, outside of reviews that might not be trustworthy? Will there be a professional organization set up to do this? To provide a guarantee that there was a thorough editing job?

Another panel was on world building. It was helpful to hear the approaches different authors take to it. Do you build your world first? Is the story contingent on your world, the world contingent on your story, or a combination of both?

There were several panels I was disappointed with or bored by (or both,) so I won't mention those here. Then there were several I liked that weren't intended as learning ones to begin with, such as my friend Patrick's podcast and a Meet the Toastmaster one, where her critique group presented with her. There was some good discussion of critique groups, and it was good to see one where the members have all found some manner of success (some of them quite a bit.) Our critique group has really just begun, and we all aspire to be in the same situation as this critique group.

All in all, I had a great time with friends, including two I shared a room with this time. I finally got to see the midnight showing of Rocky Horror Picture Show. I've seen the movie multiple times, but never with a bunch of a people. Plus, we got to introduce two people to the movie for the first time, which is always fun.

Question mark by Mohamed
Ibrahim, shared by Gayane

Since Mile Hi Con is all about panels, I figured I'd ask a question of you guys related to a panel I've set up for the November Write Brain this month (a free monthly workshop put on by Pikes Peak Writers.) It will be a panel on marketing, author platform, and book launches. I'd like to have questions prepared in case the audience doesn't ask enough. What questions do you have on marketing, platform, and book launches? If I end up asking one of your questions, I'll post the answer here for you, as well (or, if we record it, I will post a link once it's ready to go, so you can see the panel.)

The panel is November 18, so if you think of questions before then, post them in the comments and I'll keep track.

Have you seen Rocky Horror with a group of people? Have you seen it at all? Love it or hate it? What questions do you have about marketing, launches, and platform? How do you feel about "quality checks" being put in place for self-published books? How do you do world building?

May you find your Muse.

Mile Hi Con Highlights - Days Two & Three

First, I'd like to send my thanks out to our veterans.  I hope to honor those in my family this [Mostly] Wordless Wednesday.  And my love out to my brother who leaves the 20th of this month (my birthday) to go into the Navy.

And before I jump into Mile Hi Con, Day 2, a quick NaNo update (I have not yet written for today): I'm at 18900 words, and had a great breakthrough during a movie last night, which is funny, because said movie had nothing to do with my novel.  It was two words said, and they were being used in an entirely different way than I will now be using them.  I love that inspiration can strike anywhere, for any reason.

Now for Mile Hi Con, Day 2  (Day 1 can be found here):

I had my workshop presentation on "Social Media for the Professional Woman" that morning, so I didn't end up back in Denver until a bit after 3 p.m.  Once I got up there, I got checked into my room (only my second time ever being in a hotel room on my own) and changed, then met up with my friend.  Day 2 was a lot easier on me, more comfortable.  I had a better idea of how things worked, where things were, etc.

We took in part of a panel on "Science Travesties in Current Media," which was interesting.  There was a panel of people with knowledge in different areas (for instance, an ex-Navy man pointed out that the orange torpedoes used in The Hunt for Red October are test torpedoes and would not actually blow anything up, and a woman on the panel discussed how unrealistic it was to outrun the volcano in Dante's Peak).  I don't have a lot to report on this one, though, due to missing most of it.  However, suffice it to say, always do your research.  There will be someone who knows about what you're writing about, and it will bother them when your information is inaccurate.  That's a reader you've just lost.

After that panel, I attended my very first "Once More With Feeling (and) Dr. Horrible's Sing Along Blog Sing Along."  I only recently started watching the series Buffy the Vampire Slayer on Netflix (I know...gasp!), so this was the first time I'd seen the episode Once More With Feeling, but it was great fun, and easy to follow along.  Even better, the lights were out, so you could sing without being embarrassed.  And I did!  This particular episode is a musical, with some manner of curse causing everyone to randomly break into song and dance.  Quite fun!  Then came Dr. Horrible's Sing Along Blog, which I'd only seen once before (again, courtesy of Netflix), and only this past year.  At least I'd seen it, though, so I knew the tunes a bit better.  I'd totally do this again!

I attended a reading, and I will not name the readers, because I discovered I don't like just sitting and listening to people read.  I need to be reading it myself.  I can't pay attention to books on tape, either.  Maybe it's the ADHD, I don't know, but I was bored out of my mind.  Now, it did make me want to purchase several of the books.  It was not at all about the books not being interesting.  I just can't sit and listen to people read.  I can't sit and watch a movie without fidgeting, either.  It's just not for me.  Again, some really interesting books were shared, though, and they're on my wish list now.

We grabbed some food and then ended up taking part in some after hours fun.  I won't go into that, because I have to say that after hours at Mile Hi Con, stays after hours at Mile Hi Con.  Suffice it to say that I didn't get to my room until about 2:30 in the morning, and that I hung out with some people that I respected in the writing world, which was fantastic.  I also met a lot of new people and had a good time.  And I can safely say, in case you're worried, that I didn't do anything regrettable or illegal.  Well, I'm pretty sure it was all legal... (just kidding, people...it was all illegal!).  Come on, you all know I'm a boring old mom.

The only thing I'm sad about is that we were going to go to Rocky Horror Picture Show.  I've seen it, of course, multiple times, but I've never gotten to see it with a crowd, singing along, participating, you know?  And that is an experience I'd like to have, just because I haven't.  Maybe next year?  I don't know if they do that every year, but I hope to have the opportunity next year.

Since that was short, I'm going to run through Day 3.  I didn't get up early, because, well, I'm a mom, and I wanted to sleep in, dangit!  And there was nothing I so desperately wanted to do that I was willing to drag my butt out of bed.  Once I did drag my butt out of bed, I had a lovely, albeit overpriced, meal in the hotel (I took all my meals in the hotel at one or another of their restaurants, so they were all overpriced - at least the food was good).  After breakfast, I had to check out and take all my stuff out to my car, so I missed another hour's worth of programming.

After that, I went to the second half of "Transparency & Ethics in Scientific Research" and left feeling dumber than when I went in, not because of a failure on the parts of the panelists, but because a few of the discussions were a bit over my head.  I don't take part in scientific research, don't write papers on it, etc.  I did find it interesting, though, which is why I attended.

By OCAL, clker.com

I then went to "Comedic Elements in Horror," which was fun.  Those of you who stopped by during Alex's Genre Favorites Blog Fest know that my guilty pleasure is horror comedy, so this was right up my alley.  The panelists were Jesse Bullington, James K. Burk, Wayne Faust, Stephen Graham Jones and Molly Tanzer.  They discussed needing those tension breaks in a movie, and how comedy works well for that.  It's a better version of the startle response (for instance, the cat that jumps out in so many horror movies).  You startle and laugh at yourself, and some of the tension is broken up so it can grow again.  But in horror comedy, you get a legitimate laugh to break that tension.  A quote I enjoyed was "Nobody laughs at a clown at midnight," originally said by Lon Chaney.  It means things that aren't scary in one setting (say, a birthday party during the day) can be scary in the right setting (let's look at Stephen King and the clown in the sewer).  It's about how you handle it, how you set it, and the unexpected.

By OCAL, clker.com

After lunch it was time for the "Strong Women in Sci-Fi" panel, with Rudy Ch Garcia, CJ Henderson, Cherie Priest, Jeanne Stein, and Molly Tanzer.  They discussed what made a strong female in books, and it wasn't necessarily the cliched bad ass, but just a woman who showed strength of character and fortitude.  Women can be strong in many, many ways, and they don't all involve big guns or vampire stakes.  And they certainly don't have to involve scantily clad females.  Women who weren't strong were those who needed to be rescued (though not accepting help is not, in itself, strong either), who were dependent on others, who were foolish.  Overall, a valid point was to study women you know.  Who do you see as a strong woman?  What makes you feel that way?  What traits make her a strong woman?  Do you know a weak woman?  What points might she have that you'd want to avoid?  As someone on the panel said, it shouldn't be that hard to write a strong woman unless you've never had one in your life.

My final panel before heading home was entitled "Forget About the Midi-Chlorians and Embrace The Force! Religion and Sprituality in SF & F."  On the panel were Stephen Brust, Michael Carroll, Daniel Dvorkin, Warren Hammond, and Aaron Ritchey (one of my columnists over at Writing From the Peak!).  Most agreed that religion should play a part in world building, as religion is big in people's lives.  Look globally.  How does religion play a part in real life?  Consider that when building your worlds.  Religion dictates ways of life, laws, morals, etc.  So don't forget that detail.

At this point, I was thoroughly exhausted and missed my hubby and my babies, so I took off, skipping closing ceremonies and bobbing for authors (fun in the hot tub - I had no interest in being seen in my bathing suit).  Traffic cooperated with me, and I was able to get home in time for a wonderful dinner, put together by my hubby.  And I got to read to my babies and tuck them in at bed time.  Perfect.

Any of these panels you might have found interesting?  Do you know what a midi-chlorian is (cuz' I didn't)?  Would you laugh at a clown at midnight?

May you find your Muse.

Mile Hi Con Highlights - Day 1

Well hello, and Happy Monday!

First, my presentation went well.  I wasn't very nervous, which I found to be true at Author Fest once I got up in front of everyone, too.  Funny that I worry more before that date, but not actually when I'm in front and presenting.  There was a good showing and great questions!  We didn't get through everything, but it was more important that the attendees understand what we had already gone over than that I got through every little thing I'd been asked to talk about.

Friday, I took my kids and my nephew to Seven Falls, a set of waterfalls in Cheyenne Canyon, so I'm looking forward to sharing those photos on Wednesday.  I headed up to my first day of Mile Hi Con later that afternoon, having walked up an insane number of steps, then hiked up the side of a canyon.  In other words, I was already exhausted, but happily so, and excited.

When I walked in, I was completely out of my element.  I had to ask directions to the Con at the front desk (it was on the 2nd floor).  I went up the stairs only to wander around amongst all the tables with no idea where I was supposed to check in.  It took asking two different people (who were each very nice and helpful) before I got to the correct desk and got my groovy badge and program.  I had fun gawking at all the various types of costumes those moving around me had on.  I saw Star Trek costumes of all different types, steampunk outfits, furries, elves, Dresden (!), etc.

Happily, I was joined by a friend, and she showed me where to go from there.  The first program we attended was "Writing the Holy Trilogy," featuring the always fabulous Carol Berg, Warren Hammond, Catherine Cooke Montrose, the sweet and supportive Jeanne Stein, and Peter J. Wacks.  They discussed a little about the difference between a series and a trilogy (a series tends to be like a set of TV episodes, where it's the same characters, but there is a stand alone tale in each book, while a trilogy is usually a story arc that takes three books to tell the tale).  Some had the entire trilogy planned out from the beginning, but others stated that wasn't necessary, and that you could take the story piece by piece.

Someone in the audience asked whether book length mattered, whether each book in a trilogy should be long.  Otherwise, the implication was that shorter books in a trilogy should maybe just be combined into big book.  The overall perception of the panel was that novel length didn't matter, and that it depended on how the writer wanted to break down their story.  An interesting tidbit: Carol Berg tends to have a natural word count of 175,000 or so words in a book, while Jeanne Stein averages more like 75-80,000 words.  And both are okay.

It was discussed that publishers have classically (in recent years) preferred shorter novels so as to fit them better on shelves and save ink and paper costs, but e-books are changing that.  Now, length doesn't matter.

They each passed along some tricks of the trade.

Wacks: If things stall out during writing, injure or kill a character.
Berg: Jots down notes, timeline, glossary or terms, magic of the world, etc.  Rarely starts with a full world, but has an idea of aspects of it (Carol is known around these parts as an expert at world building).
Hammond: He sketches out some notes, like a flow chart.  Basically, where the story begins and ends, and a couple of plot points.  Starts from there.
Stein: Her books usually start with an idea, which she gets from TV, the news, eavesdropping, anything.  She sketches out her protagonist first and how they will be involved with the story idea.
Montrose: Thinks of the worlds first, sketches them, fulling imagines them.  Eventually, a character wanders through, and she goes from there.  Tolkien is a major inspiration for her.

A useful audience question and the responses: Is it a mistake to finish all the books in your trilogy before the first one has been picked up by a publishing house?  It was overall agreed that it was actually good to have the trilogy done.  Writing under deadline is hard, and can cramp your creativity.  Yes, you will likely have to go back and edit it, but it's worth it to have the entire story done for yourself, if for no one else.

Someone pointed out that it would be an issue to have the first book picked up, but not the next ones in the trilogy, to which Carol Berg said that's not true anymore.  The ease of self-publishing means that you could put out the rest of your trilogy on your own if there was an audience for your first book.  We have that ability now.

Final points from the panel:
Wacks: Finds he has the best luck with building the roles first.  However, you should find the way that works best for you and stick with it.
Stein: Build your story any way you want, but stick to the rules you create.  She also said to write.  Don't say you WANT to write.  Write.
Hammond: "In writing, the tortoise wins."  The person that grabs 15 minutes here or there, but continues grabbing those moments, is the one that typically gets finished and gets published.  Finish, then sell.  Don't write to sell.
Montrose: Get feedback.  Learn to share your work.
Berg: Don't sett out to write a trilogy.  Don't think it has to be three and make it that way.  Set out to write a good story, one you enjoy and want to write.  Write what you would enjoy reading.  Also, don't over-constrain your world.  As in, don't figure out every single little rule and bit of makeup of that world, or you may write yourself into a corner in future books.  Part of the fun in writing an ongoing trilogy or series is to keep developing that world, and leaving it open allows you to do that.

That was a phenomenal panel, in case you couldn't tell from my "brief" summary.  We next went to "CJ Henderson Presents 'Abuse an Author'."  The authors we got to abuse--ask questions of on any theme--were Stephen Graham Jones, Mario Acevedo, Melinda Snodgrass, James Van Pelt and the moderator, CJ Henderson.  There were some interesting questions asked (ex: "Which of the worlds you've created would you want to live in and not want to live in?" "What book do you wish you'd written?" "Can you still be surprised by your work?").

We grabbed a bite to eat (all I'd had since my big hike was half a peanut butter sandwich and some water).  Pretty sure I should be humiliated by the pure vacuuming of food I did, but I was too hungry to care.  I had ketchup all over my fingers and even (yes, I'm admitting this) found some on my shirt later.  That's how hungry I was.  In my defense, I'd burned five billion calories earlier that day, with just a cereal bar and half sandwich standing between health and wasting away, and it was 8:30pm by the time I got any food.  Thank goodness the hotel bar was open and serving food!

The third thing we attended was "Hipster Readings...with Bongos," a reading with a little extra bongo flavor.  While one guy played the bongos (not sure of his name), the following authors read from their work: Mario Acevedo, Betsy Dornbusch, Jason Heller, Stephen Graham Jones, j.a. kazimer, and Cherie Priest.  I must say, I'm not a big fan of sitting and listening to someone read (I prefer to read on my own), but this was enjoyable, kept me engaged and was  a fun way to spend an hour.  Also, it made me want to buy books by every single reader (of course, I already have books from three of them...).

The last thing we attended before I hopped in my car to head back home and get some final work done on my presentation was "The Love & Sex Lives of the Victorians," billed as a pajama panel.  There were a couple folks there in their pajamas, as well as one fella' who passed out partway through it.  Yep, he was in the front row and fell asleep.  Despite that fact, it was a fascinating panel.  They knew their stuff about sex, sensuality and women's rights/privileges in that era.  I do love history, and the history of sexuality is full of interesting and unexpected information, such as the barriers crossed in Victorian porn that we'd consider foul and disturbing now, despite thinking they were so uptight.  How about the belief that keeping your wife pregnant every other year would save a man from his own sins in wanting to have sex all the time (because, after all, we all know women don't like sex when pregnant...whoops).  Is it true what they say about the true reason for the popularity of fainting couches?  I'm going to let you look that one up on your own.

I'll hit on Saturday's highlights in a separate post.

What do you think of the panels?  Anything of interest to you?