Why writers need to be honest with themselves.

[barbarienne]

The worst thing about having good beta readers is that they're always right.

More galling is that often among the things they are right about, are things I secretly knew but was hoping no one would notice. I am, apparently, not a good enough bullshitter. They catch me out every time. :-) Gotta just do the rewriting

Comments

[sartorias]

Boy, ain't that the truth!

[la_marquise_de_]

Endings are hard. I know I can't do them at all well. I find myself reading and rereading well done endings to see if I can figure out how it's done.

[charmingbillie]

Being honest with yourself and finding people to help you stay honest are some of the most important things a writer can do, I think. I see so many people getting ready to send stuff out who say, 'I know my book is good, it's just my query/the agents/the entire world that's a problem' and then you look at their writing and think--yeah, you need to look again.

[kittentikka]

I am hugely looking forward to reading this book by now. I love it without having any clue what it is about.

[barbarienne]

LOL! It's a short story, actually. :-) But these things hold true of my work regardless of length.

[dulcimeoww]

What, to your mind, is the role of a beta reader? How much feedback should they give, how much advice should they offer, how critical should they be as they read?

People occasionally ask me to beta for them, but they always seem to reject any non-positive comments I might have, or worse try to argue about them with me (a response I find baffling). I like to be supportive and am genuinely interested in their work, but somewhere I failed to acquire the personality trait that lets me be both supportive AND uncritical. I'm wondering if that means I simply am not qualified to be a beta reader, or if it means that the authors I'm working with aren't ready for critique, or some combination thereof. I feel a better understanding of the role of the beta reader would be helpful, here.

[barbarienne]

It depends on the author. I know my crits are either called "harsh" or "helpful" depending on the recipient. I confess I'm not as diplomatic as I could be, sometimes.

More advanced writers can take a more direct crit, I think.

For someone who's only marginally literate, I deliver two or three grammar lessons on relatively straightforward topics. I lay off critiquing the story overall, because without reasonable language skills, their story is irrelevant--no editor's going to read more than a paragraph or two.

If a more advanced writer has a particular grammar tic, I might point that out. (ccfinlay probably doesn't have many misplaced antecedents anymore, but a decade ago it was something I would razz him about.) And I'll note any misspellings or "I think you left a word out" in sentences that don't quite parse, but that's just cosmetic

[sarah_prineas]

Butting in here.

The problem isn't with you, it's with the author. Knowing how to take a crit and ACT on the comments is one of the biggest things separating the pros from the wannabees. Those who rationalize away good advice? Not ready.