Killing the Sacred Cows of Publishing: Beta Readers Help You

This content has been archived. It may no longer be accurate or relevant.

From Dean Wesley Smith:

Beginning writers have a belief that the more people who read their work, the better their work will be. Of course, that flies in the face of any creation of art by an artist. But the fear is great among young writers, most of who are indie writers these days.

Long term pros? What do they do? Maybe have one first reader, maybe not. Most not.

Why? Because creating original fiction is not a group effort, that’s why.

Thinking you need beta readers is one of the deadliest myths that has come about in this new world.

Where Did This “Beta Reader” Concept Come From?

The easy and honest answer is fear.

But I need to do a little history as I normally do in these chapters.

Back in the pulp era, writers wrote on typewriters. Almost all did single draft and gave the story to their editors at magazines. (A few book houses, but not many. Most novels were published in magazines in the pulp period. Most novels from that period have never seen a hardback or paperback reprint.)

The editor might mark the manuscript up like a copyeditor, adding in directions for layout and such, then send it for typesetting and the story would hit print.

(In case you didn’t know, this marked-up manuscript came to be known as “Foul Matter.” I got many of my “foul matter” manuscripts back after publication over the years.)

As time progressed into the second half of the 20th century, this practice continued. Sometimes a writer would have a trusted first reader, but the longer-term professionals did not. They continued to write clean one draft and give it to their editor for print.

They trusted their own skill and art. And they didn’t allow their editor to touch their stories and most editors didn’t.

But then in the late 1960s and booming into the 1980s and forward came the peer workshop, where a bunch of writers at the same level of skill and lack of publishing credits sat around and critiqued commas. Sometimes at horrid length.

This started to give beginning writers the feeling that if they pleased their workshop, they had a good story. Or even worse, if they took all the suggestions from their workshop and incorporated all the suggestions, they would have a good story.

. . . .

Then in 2010 along comes the indie movement. And beginning writers, being afraid, very, very afraid of god-knows-what, decided that they needed a bunch of readers to make sure their manuscript was a very, very smooth and smelly pile of mush. So they roped in friends and other writers to be “beta readers.”

In other words, they copied the peer workshop experience right into the middle of their own publishing work.

Often a writer could have up to ten “beta readers” on a book, the best way to guarantee that the book will be not only dull, but boring.

But the typing would be perfect. God help a poor typo that slipped through that gauntlet.

And now here, in 2017, as I write this, the concept of “beta readers” makes me shudder every time I type the phrase. I had hoped for a few years it would die off as the really bad idea it is. But nope. It has gained myth status, sadly.

And it now is hurting some really fine writers.

. . . .

Just a few days ago a wonderful writer who I have seen some fantastic work in online workshops, (where I get to see first draft stuff) told me that her most recent book was at her beta readers. Seven or eight of them I think.

I wanted to say that it wasn’t her book anymore, it was “their” book. But I said nothing, just as over the last years since this horrid practice started I have said nothing.

Writing by committee makes dullness. It takes out your writer voice, and often your character voice.

And I honestly have no idea why writers don’t have more pride in their work. That is the aspect of all this that bothers me. No one touches my work. It is my work. Period. Good or bad.

And I am proud of that fact. Good or bad.

Link to the rest at Dean Wesley Smith and thanks to Sue for the tip. Here’s a link to Dean’s books. If you like an author’s post, you can show your appreciation by checking out their books.

85 thoughts on “Killing the Sacred Cows of Publishing: Beta Readers Help You”

    • I thought of you the moment I read that. I have one beta reader whose opinion I really respect, but I don’t take every one of her suggestions as a “must do.” And I don’t submit every manuscript to her. Somewhere along the line, if we are learning as we go, we have to begin to have some faith in our own judgment.

      • You have to put in the work to educate your judgment. Fortunately for me, I’ve always been aware of the distance between my words on the page and the Broadway show in my head.

        It took a long time – twenty years! – to learn how to handle that distance. Under other circumstances, it might have taken fewer years.

        I also found out almost immediately that I don’t work well in critique groups. Way too self-centered. I was a charter member of Sisters in Crime Central Jersey – tried the group route – realized I don’t have the temperament for it.

        Dean obviously learned how to use his group for his own purposes, but I was already ill, and it wasn’t worth the expenditure of energy. To me. He is full of energy, and of course has an impressive body of work. Funny that in some ways we’re at the same place.

        • I also have never been to a critique group nor have I had a beta reader. I was fortunate (or unfortunate) enough to have majored in English so I was treated to lots of bone-headed nonsense during my youth. That cured me of any desire to sit in a group and listen to people’s opinions on books, mine or anyone else’s.

          It’s my book, my work. I believe in it (most of the time). If I make a mistake than I will hopefully learn from it. I’ll take that learning and write the next thing.

          I still inwardly flinch when I come across an article written by a literary critic I was forced to read during my English Major period, by the way.

  1. I guess what I use is alpha readers, they get to see/comment on the raw output.

    Some of them are useful, others are not, after a while you know which ones to ignore and which ones to listen carefully to.

    Truth is stranger than fiction because fiction has to make sense. (too lazy to look up the actual quote.)

    As I play in the ‘wild wild west – of space’, it helps to have someone point out the plot holes before they get too big to Spackle over. then of course the fact that even my feeble mind is faster than my fingers means I can leave out words or even whole ideas (never minding the mess a change can leave behind.)

    Yes, most of this can be picked up by the editor, but it’s nice when said editor doesn’t have to guess what I really meant.

    • This.

      I can appreciate the insight a second (or third) set of eyes lends to my work, particularly in some areas. For example, description does not come naturally to me, so it’s helpful to have someone nudge me (where are they? could use setting, what do they see/hear/smell, etc.) – not WRITE for me, but just point out when something is missing or confusing.

      I listen to what’s suggested and decide whether or not to make changes. It’s not the same thing as ‘writing by committee’ which I agree would not be desirable.

    • What Stephen said. I have a few alpha readers I can turn to for help, especially of the “I think something is going splat. What do you think?” and get back “Chapter six went thud.” or “No, I can follow the action and it makes sense.” Otherwise I don’t have a committee that makes suggestions or *shudder* “corrections.”

  2. I’ve written 60 books – 54 are published or in the pipeline. I’ve never had a beta reader. I feel the same way about beta readers that I do about critique groups. Everyone has an opinion, but that opinion doesn’t have any place in your writing.

    Kind of like the saying: too many cooks spoil the broth.

  3. I’ve always had my doubts re: beta readers and never used them. My take is that too many chefs in the kitchen will ruin the dish.

  4. /agree 100%

    “But the typing would be perfect. God help a poor typo that slipped through that gauntlet.”

    That is my favorite line from the article. I’ve never read a book in my life that didn’t have a half dozen typos. However, heaven help you if you’re an indie because if you have one frigging typo you’ll get a dozen reviews that say, “needs editing”.

    • I think that has more to do with whether people are enjoying the stories or not.
      I’ve read many books and then their review straight after only to find out that they contained many typos, which I didn’t notice while I was reading because I was too engaged in the story.

    • I’ve never read a book in my life that didn’t have a half dozen typos.

      I’m curious what you’re reading. I’ve rarely seen typos in dead-tree books, and those will jump out at me like a monster in a haunted house ride. Now, post e-books I see a lot of lazy traditional publishers and lazy indies who either scan in dead-tree books without checking (tradpub), or just don’t bother with an editor/proofreader at all (indie). I’d say both instances indicate a lack of pride in one’s work; they’re the equivalent of a restaurant serving food on dirty dishes and dirty tables.

      For me there is no such thing as a story so engaging that I will miss the typos, the lowercase letter at the start of a sentence, repeating sentences, dropped sentences, etc. Those errors are a great way to kill my immersion. I’ve learned to check reviews of all e-books (tradpub or indie) specifically for those issues. I don’t buy a lot of e-books specifically because the reviewers mention typos or bad formatting. This is not something I ever had to do with dead-tree books. Before e-books, only the story mattered.

      • I’m 45 and I’ve been reading since I was six. Every book has typos and errors in it. Every. Single. One. Dead tree even more so than indie because of the expense of fixing them. I am speaking about fiction though, not nonfiction (though I’ve seen my fair share of typos and errors in those). The idea that somehow tradpub books are without errors is another myth the Big 5 likes to reinforce because it makes them seem more elite. Never mind Tolkien spent most of his life trying to get the errors out of his books that the publishers put in…

        • Again, what are you reading? We’re not far apart in age, so I’m not kidding about the rarity of this phenomenon in my experience. Copy editing is second nature for me (and occasionally I’m a proofreader by profession). It used to be rare for me to see published books, both fiction and non-fiction, with typos in them. It’s now common enough with e-books that I check for them in reviews.

          The idea that somehow tradpub books are without errors is another myth … that I addressed when I spoke of trad publishers having typos specifically in their e-books. It’s not typical in their print books, which makes their pricing of e-books at $9.99+ especially bogus. Their e-books are literally produced at a lower quality but they want to charge so much for them. The nerve!

          Another myth that needs to die is that readers are just picking on indies when they complain about typos, as if they shouldn’t care about typos. Nope. Readers are not used to seeing spelling errors in published books, and most don’t want to be used to that. They also didn’t start associating misspelled words with e-books just to be snobby.

          Readers are allowed to have standards, and expecting books to be free of misspellings, poor grammar, and punctuation errors is the very definition of basic. So basic that most readers assume it goes without saying, like the idea that a meal at a restaurant should be served on a clean plate. They shouldn’t have to ask.

          • I read everything. Mostly Sci-fi and fantasy but Clancy too. I don’t know why you think there aren’t typos in print books because I have seen them my whole life. I remember reading a Ben Bova book and finding a typo and thinking “don’t they pay people to fix this?” Print books may not have as many typos and errors as indie ebooks, but they are there. And once there they are rarely changed. My only problem with your last paragraph is… many, many, many, authors do not follow the rules of grammar and punctuation as taught in school. Fiction writing is art, not science. I agree typos should be kept to a minimum, but it is my experience you can never get them all (like Pokemon). Not that this is scientific (and now I am going to go look) but I’ve never seen a tradpub book by a well-known author have a review that says “Needs editing and proofreading but I enjoyed the story.” That is a standard, boilerplate review on indie books regardless of the level of care put into them. However, like all things ymmv. We both have lived different lives and had different experiences. It is a great example of why anecdotal evidence is worthless.

            • I’ve never seen a tradpub book by a well-known author have a review that says “Needs editing and proofreading but I enjoyed the story.” That is a standard, boilerplate review on indie books regardless of the level of care put into them.

              I see that review now and then, but not on most of the indie books that I read and enjoy. The broad brush you paint with is far too broad, and your experience isn’t broad enough.

              • I think you didn’t read everything I said. You missed the part about it being anecdotal and non-scientific. This is my experience only. I paint with whatever brush I please and you can view it however you want. But you don’t know me, you don’t know the books I’ve read or the life I’ve lived. Saying my experience isn’t broad enough is pompous arrogance on your part. I ‘hung a lantern’ on my statement to clarify to all that I wasn’t speaking for everyone or everything. Perhaps it isn’t my experience that needs broadening.

            • many, many, many, authors do not follow the rules of grammar and punctuation as taught in school.

              Surely you did not think I was confusing business or academic writing with novel writing? Come now. When I speak of proper grammar, I’m referring to the clarity of the sentence, even taking into account dialects in dialogue, as in, “She sure don’t talk too purty.”

              I once warned a writer that her writing indicated a pair of pants were running around in her story. A couple of sentences later it turned out someone was wearing the pants. This was a fantasy, so it was possible the pants were enchanted or sapient. It turned out the pants were merely pants, and we weren’t supposed to think they could move on their own. That is what I’m referring to as poor grammar. That is what readers are justified in objecting to.

              Punctuation: He went to the store. then he went back home. The lowercase T in “then” is clearly an error, especially when the story is not supposed to be one of those weird stream-of-consciousness type deals. There is a difference. ETA — I was repeatedly seeing this kind of error in the e-book version of a book published by DelRey. The book was riddled with such errors.

              Anyway, with respect to typos, “mussels vs muscles” (see Celine’s post further below for more examples). I don’t dispute that they happen — I own the hardback edition of “World War Z” in your link. Yep, the right/rite typo is there.

              What I am disputing that they are typical enough that readers should expect to see them and are just being snobby against indies if they object to them.

              Agreed that anecdotes are not evidence.

          • I’m with Jeff. There seems to be a typo in almost every book, even if it just one. In the book I just finished there was a fragment of a sentence repeated. Like above, I wonder what happened to the person who is supposed to pick this up.

            • I don’t find typos to be very common, at leas that manifest as spelling errors. What I see a lot of is homonym errors, where someone probably just told the spall Czecher to “deal with it.”

              Plus the usual to/too/two problem, of course.

          • I’ve been (re-)reading many of the classics over the last year and a half. Oliver Twist, David Copperfield, Dracula, Moby Dick, etc. Every single one still has typos, even after a century (or two) in print. I may have read one or two books in my life (out of thousands) that didn’t have typos -at least that I didn’t catch- but they’re pretty rare. Many of the most successful authors (a certain thriller publisher, for example) have dozens of typos in a single novel, and nobody complains. Stephen King and Anne Rice have unusually clean manuscripts in my opinion, and from what I hear, they rarely get touched by an editor.

            As to the other matter, I always see a spike in editing complaints in my reviews when one of my books is doing well. I’ve had Amazon contact me, saying I needed to “fix the errors and republish.” The book in question had ONE typo, but coincidentally had been sitting in the #1 genre slot for a while. I suspect some not-very-skilled writers may be spending time trying to sabotage the competition using dirty tricks like this instead of improving their own work. Regardless, I second the idea that you only infrequently see a comment like this on a mainstream, traditionally published title. It comes standard with an Indie book. My advice is to expect it and (mostly)ignore it.

          • I’ve been astonished by the number of typos and duplicated words (‘the the,’ etc) I’ve found in trade-published books that I’d read years ago and never noticed at that time. Back then, I was just a reader, and didn’t even see the words. Now that I write and I’m used to looking for them in my own books, I see them all the time.

            I even found a trade-published book with a typo in the back cover blurb last time I went to a book store in London. I forget which book it was.

            I’m expecting to find one with a typo in the title next.

          • Again, what are you reading? We’re not far apart in age, so I’m not kidding about the rarity of this phenomenon in my experience.

            I never paid any attention to typos in novels. I did find them in legal documents, business letters, etc, because it really did matter and could change the terms of an agreement. I have two reading modes.

            After people began complaining about typos in ebooks, I started paying attention to novels. So, I saw them in just about every novel I read from an established publisher.

            Now, for me, that’s a stupid way to read novels, so I stopped looking, and now just enjoy them as I always did, seeing nothing.

          • Even before eBooks were a thing, I remember noticing typos in some of the C.S. Forester Horatio Hornblower series, Rex Stout’s Nero Wolfe series, Star Trek Tie-ins, Asimov’s Foundation novels, and even some editions of the Lord of the Rings novels. I would have to re-read them to find which specific books or what kind of typos, but the adage that no book is perfect seems to fit my experience.

            • @ Everyone — Several of you are mentioning old novels — are they really misspellings (mussels vs. muscles) or are they old versions of spellings not in use anymore (Aegyptian vs Egyptian)? I don’t consider the latter to be typos. I am reminded of a post here a while back about a new e-book publisher who wanted to update books that had used Aegypt vs. Egypt spellings. I was skeptical anyone would consider them typos, but maybe I’m wrong there 🙂

              Regarding reprints, last week I spent over an hour trying to track down an e-book of a 19th century adventure that didn’t come straight from Gutenberg, which was missing the illustrations.

              I am not surprised that you’re seeing typos in reprints from tradpublishers (or the new e-book publishers of the reprints). They are very clearly not bothering to proofread anything they had to scan (hence my annoyance at their pricing). I thought this laziness was restricted to their e-books, but if you’re seeing them in print then I stand corrected.

              • I’m talking all-around errors, not just misspellings (and no, I’m not referring to things which may be “old versions of spellings not in use any more.”). Or reprints.

                With Hornblower, most memorably, there was a scene in one of the later novels (which I only have in paperback; last I checked there still wasn’t an eBook version) when a major character who had died earlier in the book (Captain Bush) was included in a scene.

                Rex Stout is notorious for inconsistencies of all sorts from book to book, especially regarding whether certain minor characters were still alive. He, frankly, didn’t care about consistency.

                I was just checking an old library-bound copy of the Hobbit the other day (one of the 1940s edition printings; I’ll note it had to be an early one, as the book was revised in a later edition to change the scene with Gollum’s character for consistency with the Lord of the Rings), and counted three punctuation errors on one page.

                First edition copy of Foundation and Earth — the scene with R. Daneel Olivaw, Daneel was errantly referred to as “Daniel” once.

                And those are just the ones I REMEMBER, without having to go back and re-read my paper books to find stuff.

  5. Because creating original fiction is not a group effort, that’s why.

    That is one approach, and I’m sure it works for some people. Others may choose to use a group.

    There is no restriction on how the product is created. It could be one person working alone, or it could be a group effort.

    Lots of consumers are concerned with the product, not the production process. Some producers might disagree with those consumers. That’s fine.

  6. Eh, beta readers help identify the parts where I left something unexplained that needed to be explained, and over explained where it needed to be leaner. But! The parts that the readers identified as a problem were the parts I suspected were a problem. So they’ve taught me to trust in my instincts, which is a valuable lesson in itself.

    I think you have to know your own craft well enough to know what advice you should accept, and which ones you should reject. That comes with experience, but in the early days you can jump-start yourself with beta readers (who read in your genre).

    I would still love to find readers who are genuinely clued in about historical or tech matters, to help me catch errors. Unfortunately, I’ve discovered that I’m the only one in my group who reads history and does any serious research. My group members have had some … odd … ideas about life in historical eras. Or even modern tourist destinations that can easily be seen and learned about on the internet.

    • Even that in itself is helpful, though. It lets you know where you need to explain a little bit more, because your audience isn’t as knowledgeable as you might think. Its extremely helpful when beta readers are representative of your audience.

      • Agreed. I did realize I needed to use some setting trigger words sooner (think legion vs. army) than I did. But one objection was just flat wrong and strange. Think of a person skeptical that the Egyptians or Greeks or Romans knew about the wheel; that sort of thing. I mean, Gladiator! Ben-Hur! Xena! That’s an example of a beta reader comment that I just had to ignore.

  7. I’m not so sure … I wrote a story some years ago and my writing group suggested some heavy edits which I made, and I then was able to place the story.

    Last year I decided to re-sell this story, but I accidentally sent the first version to the editors. They sent back a rejection with the same comments my beta-readers had made.

    My sample size is 1, admittedly. But it was pretty striking.

    • I think things like this always vary by writer, the whole ymmv thing. The one thing I like to tell new writers over and over is… there are no rules, only guidelines and what works for you. I just get excited when someone expresses an opinion I hold 😉

  8. I used to have an editor but when I started publishing books every sixty days or so he couldn’t keep up with the pace. Now I use two to three beta readers…but not for editing but for proofreading. I’m notorious for having typos, so now I make a concerted effort to have as many eyes see the book before publication as I can. But they’re not there for feedback or story editing. I’m at the point in my career that I’m confident in my writing and structure. It’s just those darn typos….

  9. “But the typing would be perfect. God help a poor typo that slipped through that gauntlet.”
    —————–
    But that’s just it. The typos do slip through. The typing isn’t perfect.

    I read a lot of indie writing. Many of them include a thank you to their multiple beta readers who possibly did help by pointing out plot holes and so on, but spelling and grammar is apparently left in the not very competent hands of spellcheck.

    taught-taut, rappell-repel, altar-alter, dual-duel, pail-pale, site-sight, muscles-mussels …

    His taught mussels gleamed in the fading light as he repelled down the cliff to fight a dual at the sight of the alter, knowing he would be beyond the pail if he lost.

    • Okay, the “taught mussels” line got me 🙂

      I have told my writing group that I won’t worry about their spelling errors unless they were egregious (still hard to resist pointing them out minor ones, though). I will flag grammar errors that interfere with clarity, but I’ve flat out said that since I’m reading the first draft I’ll only focus on the plot, story, characters, etc. There’s no point in perfecting a sentence in a scene that needs to be cut anyway. ETA that the writer is the one who would decide to cut the scene. I would only tell them why it’s not working for me.

      However, if their spelling was as bad as your mussels line I’d make a point of insisting they hire an editor later. But so far no one in my group is that bad, even the ones who write in English as a second language. Thank goodness, because my nerves couldn’t handle it 🙂

    • 2 typos in 1 sentence! Should reed; “His taught mussels gleamed in the fading lite as he repelled down the cliff to fight a dual at the sight of the alter, knowing he wood be beyond the pail if he lost.” U should take pried in you’re righting. (Just kidding — English is so much fun!)

  10. I’ve never been able to share a work in progress, and I really don’t know how people do critique groups. No one sees my work until it’s finished. Scrubbed clean. Polished. As ready as I can make it. But after that it needs fresh eyes.
    I could apply those fresh eyes myself, by waiting about six months, but I’d rather have the fresh eyes of people I trust do it for me /now/.

    • I usually don’t, but I was utterly stuck on my novel and thinking it was terrible. So I emailed it to my very dear friend who doubles as my sounding board when I’m stuck on a plot point. She read it, called me, and said, “It’s fine. Finish it.”

      That said, I lost the need for critiquing groups many years ago. They’re great for new writers. I have first readers, but they’re mostly there to catch typos and any glaring plot problems. My internal editor does most of the beta reading for me as I write and edit. I’m not a first draft person. I edit constantly as I write.

      • I edit as I go as well so my first drafts are pretty clean, but with the last one, I simply did not see a glaring plot hole until one of my betas asked me about it. So yeah, those fresh eyes really are a godsend.

  11. Beta readers can’t be the problem.

    Ken Follett seems to do well with his beta readers. See his description of his process here: https://ken-follett.com/masterclass/outline.html

    Stephen King seems to do okay sending his stuff out to his four to eight beta readers. You’ll find a description on pages 216-217 of On Writing.

    Orson Card has his beta readers which he calls wise readers. He explains what he does in both of his books on writing and in his workshops.

    Brandson Sanderson seems to do fine as well. He’s got a critique group that he shows his stuff to.

    These are all pro writers writing at the top of their game. What this means is that there are clearly different ways to produce great work.

    It’s the same way with outlines and no outlines. Some pros like Follett and Sanderson like to use outlines. Some like Koontz and King do not.

    Maybe Dean really is claiming that first readers only do damage. If so, the claim is demonstrably false as shown above.

    But I wonder if the real thing he’s objecting to is when authors have this fear about their work and feel that only the committee will know what’s good. It’s the abdication of the role of creator.

    Card puts it this way. The writer is the doctor, he says. These early readers are simply the patients. And all the writer wants from the patients is a report of their symptoms. And the only symptoms the writer cares about is the reader’s report of parts that are not clear, not believable, and boring. Or, if they’re an expert, if anything didn’t ring true or there’s something you didn’t know about that would be just too cool not to include.

    It’s the writer’s job to diagnose if anything is actually wrong and prescribe the fix.

    In this approach, the reader isn’t the doctor. And the writer isn’t asking what to do. He just wants to see if the story he loves so much is getting translated to the page well. And, maybe, as with Follett, even asking for some input.

    Seems to work for a lot of great pro authors who know how to use it right.

    • “Maybe Dean really is claiming that first readers only do damage. If so, the claim is demonstrably false as shown above.”

      No, it’s not. I don’t entirely agree with Dean, but no-one knows for sure whether those books would have been better or worse in the original form.

      For all we know, maybe one of King’s beta readers said ‘you know, the Stand would be much better with a deus-ex-machina ending’ and King went for it instead of what he originally planned.

      • You and I might not know, but these authors seem to think they do. For example, Sanderson began to publish only AFTER he started revising his drafts, something else Dean argues against.

        We’re talking about pros writing at the highest levels here. If they aren’t in a position to decide what does and doesn’t help them write better stories, I wonder who would be.

        What Dean is espousing is one working method. Other pros do it differently. Big whoop. It’s clear that there are other methods that produce great fiction that millions of readers love.

          • That’s exactly what the beta readers John is talking about are. In a high enough quantity, beta readers function like Amazon reviews for your first draft, with the focus on where the story didn’t work for them and where they got confused. If enough of them are struggling with the same things, you get to go back and fix that, so its connecting with readers as you intended.

        • In Brandon Sanderson’s case, there are sometimes over 50 beta readers, and a spreadsheet they are supposed to enter their thoughts in. The Beta read is not about grammar, but whether the story is connecting with readers in the way that Sanderson expects. And he doesn’t get the raw feedback. His assistant tabulates things to reveal problem areas where a certain percentage of the beta readers had trouble understanding what was happening.

          https://www.tor.com/2014/02/12/beta-reading-words-of-radiance/

  12. Strongly disagree on this one. A good critique group is invaluable, NOT for grammar and punctuation, and NOT because you want to write by committee. Beta readers or whatever you want to call them help the writer to bridge the gap between what you wanted to or thought you said on the page, to what a reader actually perceives on the page. In other words, you the author might think you’ve accomplished a particular narrative goal or portrayed a character in a certain light, but readers don’t get it that way. If you listen to your critical readers, you have the option to make changes to your manuscript that don’t CHANGE your creative vision, but make it more clear what your vision actually is on the page.

    • I have given betas part-1 of four, and then asked them to tell me the story. I question them on things. If they missed something important, it’s my problem, and it’s fixable.

      If they missed important stuff in part-1, they will also miss the significance of subsequent events in part-2.

      It’s garden variety QA. Check the production process at critical points, not when consumers start returning the product.

      • Love your approach, Terrence. I think it’s absolutely possible to approach the beta read process logically as a tool in your arsenal as a creator… Not with fear, clutching your manuscript and begging people to tell you that you’re good enough.

        There are enough writers in that last column that I don’t think Dean’s caution is entirely unfounded, but I think you can use a hammer to pound nails, too, not just smash your own thumb.

    • A good critique group is invaluable

      Key word: good.

      I used to frequent two writers’ groups. One was led by an amateur. The other was led by two SFWA editors.

      The first group was a case of the blind leading the blind. The leader used a critique form he got from — I dunno — ‘Critiquing for Dummies’. Made the personality conflicts jump right out at you. Okay, but not the best use of my time on a Sunday afternoon.

      The second group, in addition to the editors, included three SFWA writers. The written critiques were not structured, but the oral critiques were policed by the two editors. Even so, I found 1/3 of the critiques to be very helpful, 1/3 to be marginally helpful, and 1/3 to be trash. The editors and at lest one of the writers always fell into the ‘very helpful’ category.

  13. I don’t know where to begin with what’s wrong with this, but one thing’s for sure, DWS knows less than squat about publishng history.

    “A few book houses, but not many. Most novels were published in magazines in the pulp period. Most novels from that period have never seen a hardback or paperback reprint.”

    There was a heirarchy: pulps, slick magazines, and quite a few book publishers publishing oroginal fiction and nonfiction. Hammett and Chandler came from the pulps amd then graduated to being published in hardcover by Alfred A. Knopf, one of the the most distinguished publishers at the time.

    A long time ago DWS described his writing/publishing method: write as fast as you can, poop out your first draft, slap a cheapjack cover on it, and publish. And if it’s a bit too malodorous even for oneself, publish it under a pseudonym so as not to pollute the precious bodily fluids of your other works.

    No wonder he has no use for readers or editors. They’d only get in his way.

    • Peter, you are right about the pulps and slicks and there were numbers of book publishers. But most novels of the time remained never reprinted from the hundreds of Pulp titles from 1920 to 1950. Sure, a few writers made it out and a few series made it out. Doc Savage and The Shadow were reprinted in paper years later.

      But I have had the pleasure of being in major pulp collections that took up entire houses. Year after year, novel after novel never saw the light of day outside of the magazine issue. Far, far more than did, actually.

      So learn your pulp history before attacking me with bad information. For example, I dare you to find me one novel that made it into book form out of any of the thirty different Spicy pulp titles that published weekly or biweekly at times for decades. I don’t know of one and all of them had novels in them.

      As far as how you described what I said about my own work, that made me snort. I never said that, never believed it, never would believe it, and anyone who knows me knows that. I type with three fingers, am slow, and I work to do the best I can with every story. Period.

      Maybe that’s why I have twenty-three million copies of my books in print. Hmmm, you think?

      • Every time–EVERY TIME–I have seen a writer attempt to state his opinion on writing as irrefutable, he inevitably concludes the conversation with his writing credits, bestseller status, and/or various MFA degrees, as proof that he MUST be right.

        Dean, I respect you. I know your experience means something, and in some cases–I might even say, many cases–the pitfalls of outside input can destroy a writer along with their work.

        But to say it’s always so, and that the use of beta readers is indefensible (as you stated in the comments on your blog) is a very narrow way to look at things. You are not all writers. You aren’t all SUCCESSFUL writers.

        You can say that it’s risky, and you advise new writers to stay away from the practice… but you can’t say never.

        I mean, you can. But you’d be wrong.

        This is art. There is no never, there is no always.

    • Peter, one more point about the old pulps. I was very lucky in my career to know many of the old pulp writers personally and as friends. Jack Williamson was a mentor of mine and one of the sweetest men who ever lived. He sold his first short story in 1928 and wrote and sold in every decade until he died. He made it out of the pulps and continued to write. Many writers did that. Some never made the transition.

      But every time I pick up an old pulp or an early digest and there is a Jack story I have never seen before, or a Jack novel I had never seen before, I am stunned. Since he was a mentor and a friend, I thought I knew most of his work. As the years go by, I discover how little I actually knew because so much of the work in the hundreds of thousands of issues of pulp magazines was never brought forward. Or put into book form.

      Sorry, I know this is a beta reader topic. Just wanted to clear up that horrid historical false information that was put out there, if for no other reason but to make people aware of the writers back then.

    • Peter, are you really incapable of making a counterpoint without hurling insults? TPV is a place for discourse and this is not discourse. This is vitriol.

      And since when did writing a book become a matter of life and death? This is entertainment. Writing should be fun before anything else. If not, you’re doing it wrong.

      Dean puts a lot of good back out into the world, most of it for free. Can you say the same thing about yourself?

    • Peter you are a nonfiction writer who has squeezed out a couple of biographies in the last several years. Your career consists of writing reviews and non fiction pieces for newspapers. What exactly do you know about writing fiction? Dean is published novelist and short story writer both traditionally published and indie published hundreds of times over. He has over 100 books and a huge number of short stories and novellas. He even ran a publishing company and has forgotten reading and writing more fiction than you know exists in the world. Instead of using washroom language show a little respect to a man who has earned it.

  14. I think DWS is off track with this one. He says he learned to write by submitting to pulp magazines. That is, someone critiqued his writing and helped it to develop. A newbie writer may not have that background. I don’t know about the rest of the world but my current (and first) manuscript would have been awful without the wise comments of a mentor and a couple of beta reading friends. It’s not ‘writing by committee’ it’s seeking constructive feedback. I think what new writers need is to learn to listen to feedback and discern when to / and not to apply it. That skills will both protect their voice and help them to grow as a writer.

  15. What an odd thing to say. Of course I think it’s silly to have ten beta readers, and take on every piece of advice. That is essentially writing by committee.

    I use one beta reader who will essentially say things like “You know that’s a plot hole because of X” or “I don’t like that because of Y”. My rule is that if I agree with it, I take it on board. If I don’t agree then I don’t.

    That same beta reader said that one novel was paced too slow. I didn’t agree so I didn’t change it. The world goes on.

    • Exactly. I use 5+ beta readers with each book, along with a structural and a copy edit, and it has worked out well. Each to their own, but I won’t be changing.

    • Of course, this is far more effective when you have 100 beta readers, and 50 are saying the same thing.

  16. Funny how writers always get passionate about writing. 🙂 The thing is though, our ultimate audience is made up of naive readers, so it makes sense to ask the opinion of those readers. But only once the story is finished. I’d hate to have my plots and characters created by ‘focus groups’. 🙁

  17. “I can’t think of any other field in which people who aren’t experts critique other people who aren’t experts in the hope of everyone becoming an expert.” Steven James, Story Trumps Structure

  18. I totally agree with DWS here. Beta readers are one of those things I feel like I “have” to do, but is essentially totally unnecessary. Even if I do it these days, it’s just to let fans read books early. The last three times I’ve asked for beta readers I haven’t even looked over their responses (mainly due to time constraints).

    Because…I’m writing the story I want to write. I recently completed a book. Two authors (the first a bestseller with a small publisher, the second a NYT bestselling author). The first author told me the pace was too slow. That it had too many endings and that the couple needed to be happier sooner. The second author said the exact opposite. That the pacing was excellent, she adored the way it ended and that it was a perfect romance. Which author am I supposed to listen to? Whose opinion do I value more? They’re both doing well in their respective markets. Then an editor who looked at it advised me (more than once) in her comments to remove the magical elements from the story. They’re staying put. 1) Because it’s how the main catalyst of the story happens, 2) it gives the heroine a connection with another character so that she doesn’t feel quite so alone and 3) if this does well, I’d like it to be a series and the other characters will be wielding magic. It would seem weird if they started doing magic with no explanation of how this particular family came to possess it.

    Which is the problem with opinions. They’re just that – opinions. Which I may or may not agree with.

    A few years ago there was an author who wrote a book about his childhood that had one of the funniest scenes I’ve ever read. Even now I can’t read it out loud without giggling through the whole thing. But then he decided that his next book was going to be written by readers and their experiences (experimental?). And it absolutely reads like a book written by committee. He lost his voice.

    I also hate critique groups. I don’t care what other authors think I should do with my story. It’s my story. They can tell their stories their way, and I’ll tell mine my way with my voice.

    And as for the “if it’s good enough for so and so…” in writing we have to find what works for us as authors. If you need to have ten people read your story before you can move on to the next stage or if you need a group of colleagues to give you their input first, more power to you. But just because you think it’s important for your work doesn’t mean it’s important for every other author out there.

    • A favorite author wrote his first several books on his own, before the first one came out, and it shows. You can begin to tell where the critiques began to get in his head. Before he was just having fun, but then he started letting other people’s opinions get into his work.

      This is why Dean’s advice seems so right on to me. Use a copy editor for typos and inconsistent aspects, and a first reader, but nothing else, and don’t read reviews bad or even *good*. All of those will get into your head and start unconsciously affecting your voice and work.

      When the heck did writing by committee become a thing? It’s got to be a fear thing and not trusting your own work.

      • When the heck did writing by committee become a thing? It’s got to be a fear thing and not trusting your own work.

        Sure. I don’t trust my work. Since I have a long history of failure to communicate, I think I’m on safe ground distrusting my skills.

        The objective of my communication is to convey information, knowledge, or attitudes to an audience. If the audience doesn’t know what I want it to know after I communicate, then I have failed.

        If failures are found, they can be fixed. If I refuse to even look for the failure, then it persists.

        When I begin to trust myself on all these things, I have truly gone astray.

      • “and don’t read reviews bad or even *good*”

        There are some popular authors who I like and whose recent works have not, in my opinion, lived up to their earlier work. It makes me wonder if they’ve started believing their own hype a little too much and consequently gotten lazy (thinking that their fans will love anything they put out). It’s made me consider whether I should read any reviews at all, even good ones, as you say.

        • The other thing about good reviews is that you can start unconsciously trying to write those aspects into your new stories. “Readers liked X so I better include it here.” And that’s often just one, single person’s opinion out of the thousands (hopefully!) who read it.

          Even if it was 5 or 10 people, it’s still only a tiny percentage of the people who bought the book. “Arrrgh” (when I see this happening to me as well as others) why would I let them into my head?

Comments are closed.