confessions of a snarky beta (#4)

[isiscolo]

A lot of fairly sophisticated writers who are relentless self-editors don't see the need for a beta editor. Their stories are usually free of the grammatical and spelling errors that mark the work of poorer writers; they certainly don't need someone for the technical fixes. But really, this type of editing is the least interesting (and least

Comments

[amanuensis1]

What I found particularly nifty about this essay was seeing what others focused upon in seeing the same first draft, that went past me. See, multi-beta is indeed an excellent thing! I really enjoyed reading this.

I think most of us beta the way we'd want to be beta'd. Unless I have a pre-agreement with an author that I am pressed for time and will only make a "Here's what didn't work for me and I think you should consider altering" response, I like to talk about both the positive and the negative in a story. (And to couch the negative constructively and gently. Don't want to put anyone on the defensive if I can help it!) Because otherwise, how would we know what was particularly good, so that we know where our strengths are and how to cultivate them?

And beta-ignorance (see above) works well, except that it might be sensible to run things that you are uncertain of off your other beta(s). I had one beta say, "I thought the last line was a bit overdone and silly," and happened to write to the other beta "I changed the last line a bit," and was met with protests of "WHAT? No, the last line was just right! Put it back!" So, in the face of that kind of vehemence, I did put it back. ^_^

I'm reading through your whole post again and thinking, "Man, I'm awfully lucky to have you guys reading my stuff! I must have been building up some karma."

[isiscolo]

And beta-ignorance (see above) works well, except that it might be sensible to run things that you are uncertain of off your other beta(s).

Hee. This is where I tell you that I had to run the revised version of the ending by fabularasa because she expressed concern when I told her I was changing it. I suppose having an odd number of betas helps -- you all could vote on things!

[darkkitten1]

I think most of us beta the way we'd want to be beta'd. Unless I have a pre-agreement with an author that I am pressed for time and will only make a "Here's what didn't work for me and I think you should consider altering" response, I like to talk about both the positive and the negative in a story. (And to couch the negative constructively and gently. Don't want to put anyone on the defensive if I can help it!) Because otherwise, how would we know what was particularly good, so that we know where our strengths are and how to cultivate them?

Amen, Amen, Amen.

My quiet personal crusade: positive feedback. *waves her tattered banner* Detailed, careful positive feedback. IMO it's much more of a challenge to explain what is right with a story than what is wrong with it, because hitches in logic or phrasing trip you up, break the rhythm of reading and otherwise make themselves noticed. But the little touches that make you purr, shiver, laugh or get all hot won't stop you in your tracks. Instead they lurk below the surface, busily pulling you in.

[amanuensis1]

One of the things that I'm guilty of too is the feedback that says, "Oh, and the sex was really hot!" Now, sometimes, in my stories in particular, the sex is a very significant part of it-- it may go on for pages and pages and pages. So essentially, "the sex was hot" is about as useful as "your fic was great." Don't get me wrong, it's nice to hear that! It's just not all that constructive as feedback. And many people don't even read the smut; it bores them, they skip it. So those of us who enjoy reading the smut (me for one; a mediocre fic that promises NC-17 will often have me yelling, "Get to the shagging!") might, if we want to leave constructive feedback and not just a "It was great, wish I could say more!" comment, keep that in mind.