My Beta
The wonderful and brilliant Lurker Monkey is in my critique group.
There are four of us. Invite-only. "Trial period" to see if you fit the vibe. I have no idea what they think I bring to the table, but I know he brings a ruthless eye for pacing, another of us can spot a cliche from a mile off, as well as having an incredible visual mind for action/fight scenes and making sure your characters' actions are working for the scene, and the other of us is a real wordsmith, I think.
Separate from them, I "cheat" on them with a beta, whom I am seeing today. He brings a totally different vibe and sensibility to the process. Between those four readers, I turn in something pretty close to what gets published, so we must be doing something right.
But in a GROUP, we have each developed strengths. I barely even take the TIME to notice a cliche 'cause I know it's going to get called out in group. And I know who's going to do it, too. LOL!
But a one-on-one beta is different. It's more of a "generalist" reading role. So I thought about what makes a good beta relationship, and here's what I came up with (and for the record, my beta ROCKS.)
--TRUST. You cannot expect to ever get consistent quality critiques if you do not invest in a week to week, month to month relationship. It takes developing trust to fall into a groove of honesty, and also to be able to truly assess what you have in that beta. I could post here on the blog, "Hey, anybody want to beta-read the first chapter of my proposal"--and I would likely get volunteers (and in fact, I have asked Genius to read for me in the past). But finding random readers won't get me the kind of trusted critique I need and want. I have no idea what that beta reader brings to the table. My current beta and I have been reading for each other, off and on, for about two years, I think.
--A MACRO VIEWPOINT. At this point in my career, I would hope my beta is not finding too many wordsmithing problems or cliches or what have you. Trust me, he'll find them (see next point). But I want to know how he feels about the macro sense of my project. Get into the MEAT of who the characters are and their motivations.
--A MICRO VIEWPOINT. That said, dude, I want to know when I have a weak verb. I DO NOT WANT YOU TO REWRITE MY STUFF! But I want to know the weak spots. I want you to pick up my sloppy "overlooks." (Case in point, recently he noticed I had a character with a savings passbook. Um, none of us have them anymore--or most of us don't. It's all online now.)
--RESPECT. Don't rewrite my stuff. That's just rude. Enough said.
--HONESTY. I don't want you patting me on the back. Let me know what's not working. Last meeting he sat down and said, "This book has rocked" (well, that's my word, but I'm paraphrasing here) "and these two chapters just SIT THERE." Hmm. He was totally right.
--LIKEABILITY. Call it beta chemistry. You don't have to be best friends, but do I really want to meet someone for coffee every other week if we simply don't mesh? Life is too short. I want to invest in a beta that doesn't annoy me, who is professional, who's not a (excuse the Yiddish) schmuck. Get in a writers' group with five or six good people and ONE jacka** and you'll see what I mean. Trying out your beta for "fit" isn't a bad idea.
So there you go. My beta rocks. I will come back, I hope, with some idea on what I am doing with this Proposal That's Gonna Kill Me. And hyped up on a LOT of coffee.
Thoughts?
24 comments:
I agree all that stuff is useful and important, but for me, the most important thing I want to know is how they feel. Where do their minds wander? Where do they get confused? Where do they get bored? How do they feel here? How do they feel there? When do they laugh? When do they get choked up? When do they take a break to do something else? When are they tempted to walk away and never come back?
To me, effect on the reader is the point of all the stuff you list.
Natasha:
I don't know. I don't read with that sort of intensity (or only rarely). I don't know that I expect that from them. In sum total, I want to know if they liked it . . . and some highs and lows . . . but I guess I don't approach it in the same way.
I think it's good to have a healthy mix of betas, some who are writers and who can offer criticism from that perspective; others who just love to read and who can give you an idea of how a piece might fare in the real world. Silence is not golden in either case.
I was in a critique group a year or so ago. It didn't go well for me and left me feeling hesitant about doing another one. They weren't mean or anything, it's just, well the difference between that year with them and that one page you read for me, it meant the difference between getting an agent's attention and not.
You're a great reader.
And I did so with pleasure.
Jude:
I don't know. It's been my experience that non-writers who cannot imagine writing a novel are sufficiently impressed that you HAVE written a novel as to just tell you "it's a page-turner" without having any concept of what will make an EDITOR feel it's a page turner. I realize not every nonwriter feels that way . . . but I am wary of utilizing that as any sort of benchmark.
Richmond:
Aww . . . thanks, Richmond. It is an art form in and of itself. Not every writer can read. In fact, I know quite a few who can't by any barometer I use. I feel lucky I have the readers I do. But I also know I put a lot into finding and keeping them. [And Lurker, if you ever think you can stop reading for me, I will hunt you down and take you out.]
E
P.S. And if you ever want me to read a chapter, Richmond, I'm all yours.
Mark:
Back at ya.
:-)
E
I tried to do the crit group thing, but I had a real problem with the nit-picky when I needed to know about the big picture issues--and yes, I did tell them the type of crit I wanted. It didn't work out, and honestly, I think it set me back in my writing because I was writing to please THEM and not writing for the story!
Anyhoo, fast forward to this year, I wrote my first middle grade novel and wanted a beta reader and found an unlikely prospect who is PERFECT.
I had known J for years--we boarded our horses at the same place twenty-odd years ago--but she moved to another state and I sold my horse and we lost track of each other. About two years ago we reconnected. She offered to read my MG story and gave me the input I needed. WOW. I always knew she was an uber-talented artist and superb horsewoman, but her input PUSHES me to make a better story without taking the ME out of the equation. I trust her implicitly, whereas I never really trusted the original crit group that I had been asked to join.
magolla:
Congrats! Finding someone like that is like finding gold!
E
My beta is moving away in January :( I think we'll Skype. It'll be different not meeting in the flesh every week, and I'm really bummed about it.
MY favorite thing a beta does for me is to point out missed opportunities.
I think it's funny. I have a similar arrangement. I have a regular group of critters (30 pages every biweekly) and then a great beta who reads the whole book. I find it's been about as much as I can absorb. But I have asked someone else to read SCAR for me based on her particular knowledge.
It's true ...
I can say without hesitation that you have made me about a 100% better writer. Maybe 102%. The thing I'm worst at is the thing you're best at—and you never really let me get away with BSing my way past a scene. Even though I've tried. And even though I might fight like a sprung monkey.
All in all, I think crit groups are essential to growth as a writer, and I agree that the chemistry of a crit group is all-important. You can't just trust anybody. And history is important, too. I think there's something to be said for critiquing the same writer over years and years—you gain a history, you become an expert in that writer. You can see more clearly.
I would add another item to your list, one that might be controversial. I think it's important that your crit partners are roughly in the same place you are. I don't mean published or not published, but I mean as serious about writing as you are, and at least in the same ballpark when it comes to talent and craft.
Finally, I've used non-writers in the past, and except for one exceptional reader (by far my toughest critic), I don't get much out of it. You're right: they often don't get past the ga-ga factor, and they don't necessarily know what to look for when evaluating a book.
And lastly, it's cool if you cheat on us, as long as you come back :)
Heather:
I skype with one friend. I like it. Though often there's naked Demon baby climbing all over me.
Sex Scenes:
LOVE that. YES . . . they point out missed opportunities.
E
Lurker:
LOL! I'll ALWAYS be back. And my writing has vastly improved the last couple of years. I don't even critique the same way.
And yes, I didn't add that, but I agree. Having had an assortment over the years (the group is now 15 years old), being in the same place is an element. I know we've had newbies--brand spankin' newbies. But the newbies who stayed were SERIOUS about it and they welcomed and were open to learning. The people who fell away over the years could never find time to make writing and critiquing a priority . . . and they were closed to changing their own writing and learning.
I like this post. I've had a handful (or two) of people read my work, but only one who I've really connected with. We're figuring out that balance of being harsh without being hurtful, and getting to the heart of what needs work. I'm truly grateful to have found her.
Hi Melanie:
That's awesome. And that's a tough dance--real and honest without being hurtful. Critical without being harsh. It's a tough dance.
E
Timely post for me - I have one beta who is a writer and one who is not. They offer different kinds of feedback and the combination really works for me. One has been "with me" since the inception of my WIP (the writer) and the other just read it for the first time. I like that dichotomy as well.
The only critique groups I've been in have been online. Some have worked and some - not so much. The beta readers are working better for me now - although I miss that group read/feedback experience and the accountability.
Writing groups have so many challenges that expand beyond the actual writing process. The key for me has been to find people that somehow move beyond those other challenges -- human drama -- and settle into discussion of the work. AND people that will read and critique no matter what the style or theme of the writing. Good groups can critique stuff in and out of their areas of interest.
If you find lots of these people in Minnesota, let me know!
Amy:
My beta read this morning was full of brainstorming--worked really well. Because it was one-on-one, I could do that without monopolizing group time. I guess each situation allows exercise of a certain kind of feedback.
E
Hi Alex:
I read for people outside of what I normally read. I am always clear ("I don't know the conventions of your genre") . . . but I agree that characterization and pacing and so on . . . they're elements of all good writing.
E
I've been very fortunate to find an awesome beta and we both work very well with each other. It's refreshing to find someone who I trust 100%. How I wish I could meet her for a cup of coffee like you do with your beta. Maybe one day!
Nadine:
My other group is five states away and I phone in. :-(
Post a Comment