How harsh do you prefer your beta readers to be?

[kkbe]

I think having strangers want to give up their time and effort to improve my writing makes their contribution even more special. YMMV, of course.

Agree with this. And if you are fortunate enough to have a couple, a few, read your work, and if those two or three are really, really good, that's all the better for you. I can't imagine how that could be detrimental to one's work. In my own experience. . .

Never mind. Screw that. If you've written something, and you think, okay, this is pretty good. . .but is it? And you ask a stranger, seriously, Excuse me, Pardon me, May I ask you to ahh, Hell with it: I want you to read my 120,000-word novel and tell me what's right and what's wrong and offer suggestions and make comments and fix my grammar and point out inconsistencies and I know this is going to take hours and hours and hours and I'm not paying you, I can't pay you a dime, I haven't sold anything so I have no money. . .

Would you be so kind as to beta read my novel?

Blessed be the Beta Readers for they shall help me improve my writing. Of course, YMMV (which I used to think meant, You Make Me Vomit. . .)

 

[CrastersBabies]

Or you're new to critiquing and are still on a steep learning curve.

Or you're a reader but not a writer, so you don't have experience from the other side of the fence to draw on.

Or you have cultural/personality differences to the author, so what you think is tactful = what the author thinks is abrupt or aggressive.

Or you are very experienced at critiquing and aren't aware that the author you are critiquing is new to it, so you use standard jargon that the author doesn't understand and thus "TSTL" is read as "unhelpful unintelligible acronym".

Or you've been critiquing for a while and really are trying to do it right, but after putting in tens or hundreds of hours, the only feedback you've got back from authors is "Thanks, very helpful, great!" so you have no idea which of your comments worked and which didn't.

Editing to add: Because, seriously, I've no idea where I sit. Frex, for the last few people I critted, I spent about 10 hours on each one (reading the first 2 - 5 chapters, doing line-edits, putting comments all through the ms, and writing a page or so of overall "what I got out of this, what worked for me, what didn't" notes, along with the usual caveats of 'this is just IMO, a single reader's impression, use what you can and ignore the rest"). One person sent back ~ three sentences of "thanks, great, v helpful." Another sent back a paragraph of "thanks, but I'm really upset that you said you didn't like XX". A third came back with a long email full of "thanks, I agree with XX, I found YY really helpful, I think you're right about ZZZ, I'm not sure about RRR and will probably let it stand but instead maybe do QQQ and SSS to cover that base, blahblahblah".

So, am I doing it right? Honest without being either too harsh or too sugar-coated? As three authors I've critted and you'll probably get three different answers. Me, I still can't answer the question. I just don't know. I'm sure as shit putting in the time on my end -- I've probably spent a hundred hours critiquing for total strangers in the last six months. But I don't know if I'm doin it rite or doin it rong.

Excellent points all! Definitely mulling them over. Thanks, Unimportant.

 

[katci13]

I just like my betas to be honest. All I want is to be the best writer I can be and without honest crits how am I supposed to do that for myself?

I don't like the word "harsh," though, because I definitely believe it's possible to be completely honest and at the same time not exactly "polite" per se but just... not rude, I guess. There's a difference between "I couldn't even get past the first page -insert constructive criticism-" vs. "It was difficult for me to get through the first page -insert constructive criticism-" --- IMO anyway. Maybe I'm just sensitive.

What I mean is I want my betas to help make me a better writer, not make me feel bad about myself.

Exactly what I was going to say. I only have one critiquer. She's honest, helpful, and does a great job all around. She's the slightly nicer version of me. ^_^

I started off with 2 people. But I just had them read the first 4 chapters. I wanted to see what things they would both point out, and then choose the one I thought would be the most helpful. (It's easier on my brain to just deal with one person on this much material.) The 1st person critiqued like a crazy person. I didn't understand half the comments she made and half of the rest had nothing to do with my story. I like her and I discuss other writing related things with her, but I don't want her critiquing my work. Trying to pick through her comments for relevant info gave me a headache.

I want someone who can calmly and rationally point out any and all issues while leaving my writing style alone, unless it's distracting. (Which it isn't.) Someone who is honest and not afraid of hurting my feelings. And someone who can let me know there's a problem without ripping me a new one. (And this is way I try to critique stuff as well.)

 

[bearilou]

It depends on the reviewer. I don't think the writer's feelings on the issue matter in the slightest. It's how the reviewer feels is important.

Except I thought we were talking about betas and not reviewers.

Reviews are for the readers. It was my understanding that betas were for the writers.

Or am I now not correct in my definitions there?

I actually agree with you.
My point was that personally, I wouldn't ask a beta to phrase anything they sent me this way or that way. Each way of reviewing is unique to the person and some people are harsher than others. Some writers need that (me being one of them). But I wouldn't ask a beta to be horrible or go easy on me. That's their decision.
There is nothing wrong with either way so long as it helps the writer get better at writing.

Again, are we talking about reviews or beta critiques? I'm really confused now.

 

[CQuinlan]

Except I thought we were talking about betas and not reviewers.

Reviews are for the readers. It was my understanding that betas were for the writers.

Or am I now not correct in my definitions there?




Again, are we talking about reviews or beta critiques? I'm really confused now.

My apologies. In my mind betas give constructive criticism which I refer to as reviews, although done in as reading rather than reflecting the whole piece.

 

[bearilou]

My apologies. In my mind betas give constructive criticism which I refer to as reviews, although done in as reading rather than reflecting the whole piece.

Ah. Gotcha. It's all good. I just want to make sure I'm up with the conversation.

 

[ryanswofford]

I used to get critiqued a lot at a writer's group I attended a while back. I learned that some people will write big long crap-letters about what needs to be fixed and why, but they're really just writing it to make themselves feel better. This isn't to say that I don't dig constructive criticism...believe me, I want and need it to become a better writer.

But some people just go over-board. Like a lot of people have said, be honest, and we'll be friends.

 

[Unimportant]

The 1st person critiqued like a crazy person. I didn't understand half the comments she made and half of the rest had nothing to do with my story. I like her and I discuss other writing related things with her, but I don't want her critiquing my work.

Did you tell her this, so that she could learn to be a better critiquer?

I learned that some people will write big long crap-letters about what needs to be fixed and why, but they're really just writing it to make themselves feel better.... But some people just go over-board.

Did you tell them this, so that they could learn to be a better critiquer?

 

[CJ.Wolfe]

Did you tell her this, so that she could learn to be a better critiquer?


Did you tell them this, so that they could learn to be a better critiquer?

Yeah I'm new to critiquing so I'd appreciate being told where I went wrong.

 

[ryanswofford]

Did you tell them this, so that they could learn to be a better critiquer?

I did, but it was hard not to be rude about it. Haha.

 

[rwm4768]

I haven't had any beta readers yet, but when I get them, I'll want them to be harsh but constructive.

 

[katci13]

Did you tell her this, so that she could learn to be a better critiquer?

I didn't even think about it. I could have pointed out the things I didn't understand, but as they had little to nothing to do with my story and the other girl edits so much better, I didn't even bother.

I guess I think more along the lines of either you can help me or you can't. If you can't, I'll just find someone else, no big deal. I also already had someone else, so even more reason not to bother.

 

[Unimportant]

I didn't even think about it. I could have pointed out the things I didn't understand, but as they had little to nothing to do with my story and the other girl edits so much better, I didn't even bother.

I guess I think more along the lines of either you can help me or you can't. If you can't, I'll just find someone else, no big deal. I also already had someone else, so even more reason not to bother.

So, are you saying that it's okay for you to ask someone to donate an hour or two or ten of their time to do what they can to help you, but you don't feel any onus on you to spend five minutes in return to help them?

I guess I think more along the lines of either you can help me or you can't. If you can't, I'll just find someone else, no big deal. I also already had someone else, so even more reason not to bother.

I'd just like to point out that I, personally, disagree very strongly with this attitude. In my opinion, it is detrimental to fostering a sense of community and of writers helping each other out. Of course, YMMV.

 

[cmi0616]

Why is it that honest opinions/criticisms have to be harsh? Why is that a requirement?

For myself, I'm not asking someone to walk on eggshells around me but it's really not necessary to be an asshole when telling me the truth. And for me being harsh can in many case equate to being an asshole.

Now that definition doesn't bear out for other people and that's fine. It's a pretty good argument to make sure author and beta are on the same page with expectations before deciding to work together.

I just think it's not productive to indicate that if it's not said harshly then it wasn't offered honestly.

Now wait a minute, there's a very fine line one walks between harshness and assholery.

As you said, when I say I want harshness, what I mean is that I want honesty. I don't want people stepping on eggshells or blowing smoke simply because it's easier than telling me such and such paragraph is simply not good, or that such and such character is completely one-dimensional and totally unlikeable, etc.

As a writer, when I'm having somebody critique my work, I want to know what they're thinking and I want to know those thoughts in a totally honest, undiluted form, because when (hopefully) the thing gets published, readers aren't going to water down their opinions. To deliver honest criticism, one doesn't have to be obnoxious or rude, or as you said, an asshole. They just have to be honest.

 

[Lhipenwhe]

Anything short of purposeful/veiled insults and deliberate condescension. I admit that I have a problem taking criticism sometimes, but I can usually handle it as long as the beta-reader is trying to help me/be honest. If they decide to be insulting then I have tendency to become overly defensive/argumentative.

 

[katci13]

So, are you saying that it's okay for you to ask someone to donate an hour or two or ten of their time to do what they can to help you, but you don't feel any onus on you to spend five minutes in return to help them?


I'd just like to point out that I, personally, disagree very strongly with this attitude. In my opinion, it is detrimental to fostering a sense of community and of writers helping each other out. Of course, YMMV.

Actually I'm not saying that at all. You don't know my history so I'll tell you. I have spent many, many hours helping people with their writing and I am spending a lot of time helping this girl with her work. All I'm saying is that I don't want her helping me with my work. How is that in any way detrimental to a sense of community?

The way she gives feedback doesn't work for me. Not everyone is great at giving feedback. I am. I don't have a problem donating a lot of time to helping people. And honestly, this one friend I have reading my story, is the ONLY time I've gotten good help on a novel from anyone. I haven't been on this site for very long, but I have been helping people and writing for years. And it's nice to finally be dealing with someone who treats my work with the same respect I've been showing other people's work since I was in high school.

Not wanting to tell someone that their critiquing isn't working for me doesn't make me a bad or selfish person. I'm actually hoping that by helping her, she'll see how to do it better. If she doesn't, oh well. I'm helping her because she asked and I like doing it. I only sent her my story because we're buddies and I've read her stuff so she wanted to read mine.

It's not my responsibility to fix her bad critiquing. Her methods may work for other people. They don't work for me.

 

[The Otter]

For me, it really depends on the type of feedback.

I'm fine with stuff like, "I think you should cut this whole chapter, it's not moving your story forward." Or stuff like, "This whole part really confused me." I don't consider that "harsh," just honest.

Where it starts to become uncomfortable for me, I've discovered, is when the critique takes the form of a more personal response to the subject or the characters. A lot of my characters deal with mental illness--depression, social anxiety--or addictions, or phobias. I often fear that I'll run into a beta who'll tell me "so-and-so is weak/unlikeable/should just pull himself up by the bootstraps and stop whining" et cetera.

You could argue that that's still a valid critique because it's the reader's honest reaction, but on a personal level, it's hard not to be uncomfortable with that.

 

[bearilou]

As you said, when I say I want harshness, what I mean is that I want honesty.

Which is why I think these kinds of conversations are pretty much just us telling everyone what we want and no constructive discourse can come from it until we all define things.

To you harshness = honesty.

To me harshness = assholery. (is to a word!)

So when you say you want harshness, I'm reading it as you want someone to be an asshole.

Apparently when I say honest, to some I'm saying I want harshness (assholery) and to others it appears I'm saying you have to step around eggshells unless it's said in harshness (assholery).

And my comment was addressing just that because when you said:

I personally like harsh criticism though. My take on it is why wouldn't you want all of the flaws in your work to be pointed out? Why wouldn't you want an honest opinion to make it better? As long as it's constructive, I see no problem with it.

It was reading to me that you were saying harshness = honesty and that if I didn't want harshness, then I didn't want honesty, and why wouldn't anyone want honesty, which is not my stance at all. I want honesty, I don't want harshness.

It all has come down to how you define honesty and equate that to harshness and how I equate harshness to assholery.

Round and round we go because neither of us (nor it appears many of us) are really defining anything the same way. Add to that merry-go-round that some are okay with varying levels of harshness (however it's defined) and indeed, are willing to take a bit of rudeness in the mix as long as it's honest.

And it all comes down to honest criticism, which I think we all would like, whatever form it's dished up as.

 

[NeuroFizz]

Where it starts to become uncomfortable for me, I've discovered, is when the critique takes the form of a more personal response to the subject or the characters. A lot of my characters deal with mental illness--depression, social anxiety--or addictions, or phobias. I often fear that I'll run into a beta who'll tell me "so-and-so is weak/unlikeable/should just pull himself up by the bootstraps and stop whining" et cetera.

But, what if your character IS coming off as weak and unlikeable and that is not what you intended for that character? Do you just dismiss what the beta said because it's something you don't want to hear? I'm not trying to be argumentative. I'm just suggesting that a character assessment like that may be legit--something caught by an honest, thorough beta. If that was a reader reaction to one of my characters, I'd consider it an extremely valuable "catch" on the beta's part. I would revisit my overall characterization to see if I portrayed that character in the way I intended.

On the other hand, if you intended to make that character come off as weak and unlikeable, then you have positive feedback on the job you did with that characterization.

And I'll repeat something that I've said before because I've seen betas criticized for this on more than a couple of occasions (not related to the quote above). If a beta totally misunderstands a part of a story, or misses an important element in that story, there are two possibilities for the situation:
1. The beta just didn't get it
2. The writer didn't do a very good job of explaining/leading the reader through that part of the story.

Guess which one the writer should assume is the case in deciding to review that part of the story? I will certainly check for my writing clarity in that part of the story every time.

 

[shadowwalker]

If they decide to be insulting then I have tendency to become overly defensive/argumentative.

Which is a perfectly normal response - but which will also get you labeled a 'speshul snowflake'. And the end result is a lot of anger, frustration, and most likely, few needed changes made.

 

[NeuroFizz]

Anything short of purposeful/veiled insults and deliberate condescension. I admit that I have a problem taking criticism sometimes, but I can usually handle it as long as the beta-reader is trying to help me/be honest. If they decide to be insulting then I have tendency to become overly defensive/argumentative.

Even in situations like this, the proper response is "Thank you." You don't have to use anything said by that beta, and you certainly don't have to use him/her again. But he/she did invest time in your project. Giving a nasty or defensive response to that beta accomplishes nothing positive.

 

[scarletpeaches]

I find an appropriate response to a completely WTF crit/review is a cool, calm, "Well. Isn't that precious?"

 

[Mutive]

As a writer, when I'm having somebody critique my work, I want to know what they're thinking and I want to know those thoughts in a totally honest, undiluted form, because when (hopefully) the thing gets published, readers aren't going to water down their opinions. T

My concern about this line of thinking is that, as a reader, what I'm thinking tends to be something along the lines of, "This book is boring and the writer sucks. I'm going to find something better." Which (in addition to being rude) isn't particularly helpful or constructive.

The trick is figuring out why the book was boring and sucks, (Which is sometimes obvious, sometimes difficult.) as well as figuring out whether it's a just-you kind of thing (maybe I personally hate this type of book but know others who would be all over it) or whether it's something that most readers are going to be annoyed with.

Of course, there are those writers who are going to flip out about any criticism that isn't all rainbows and sunshine. But I can assure you that no writer would want to hear my raw, unadulterated comments about their manuscript.

 

[The Otter]

But, what if your character IS coming off as weak and unlikeable and that is not what you intended for that character? Do you just dismiss what the beta said because it's something you don't want to hear? I'm not trying to be argumentative. I'm just suggesting that a character assessment like that may be legit--something caught by an honest, thorough beta. If that was a reader reaction to one of my characters, I'd consider it an extremely valuable "catch" on the beta's part. I would revisit my overall characterization to see if I portrayed that character in the way I intended.

It's not necessarily an invalid crit. I'm not sure there really are any "invalid" crits unless the critter is being deliberately insulting. It's uncomfortable in that it triggers...stuff.

Probably not something I should get into. Shouldn't have even brought it up.

 

[kkbe]

The Otter: I'm not sure there really are any "invalid" crits unless the critter is being deliberately insulting. It's uncomfortable in that it triggers...stuff.

Probably not something I should get into. Shouldn't have even brought it up.

Oops.

Just trying to lighten it up a tad but Otter, I don't quite understand what you're saying. Are you speaking of an uncomfortable experience you've had, in which you think (or know) that your beta was deliberately insulting? Or are you saying that a beta questioned something of yours, giving you pause and prompting you to rethink your approach, which you were not ready/willing/able to do?

If you are saying the former, that's very unfortunate. I certainly wouldn't want a beta reader who insulted my work maliciously. I'd feel betrayed and would likely terminate the working relationship. I might be gun shy after that, which would be a shame because I know most critters have our best interests at heart.

If you're saying the latter. . .I can only speak from experience. Sometimes, the thing we don't want to hear is the thing we need to hear the most. Our resistance tells us something. At the very least, it tells us that perhaps the issue raised warrants a closer look. Sometimes, for whatever reason, we need that nudge. . .

If you're saying something altogether different, perhaps you could explain. No biggie if you chose not to, you've stated already that you regret bringing it up. In that case, I'll not trouble you further.