[ SECRET POST #3872 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3872 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.
















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 07 secrets from Secret Submission Post #554.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Completely your right. You have to sort authors some way. I'm not sure you always know, though. (:

[(Anonymous)]

Also should add it varies for everyone, of course, but for me, writing it not a group project. Trying to take other people's ideas & incorporate them into my story just makes everything turn out worse.

[(Anonymous)]

LOL, merely being open to editing suggestions doesn't make writing a group project! You still have the final say in deciding whether or not a beta's advice applies or not. But if you close yourself off to constructive feedback, you're shooting yourself in the foot.

[(Anonymous)]

Yes, by all means, presume you know more about AYRT's writing than they do. That makes complete sense, and you are in no way being a condescending know-it-all.

Everyone's writing method is different.
Everyone's writing goals are different.

I've beta'd for quite a few people over the years. I've beta'd for people whose work was airtight before they even sent it to me. And even if there was something about that person's fic I didn't really like, or thought could be stronger, with writers like that it's often pretty clear that you can't change much without breaking the whole thing down. Some writers don't have the writing equivalent of a basting stitch; they write with tiny, tight, precise stitches right from the first word. And that can be a weakness in some cases, but some of the best writers I've beta'd for have written that way as well.

I've also beta'd for writers that write extremely loose, sloppy first drafts. Those kind of writers tend to be more fun to beta for, but they're not always better writers. I've worked with very loose writers who were ultimately very strong writers. But I've also worked with very loose writers who, frankly, passed as far better writers than they were because they had a knack for finding betas who would operate as co-writers.

[(Anonymous)]

thanks for explaining this to everyone better than i could have!
as a beta, you probably have better insight into different writing methods than i do.
i mostly just know how mine works, and it doesn't always line up with the official party line of outline, 2.5 drafts, 1.7 betas, or whatever the going exchange rate is.
thanks :)

[ginainthekingsroad]

Some writers don't have the writing equivalent of a basting stitch; they write with tiny, tight, precise stitches right from the first word.

This is a lovely description, and I relate to it a lot. A favorite teacher once described my fiction writing as "lean meat." And yeah, I really struggle with adding "fat" to it, even if in this somewhat tortured metaphor* it makes the whole thing tastier.

I wish I knew how to make it easier to add more to every scene, but then I get self-conscious about how each little thing fits into the whole. Sooo I default to dialogue because that's where I'm more confident. Since I have a background in playwrighting, I'm so used to getting most everything across with dialogue.

*I almost accidentally typed "meataphor" here, no joke. I would never use this metaphor in my actual writing, but I laughed.

[(Anonymous)]

To add to what the anon above said, writers also have different personalities. For example, I'm a people pleaser. So I've found it's very easy for a forceful beta to derail my stories completely just because they're so insistent that I'm "not doing it right". Then my original message gets lost, as well as the enjoyment of writing.

I know I'm not the only one, since I have seen other fanwriters get completely turned into a doormat or mouthpiece for their beta, and lost their writing voice. The one I'm thinking of changed the writer's style completely to suit THEIR preferences. For the worse, in my opinion. (The writer's technical ability improved, but their talent for visceral imagery and in-depth characterization were tossed out.)

Just to give you insight to the other side of the coin.

[(Anonymous)]

All of this. It's all fine and well to say "well just don't be a pushover dur" but this stuff gets in your head and makes your second-guess yourself and can be a real block to writing what you actually want to write...not to mention the risk of pissing someone off when you don't write what they believe you should. :(

By the way, I'm the anon from above who said I don't use betas and have been writing for 20 years because this is what works for me. The truth is I'm actually a full time writer now and I still don't think I can do anything differently in this department. It's just not what works for *me.*

Sure, it would be lovely to be one of those awesome people who can kick around ideas with a buddy and spitball and do all of the great stuff writers are supposed to be able to do for help. But it's just not me!

[(Anonymous)]

nayry, but ayrt did say "generally", and I tend to agree. Authors who refuse to take ANY input about how they write tend to be rather crap at best and no wonder - they've given themselves a serious disadvantage when it comes to improvement! There are no writers who are so perfect and flawless that they're above constructive feedback. None.

In the meantime, I've been in fandom for a long time now and if I had a dollar for every writer who thought that they couldn't possibly take a suggestion from a beta lest their precious "style" or "voice" is compromised... ooh, I could retire and do nothing but read fanfic forever. And those authors? Yeah, they don't have much worth preserving, to be honest. It's more about protecting their egos than their writing. Constructive feedback from a good beta is one of the most valuable resources any writer has. It might not always be pleasant to hear, but it'll help you grow as a writer.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, but how many betas are actually qualified to edit and give constructive criticism as opposed to being regular people just like the author who also think they know how to write but may not actually have any more skill just a different opinion of what "good" is?

[(Anonymous)]

I've always wondered this. I mean, there are obviously going to be some people who know more about technique and can proofread grammar and nitpick continuity and etc better. But, as far as matters of taste go, aren't we all just peers, here?

I did creative writing courses in university, and the peer-editing was often LESS helpful than you'd think it would be. Half because you've got twenty different people giving you twenty different opinions on your work, and half because it seemed like everyone was just competing to prove that no, THEY were the best writer in the class.

I feel that "good" is so utterly subjective that you've really just got to take what's useful to you, when it comes to criticism, but not lose sight of the fact that your own tastes and opinions are also valid and important.

[(Anonymous)]

+111

[(Anonymous)]

Do what works for you. To me, beta "help" that tells me to write something different doesn't improve my style. It doesn't make me grow as a writer. It makes me try to balance not hurting someone's precious feelings while trying to write the story I want to write (which I can't without going against their advice). IDK. I know it works for some people. Good for them. But I've been writing for more than 20 years. I know more or less how I roll by now. *shrug* There really is no one size fits all, whatever y'all want to say.

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT didn't say they don't take ANY input about how they write. They just said they don't take input about how they write their plots and characters. That still leaves quite a lot of area on which they will accept input.

We also don't know exactly what AYRT means by that. I mean, one form of advice might be: "The way this character goes from calm to sobbing sorrowfully in this scene feels very abrupt and a bit awkward. I think the emotions of the scene would land better if you incorporated his emotional transition a little more smoothly into the text." Is that character input, or something else? To me that feels more like input on the writing itself. As opposed to something like: "I think Character A is coming across too emotive and vulnerable, here especially, but also throughout the rest of the fic. I think the reader may find it hard to believe this is really him, as he's so much more stoic than this in canon." Here we have a piece of input that may well be correct, but if the writer wants Character A to be more emotive and vulnerable in their fic, then being told it's OOC to write him that way isn't going to help them any.

Of course, a really good beta is usually able to identify what the writer's intent is, and do their best to accommodate that (for example, accepting the OOC characterization if it's how the writer wants the character to be, while still smoothing out the writing so that the characterization - however OOC - remains stable, consistent, and relatively believable throughout). That said, a really good beta is - understandably - sometimes hard to find.