Crucio is never a good safe word - or, a meta on editing & the beta process
It's been a while since I've done a meta post on writing, so I thought I'd try to tackle a topic that is near and dear to my heart: editing. And more specifically within that: the beta process.
Having worked with a double digit amount of betas over the course of my time in fandom (at least 30 different individuals) and beta read a fair amount of stories myself, I think I have enough data-points to be able to articulate some of the trends I've seen, as well as what I think makes for a good beta experience in general. In this post, I'll give a brief overview of my writing process and then I'll talk about what I believe the function of a beta is. In a few days, I will probably post a followup entry discussing what makes for a smooth, positive, & helpful beta experience on an author's end.
I. My writing process:
To start, I'll just lay out a simplified version of how my writing process works since I'll be using my own experiences as examples, and it's best to be clear at what stage I usually bring betas in so I can distinguish them from what I call 'alpha readers' (who are also helpful, but serve a different and distinct function for me as an author).
When I get an idea for a story, I create a detailed outline before I begin writing. I then write a rough draft and during this stage, I have people I call alpha readers (or cheerleaders, as they're sometimes known) read over what I've written to give me their immediate feedback on how it's coming together. They will usually offer general reactions (emotions, thoughts, whether they're enjoying it) and then I will ask them specific, targeted questions about areas in the story that I am concerned about (what do you think about the characterization of X, or the dynamic between X & Y, how did you feel when Y did this thing). Alpha readers do no proofreading, no edits, and generally don't offer suggestions either--they exist purely for me to get a sense of whether what I've written so far will work for a reader as I've intended it.
For a more concrete example: I write a scene that is intended to be sad. The alpha reader gives me feedback on whether it actually reads as sad, or is unintentionally hilarious, or conveys no particular emotion at all. Based on their feedback, I can go back and revise, or make course corrections for the rest of the story. I may also discuss planned plot twists or scene sketches with alpha readers in abstract terms, just to work through ideas and get their thoughts. My alpha readers are almost always different people from my beta readers.
After I've written the draft, I do 5-10 revision passes on my own of the entire draft. This means I read through the draft 5-10 separate times for issues like: flow, pacing, line edits, typo fixing, and continuity. I try to present as clean a copy to my beta team as possible (that is, free of typos).
After the betas go through and make their corrections/suggestions, I make all necessary changes and rewrites. If the rewrites are significant, I send it back to the team and we go back and forth until everyone's happy. I will usually do another 2 revision passes over the entire story, and then finally post.
As you can see, my writing process is lengthy and the bulk of it is dominated by editing in some form. If I were to break it down into percentages, here is how much time spent is in every stage: 20% outlining/planning the story, 40% writing the story, 40% editing what I've written or doing re-writes.
II. The Function of a Beta Reader
At the most basic level, a beta reader is another set of eyes passing over a story draft which will catch issues like typos, SPAG errors, and other mechanical problems. Beyond mechanics, a beta reader can also provide detailed feedback and critical analysis of the higher level aspects of a story: flow, pacing, plot, characterization, theme, and so forth. Will all betas be able to provide both? No. What I've found is that any given beta will be stronger at one or the other, and there will be a wide range of skill.
There are several dimensions in which a beta can be skilled, but I will limit my discussion to the following categories:
1. Proofreading - ability to notice and catch errors in a text such as typos
2. SPAG - understanding of grammar/punctuation rules, and I'm going to throw in here breadth of vocabulary as well
3. Critique - Ability to correctly identify problems and articulate them in a way that is helpful to an author
4. Writing Analysis - familiarity with the tenets of storytelling, familiarity with a particular genre's conventions/rules, familiarity with topics like theme and story structure
1 & 2 - Proofreading and SPAG abilities are what most beta readers in fandom have to offer. They are the skills most easy to develop as an amateur given enough time, patience, and interest in reading. For example, most native speakers of a language can tell when a sentence "feels" grammatically off and articulate that ("this sentence reads a little weird") even if they can't say what the exact issue is (ex: comma splice, sentence fragment, improper semi-colon usage). An author who is still shaky on the basic mechanics of writing/grammar should definitely enlist a beta who is at least competent in these areas. Even authors who do have a firm grasp of SPAG can benefit just from having a second set of eyes catch typos and easy to miss mistakes.
I should note that finding someone who is truly excellent at proofreading and spotting subtle typos is extremely rare. Most people can spot the big stuff: a sentence with grammar that is totally off, the odd misspelling. But things like comma placement, subject-verb agreement, and stray plurals can be all too easily missed when an author is reading and sees what they intended to write instead of what's actually written. When I work as a beta reader myself, I'm only okay at this, not excellent. That's why when I run across a beta reader who is excellent I hang onto them for dear life.
3 - The ability to accurately identify and articulate a problem within a piece of writing is something that may not seem intuitively obvious as a skill, but is perhaps the most important for a good beta reader to have. Within the context of SPAG, this can be easy: either a word is spelled correctly or incorrectly--there is no room for debate. But within the context of problems that are less obvious than a misspelled word, it becomes much more difficult.
For example: think of the last movie you watched that you disliked. Imagine someone were to ask you: what exactly did you dislike about the movie? Can you articulate the root of the problem? Was the dialogue was poorly written? Was the acting wooden? Were the characters thinly drawn? And so forth. If you can identify exactly what aspects of the movie you disliked, do you have any suggestions for how it could be improved? What lines of dialogue would you change? How would you go about making the story less predictable?
It's easy to say a movie or story is 'bad' or 'boring' but it's much harder to pinpoint what makes it so. Is it because a story's pacing is off? Is it because there's too much dialogue that doesn't advance the story? Is it because the plot developments are so predictable the reader already knows everything that is going to happen before it does? Even if one can correctly diagnose the problem, it's important to be able to tell the author in a way that doesn't shatter their confidence (if they have a fragile ego, which many do) and helps them improve. Ideally, a beta wants to see the story become the best it can be before posting, and for the author not to give up writing completely after the endeavor.
To expand on the last point: many authors have easily bruised egos, especially when they first start writing and probably aren't very good yet. All authors have to start somewhere, and very few write inspired fiction right out of the gate. Part of being good at critiquing is understanding where an author is in terms of skill level and confidence, and tailoring critiques to communicate most effectively with that author. If someone's got 20 years, 3 novels, and plenty of experience with other betas/editors under their belt, they've probably developed a thicker skin than the newbie writer who is scared/excited to post their first 1,000 word fanfic. A beta shouldn't communicate with one the way they'd communicate with the other. A newbie who doesn't receive encouragement, support, or understanding with regards to their early attempts may not continue writing, and if they don't continue writing, they'll never become the author with 20 years, 3 novels, and plenty of experience under their belt.
I know that I personally started out writing the badficciest badfic around, and that all the betas I've worked with over the years gave me the encouragement I needed to keep writing and improving. It's no exaggeration to say that all of their comments and feedback have led me to become the writer I am today.
4. A beta with the ability to analyze writing and stories thoughtfully is helpful only when an author has a firm grasp of SPAG, the mechanics of writing, and the basics of storytelling. If an author is still having problems mastering the basics, they're better off sticking with a proofreader/SPAG fixer until they improve sufficiently. Writing analysis is also only necessary when a story calls for it; a PWP, for example, doesn't typically require a deep understanding of theme.
Writing analysis is usually most helpful when combined with the ability to effectively critique. The more familiarity a beta has with the common weaknesses in fiction or the conventions of a genre, the more ability they have to effectively point out and critique those areas. Note that formal schooling is not the only way to develop the ability to analyze writing well--reading extensively in a particular genre, for example, may result in someone internalizing all the rules and conventions of that genre well enough that they can help an author trying to write in the genre. For example, someone who reads a ton of mystery novels can help authors who are less familiar with the genre avoid writing plot "twists" that are already cliches.
Being a good beta reader isn't easy, and each beta has their own strengths and weaknesses. There is a reason why professional critics and editors get paid to do what they do.
More on how to get the most out of a beta reading process as a writer in a few days.
Having worked with a double digit amount of betas over the course of my time in fandom (at least 30 different individuals) and beta read a fair amount of stories myself, I think I have enough data-points to be able to articulate some of the trends I've seen, as well as what I think makes for a good beta experience in general. In this post, I'll give a brief overview of my writing process and then I'll talk about what I believe the function of a beta is. In a few days, I will probably post a followup entry discussing what makes for a smooth, positive, & helpful beta experience on an author's end.
I. My writing process:
To start, I'll just lay out a simplified version of how my writing process works since I'll be using my own experiences as examples, and it's best to be clear at what stage I usually bring betas in so I can distinguish them from what I call 'alpha readers' (who are also helpful, but serve a different and distinct function for me as an author).
When I get an idea for a story, I create a detailed outline before I begin writing. I then write a rough draft and during this stage, I have people I call alpha readers (or cheerleaders, as they're sometimes known) read over what I've written to give me their immediate feedback on how it's coming together. They will usually offer general reactions (emotions, thoughts, whether they're enjoying it) and then I will ask them specific, targeted questions about areas in the story that I am concerned about (what do you think about the characterization of X, or the dynamic between X & Y, how did you feel when Y did this thing). Alpha readers do no proofreading, no edits, and generally don't offer suggestions either--they exist purely for me to get a sense of whether what I've written so far will work for a reader as I've intended it.
For a more concrete example: I write a scene that is intended to be sad. The alpha reader gives me feedback on whether it actually reads as sad, or is unintentionally hilarious, or conveys no particular emotion at all. Based on their feedback, I can go back and revise, or make course corrections for the rest of the story. I may also discuss planned plot twists or scene sketches with alpha readers in abstract terms, just to work through ideas and get their thoughts. My alpha readers are almost always different people from my beta readers.
After I've written the draft, I do 5-10 revision passes on my own of the entire draft. This means I read through the draft 5-10 separate times for issues like: flow, pacing, line edits, typo fixing, and continuity. I try to present as clean a copy to my beta team as possible (that is, free of typos).
After the betas go through and make their corrections/suggestions, I make all necessary changes and rewrites. If the rewrites are significant, I send it back to the team and we go back and forth until everyone's happy. I will usually do another 2 revision passes over the entire story, and then finally post.
As you can see, my writing process is lengthy and the bulk of it is dominated by editing in some form. If I were to break it down into percentages, here is how much time spent is in every stage: 20% outlining/planning the story, 40% writing the story, 40% editing what I've written or doing re-writes.
II. The Function of a Beta Reader
At the most basic level, a beta reader is another set of eyes passing over a story draft which will catch issues like typos, SPAG errors, and other mechanical problems. Beyond mechanics, a beta reader can also provide detailed feedback and critical analysis of the higher level aspects of a story: flow, pacing, plot, characterization, theme, and so forth. Will all betas be able to provide both? No. What I've found is that any given beta will be stronger at one or the other, and there will be a wide range of skill.
There are several dimensions in which a beta can be skilled, but I will limit my discussion to the following categories:
1. Proofreading - ability to notice and catch errors in a text such as typos
2. SPAG - understanding of grammar/punctuation rules, and I'm going to throw in here breadth of vocabulary as well
3. Critique - Ability to correctly identify problems and articulate them in a way that is helpful to an author
4. Writing Analysis - familiarity with the tenets of storytelling, familiarity with a particular genre's conventions/rules, familiarity with topics like theme and story structure
1 & 2 - Proofreading and SPAG abilities are what most beta readers in fandom have to offer. They are the skills most easy to develop as an amateur given enough time, patience, and interest in reading. For example, most native speakers of a language can tell when a sentence "feels" grammatically off and articulate that ("this sentence reads a little weird") even if they can't say what the exact issue is (ex: comma splice, sentence fragment, improper semi-colon usage). An author who is still shaky on the basic mechanics of writing/grammar should definitely enlist a beta who is at least competent in these areas. Even authors who do have a firm grasp of SPAG can benefit just from having a second set of eyes catch typos and easy to miss mistakes.
I should note that finding someone who is truly excellent at proofreading and spotting subtle typos is extremely rare. Most people can spot the big stuff: a sentence with grammar that is totally off, the odd misspelling. But things like comma placement, subject-verb agreement, and stray plurals can be all too easily missed when an author is reading and sees what they intended to write instead of what's actually written. When I work as a beta reader myself, I'm only okay at this, not excellent. That's why when I run across a beta reader who is excellent I hang onto them for dear life.
3 - The ability to accurately identify and articulate a problem within a piece of writing is something that may not seem intuitively obvious as a skill, but is perhaps the most important for a good beta reader to have. Within the context of SPAG, this can be easy: either a word is spelled correctly or incorrectly--there is no room for debate. But within the context of problems that are less obvious than a misspelled word, it becomes much more difficult.
For example: think of the last movie you watched that you disliked. Imagine someone were to ask you: what exactly did you dislike about the movie? Can you articulate the root of the problem? Was the dialogue was poorly written? Was the acting wooden? Were the characters thinly drawn? And so forth. If you can identify exactly what aspects of the movie you disliked, do you have any suggestions for how it could be improved? What lines of dialogue would you change? How would you go about making the story less predictable?
It's easy to say a movie or story is 'bad' or 'boring' but it's much harder to pinpoint what makes it so. Is it because a story's pacing is off? Is it because there's too much dialogue that doesn't advance the story? Is it because the plot developments are so predictable the reader already knows everything that is going to happen before it does? Even if one can correctly diagnose the problem, it's important to be able to tell the author in a way that doesn't shatter their confidence (if they have a fragile ego, which many do) and helps them improve. Ideally, a beta wants to see the story become the best it can be before posting, and for the author not to give up writing completely after the endeavor.
To expand on the last point: many authors have easily bruised egos, especially when they first start writing and probably aren't very good yet. All authors have to start somewhere, and very few write inspired fiction right out of the gate. Part of being good at critiquing is understanding where an author is in terms of skill level and confidence, and tailoring critiques to communicate most effectively with that author. If someone's got 20 years, 3 novels, and plenty of experience with other betas/editors under their belt, they've probably developed a thicker skin than the newbie writer who is scared/excited to post their first 1,000 word fanfic. A beta shouldn't communicate with one the way they'd communicate with the other. A newbie who doesn't receive encouragement, support, or understanding with regards to their early attempts may not continue writing, and if they don't continue writing, they'll never become the author with 20 years, 3 novels, and plenty of experience under their belt.
I know that I personally started out writing the badficciest badfic around, and that all the betas I've worked with over the years gave me the encouragement I needed to keep writing and improving. It's no exaggeration to say that all of their comments and feedback have led me to become the writer I am today.
4. A beta with the ability to analyze writing and stories thoughtfully is helpful only when an author has a firm grasp of SPAG, the mechanics of writing, and the basics of storytelling. If an author is still having problems mastering the basics, they're better off sticking with a proofreader/SPAG fixer until they improve sufficiently. Writing analysis is also only necessary when a story calls for it; a PWP, for example, doesn't typically require a deep understanding of theme.
Writing analysis is usually most helpful when combined with the ability to effectively critique. The more familiarity a beta has with the common weaknesses in fiction or the conventions of a genre, the more ability they have to effectively point out and critique those areas. Note that formal schooling is not the only way to develop the ability to analyze writing well--reading extensively in a particular genre, for example, may result in someone internalizing all the rules and conventions of that genre well enough that they can help an author trying to write in the genre. For example, someone who reads a ton of mystery novels can help authors who are less familiar with the genre avoid writing plot "twists" that are already cliches.
Being a good beta reader isn't easy, and each beta has their own strengths and weaknesses. There is a reason why professional critics and editors get paid to do what they do.
More on how to get the most out of a beta reading process as a writer in a few days.