- Joined
- Feb 13, 2005
- Messages
- 3,126
- Reaction score
- 768
- Location
- Near Cincinnati
- Website
- www.allensedge.com
I've had beta readers of both types, a writer and a reader. "Reader" meaning an average reader, but not a writer.
I think both have their own positives. A Writer beta-reader will be much more nitpicky, will scrutinize the dialogue, narrative, words choice, punctuation, adverbs, said-bookisms, and grammar much more closely, while also analyzing the big-picture stuff, plot, characterization, story arc, etc. I know I do when I beta-read something. I can't just read it, I have to flag every problem I come across.
But the average Reader beta-reader probably won't notice the small problems. I mean, with me the overusage of adverbs, said-bookisms, and punctuation really stick out, but the average reader glosses past those and reads it mainly for story and characterization, or focuses on a cerain aspect that might be that reader's expertise and he's making sure that part is right. (Like the diabetes subplot of my own novel.)
Which is better?
It seems to me that the Writer beta-reader is so focused on nitpicking that he loses focus on the story and how well it works overall. In fact, some writer beta-readers just give up when the story gets too bogged down in technical problems.
But the Reader beta-reader focuses more on the story than poor grammar or missing commas. And you might get a better reaction from the Reader beta-reader if you ask a lot of follow up questions.
Thoughts?
I think both have their own positives. A Writer beta-reader will be much more nitpicky, will scrutinize the dialogue, narrative, words choice, punctuation, adverbs, said-bookisms, and grammar much more closely, while also analyzing the big-picture stuff, plot, characterization, story arc, etc. I know I do when I beta-read something. I can't just read it, I have to flag every problem I come across.
But the average Reader beta-reader probably won't notice the small problems. I mean, with me the overusage of adverbs, said-bookisms, and punctuation really stick out, but the average reader glosses past those and reads it mainly for story and characterization, or focuses on a cerain aspect that might be that reader's expertise and he's making sure that part is right. (Like the diabetes subplot of my own novel.)
Which is better?
It seems to me that the Writer beta-reader is so focused on nitpicking that he loses focus on the story and how well it works overall. In fact, some writer beta-readers just give up when the story gets too bogged down in technical problems.
But the Reader beta-reader focuses more on the story than poor grammar or missing commas. And you might get a better reaction from the Reader beta-reader if you ask a lot of follow up questions.
Thoughts?