Alphabet soup readers

[Peyton Stafford]

My understanding of beta readers on Litopia was that they knew something about writing. Then I heard a podcast by some US writers who said alpha readers were the writers who commented, and the beta readers were the non-writers... Anyone know?

 

[CarolMS]

My understanding of beta readers on Litopia was that they knew something about writing. Then I heard a podcast by some US writers who said alpha readers were the writers who commented, and the beta readers were the non-writers... Anyone know?

I've seen a ton of definitions of what a beta reader is as I've been wandering the writing realms of the web over recent years. I wouldn't be surprised if there aren't varied opinions about it, including from those seen as well-established "experts." The one thing I've noticed as consistent from those "in the know" has been that a beta read is not the same as a standard critique including detailed, incremental feedback. Instead, it usually seems to involve readers' feedback that is in response to specified wants from the writer and is commonly applicable to a full manuscript draft. I'm not saying this as a certainty, though, but rather just conveying what I've gleaned on the subject from lots of reading about it online. As I said, there are likely many opinions. And, as well, the term "beta read" is often loosely applied, such as to standard critiques, without awareness of its differentiated meaning.

 

[Eva Ulian]

I never did know what if any was the difference between an A and B reader - certainly I've never considered myself as either one or the other because when I read, I just read as a normal reader who knows nothing about writing - then say what I "feel" about it .

 

[Hannah F]

Basically alpha readers are those who read your story first and beta readers are those who read your story second. Which way you want to do it: non-writer-readers first and writer-readers second or vice versa is up to you. Either way, this is not copy-editing. Alpha or beta reading is about structure. It's a developmental critique. Does your story/the geography in your story make sense? Are there loopholes? Have you paced it well? Are your characters distinct enough? Does your ending (if it's a full MS) satisfy your alpha/beta reader? Are there any sentences/paragraphs/scenes that confuse your reader? You can, of course, ask for anything specific.
I personally like to go with non-writer-avid-readers first because they don't veer into critique that is totally unnecessary at the developmental stage. However, they should both essentially be doing the same thing but with a slightly different eye to detail.

 

[CarolMS]

Basically alpha readers are those who read your story first and beta readers are those who read your story second. Which way you want to do it: non-writer-readers first and writer-readers second or vice versa is up to you. Either way, this is not copy-editing. Alpha or beta reading is about structure. It's a developmental critique. Does your story/the geography in your story make sense? Are there loopholes? Have you paced it well? Are your characters distinct enough? Does your ending (if it's a full MS) satisfy your alpha/beta reader? Are there any sentences/paragraphs/scenes that confuse your reader? You can, of course, ask for anything specific.
I personally like to go with non-writer-avid-readers first because they don't veer into critique that is totally unnecessary at the developmental stage. However, they should both essentially be doing the same thing but with a slightly different eye to detail.

Right on, Hannah. Well said.

 

[Peyton Stafford]

Thanks, all. The best explanation I heard was that alpha readers should be competent writers who can address story issues, and beta readers should be non-writers. Thank you, again.

 

[RK Wallis]

and then on top of that you have critiquing, but I found Brandon Sanderson explains the deal best (in sync with a Litopia critiquing attitude):

 

[Peyton Stafford]

and then on top of that you have critiquing, but I found Brandon Sanderson explains the deal best (in sync with a Litopia critiquing attitude):

My thoughts, too. Alpha = writer critique. Beta = non-writer critique.

 

[Hannah F]

and then on top of that you have critiquing, but I found Brandon Sanderson explains the deal best (in sync with a Litopia critiquing attitude):

I love that he says his books are "kinda bad" at the beta reader stage.

 

[Hannah F]

and then on top of that you have critiquing, but I found Brandon Sanderson explains the deal best (in sync with a Litopia critiquing attitude):

Yeah, for writers with sequel or second book deals or yet another book deal with a publisher, or those with the money to pay a good, trusted editor, their trusted editor will be their first port of call. Especially for those with a publishing deal, there's no point in anyone else reading the story if they're going to advise completely changing this and that. I'm not there yet, so my alpha readers are my trusted read-a-lot friends. Then I can change this and that and improve it before I hand what's not copy-edited but I hope is the actual chapter-by-chapter story, structure and emotion-wise, to the beta readers. (Not 50 of them though. Good Lord!) They wouldn't need to be writers, but I choose writers who I trust will know story structure and the magic (literary) tricks that lift emotions off the page and into the reader's heart.

 

[Pamela Jo]

My thoughts, too. Alpha = writer critique. Beta = non-writer critique.

Except you probably are better getting non writer readers reaction to your story first so maybe calling them Alpha readers is better?

 

[Hannah F]

There's no literary norm is these definitions. Alpha and beta and gamma will depend on the writer's circumstances and needs.

 

[Peyton Stafford]

There's no literary norm is these definitions. Alpha and beta and gamma will depend on the writer's circumstances and needs.

Just like the alphabet and numbers. 1, 5, 2000. Or Z, X, A. Right?