So, part of being a writer is getting critique. And critique isn’t always nice. I actually prefer my beta readers to be blunt: if they are blunt, I don’t have to turn around and ask them what they meant by something. When you call my hero a douchebag, I’m pretty clear on the meaning.
I recently sent a book to be beta read and got conflicting feedback: one liked it, the other told me in no uncertain terms that it wasn’t ready.
Back to the drawing board. I trust both readers and their taste, so I’m going to try to hold onto what the first reader liked about the characters while delving into a total re-write of the plot. hoo boy. This should be fun.
And this my friends, is why it’s good to get feedback on your writing from multiple sources. It doesn’t mean you can’t trust people who give you positive feedback, or that one crit partner “isn’t enough.” The fact is, publishing is a subjective industry, and what works for one might not work for another. Getting multiple perspectives on your work is a good way to get a feel for what some editorial concerns might be and how you’d be best prepared to tackle them before you even send a book out on sub.
As of today, I’m 6k words into the rewrite on this book and a few things have become clear: the new version is going to be longer. It’s going to be darker. And, hopefully sexier and more satisfying when all is said and done.
It’s going to be better, and that’s what working with a beta reader is all about!