Tuesday, February 7, 2012

On My Beta Readers


I’ve just finished reading the last beta reader’s manuscript on The House That Nobody Built. It was the longest, with over 1.700 comments, and by the end I taped an envelope with the page numbers of each chapter to my computer tower. I crossed them off to encourage myself to continue.

Using six beta readers drew surprise from most of the authors I know. Most only used a couple. Two concerned friends kindly e-mailed me saying they thought more would be too much work for me, and they feared I’d overwhelm myself. After a month of self-imposed deadlines and legitimately fearing for my eyesight, I’m glad I stuck with my six. Here’s why.


470-odd pages look better when broken down.

My six covered more ranges of experience. I get multiple men, multiple women, multiple ethnicities and regions represented. Some were writers and novelists, at least one works in a related craft, and two were simply passionate Genre readers. The professional zoologist knew things my linguist-nut friend didn't, and vice versa.

The bigger the population, the easier it was to discern whether something was actually functional or problematic. One of six beta readers hating a joke was not so bad, but if he’d been one of two, I’d have an exaggerated sense of the importance.

As Stephen King covered in his On Writing, having more betas also let opposing opinions go up against each other. If 1/6 was terrified by a scene and another 1/6 thought it was trite, with the others being neutral, then the tie can go to the runner.

Alternatively, as was usually my approach, I could e-mail the two outliers and find out more about the nature of their reactions, using the answers from one to form probing questions for the other, and figure out broader functionality. With only a couple betas, I’d have less of a chance of catching these instances, and at least three times during the crit such ping-ponging seriously helped balance the plot.

There were smaller boons, too. Only the third beta reader to turn in her copy noticed the following typo.

Click to resolve Blogspot's awful resolution issues!




One typo’s not so much, but only one of the six pointed out that people were eating the carcass of what had previously been identified as a poisonous creature. Only one caught a reference to Douglas Adams, and had the guts to say it was too bald and, as a fellow fan, it should go. And while I enjoyed their specialties, just as important were their ignorances; what people didn’t know or misbelieved about typical con-men or prisons had to be compensated for every bit as much as my errors.

Then there were the consensuses. When the death of one character left 3/6 readers deeply afraid for the safety of the rest of the cast, I knew I was on to something. That case was particularly relieving because of how hard it’d been for me to kill that character in the first place. There were many reasons for it to happen and I’ll likely write about it another time – but in this case, the reader pool’s reactions let me know the hard choice was the right choice. As much as I trust certain individuals, one out of two people can’t convince the way a majority of a pool can.

This is not disembodied data or focus-tested art. I know these beta readers personally or professionally, trust them, and have corresponded after they turned in their copies. I’m not looking to score 73% approval for a fight scene; I’m comparing human reactions on the page and checking in-depth as to how folks differ in experiencing my work. It may be that I’m too artsy for pure scientism. Whatever you call this, it’s the process that’s yielded my best work in the past. It’s the one I’ve got to rely on now, as I strive to produce the best thing I’ve ever written. Like I tell you every time, my beloved readers, I will not put this out unless it’s worth your time. I’m very grateful to these six for helping me get this far, as I will be to the theta readers next.

19 comments:

  1. This was such an interesting post John. I have no doubt whatsoever this will be one of the best things you have written. I feel sure that you will make your mark in the writing world. Your future looks very bright to me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Helen! That made me smile. I'll do my best to validate your faith.

      Delete
  2. Isn't it Gamma after Beta? Interesting post John. Question! How long did it take you to get responses from everyone, and did everyone finish the read?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're right, "gamma" is the third letter in that alphabet. I don't know where I picked up "theta," though perhaps I picked it unconsciously for its similar sound to "beta."

      Most got their copies in by December, which was nice. One didn't get it in until about last week. I staggered my editing process to compensate for people who needed more time to do the detailed jobs they felt were warranted.

      Delete
    2. The references to theta readers has been confusing me for a while. I thought it was a piece of insider lingo.

      Delete
    3. Have you generally heard them called "gamma readers"?

      Delete
  3. Fascinating.. and very helpful..You're thorough and painstaking approach will reap rewards I'm sure.. Getting more and more excited about this darn book of yours.

    So, now that they are done with you.. do you think they'd have some time on their hands to read mine? (Second thoughts.. you're too hard an act to follow!)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. unlike my thorough and painstaking comment (typo your..and not bloody "you're") okay I was at work and distracted but it just goes to show!!

      Delete
    2. As Stephen King says, to err is human, to edit is divine. I'll do my best to validate your faith, Tom.

      Delete
  4. Was such an honor to read it, sir. Can't wait to see what it looks like when you deem it ready! <3

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And I deeply appreciated all the time you put into reading it. Thank you again!

      Delete
  5. I can't remember the original number of readers you told me you had and I did email you about it, but then you clarified that the ten or so readers were going to be split into "beta" and "theta" (or gamma or whatever) readers. I've had six beta readers on each of my two manuscripts and I was glad for it for all the reasons you listed above. I love going back to the readers and getting more in depth reasons why they felt one way or another or why something worked or didn't. Although some of the comments may sting, it's always fascinating to see how others interpret your work and what they take from it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm typically relieved the betas are open to more discussion, honestly. A big part of figuring out what I want from betas and who make good ones to begin with has been that extended conversational process.

      Delete
  6. Nice bit of insight into your process. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Did any particular part resonate with your process, Tim?

      Delete
  7. Love the insight. I agree that six is a great number. I think having two that aren't writers or in a related field are also great. My friend is an avid reader of the genre I write in, but she isn't a writer at all. I go to her all the time, asking for advice on things. She always says, "But I'm not a writer." And I have to tell her that's exactly why I'm asking her. Good deal w/those beta readers. Sounds like you have some great ones!! :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's definitely good to get a pure reader's perspective. It's almost funny how much of the time writers spend trying to see things like a reader, and having both lets you compare.

      Delete
  8. Beta readers are great. I had about twelve the first time around, then three for the second book. I think around five is a good number. good luck to you and thanks for stopping by Alex's blog!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How did dropping to three affect your output, Stephen?

      Delete

Counter est. March 2, 2008