On Writing and Coding
One of the odd things I've noticed while doing beta reading (I always end up being the "extra beta" for Sybil... they like her, but never ask me directly... should I be offended?) is that people take a different attitude towards writing and programming.
When people are trying their hand at programming, and run into issues (compiler errors, incorrect output, etc), they generally assume the problem is with their skill, and seek to improve it. Coding communities, friends, google searches, whatever it takes, they do it. If they can't seem to work through their challenges, they may accept that they aren't cut out to be programmers and move on. It is very rare that somebody assumes the compiler/computer/linker is in error. Instead, they accept that their skills are failing them and need improvement.
By contrast, many people start writing and seem to resent negative feedback/constructive criticism. On FF.net, it is very common for people to solicit reviews, but request "no flames". In their mind, anything that doesn't sing their praises to the heavens is a flame. You know, the minor things like "characterization could use improvement", "character X was badly out of character", "please use spellcheck", etc. What's unfortunate is that these are the equivalents of compiler errors, linker errors, and incorrect output of programs. There is no emotion involved in such feedback, it's a simple observation of technical problems that require correction.
I think the difference, of course, is that we all communicate in English (or whatever language you communicate in) on a regular basis. We are used to communicating effectively in spoken language, and expect that to carry over to written language with equal effectiveness. What writers may not realize is that with verbal communication, there is a feedback loop involved that allows you to adjust the message. Written communication doesn't have this element (or it's slower, such as when you get fresh feedback on chapter 1 while you're working on chapter 9). As a result, more care is required. Also, we do have requirements for effective spoken communication, such as "don't mumble", "speak clearly", etc. Thick accents, poor enunciation, and other verbal flaws are impediments to communication every bit as much as poor spelling, poor punctuation, and jumbled sentence order.
At the end of the day, I think the biggest difference is in experience. We've all been writing small bits of text since we started learning how to read and write. As a result, we assume we have a certain amount of competence at it. If we were cursed with teachers who just wanted to pass us along, this could be a very false sense of competence. By contrast, people just learning how to program are acquiring a new skill, and seeking help with something where they have a more rigid feedback system that prevents credible claims of excellence that is undeserved.
I enjoy beta reading a great deal. I enjoy helping new programmers a great deal. In both cases, I can help those who are working on their craft improve their skills, while getting sneak peaks and upcoming programs/stories. Moreover, in both cases I have the pleasure of working with people who do not have large egos improve their competence and become the next generation of experts.
When people are trying their hand at programming, and run into issues (compiler errors, incorrect output, etc), they generally assume the problem is with their skill, and seek to improve it. Coding communities, friends, google searches, whatever it takes, they do it. If they can't seem to work through their challenges, they may accept that they aren't cut out to be programmers and move on. It is very rare that somebody assumes the compiler/computer/linker is in error. Instead, they accept that their skills are failing them and need improvement.
By contrast, many people start writing and seem to resent negative feedback/constructive criticism. On FF.net, it is very common for people to solicit reviews, but request "no flames". In their mind, anything that doesn't sing their praises to the heavens is a flame. You know, the minor things like "characterization could use improvement", "character X was badly out of character", "please use spellcheck", etc. What's unfortunate is that these are the equivalents of compiler errors, linker errors, and incorrect output of programs. There is no emotion involved in such feedback, it's a simple observation of technical problems that require correction.
I think the difference, of course, is that we all communicate in English (or whatever language you communicate in) on a regular basis. We are used to communicating effectively in spoken language, and expect that to carry over to written language with equal effectiveness. What writers may not realize is that with verbal communication, there is a feedback loop involved that allows you to adjust the message. Written communication doesn't have this element (or it's slower, such as when you get fresh feedback on chapter 1 while you're working on chapter 9). As a result, more care is required. Also, we do have requirements for effective spoken communication, such as "don't mumble", "speak clearly", etc. Thick accents, poor enunciation, and other verbal flaws are impediments to communication every bit as much as poor spelling, poor punctuation, and jumbled sentence order.
At the end of the day, I think the biggest difference is in experience. We've all been writing small bits of text since we started learning how to read and write. As a result, we assume we have a certain amount of competence at it. If we were cursed with teachers who just wanted to pass us along, this could be a very false sense of competence. By contrast, people just learning how to program are acquiring a new skill, and seeking help with something where they have a more rigid feedback system that prevents credible claims of excellence that is undeserved.
I enjoy beta reading a great deal. I enjoy helping new programmers a great deal. In both cases, I can help those who are working on their craft improve their skills, while getting sneak peaks and upcoming programs/stories. Moreover, in both cases I have the pleasure of working with people who do not have large egos improve their competence and become the next generation of experts.