Beta Readers and Critique Groups

This post first ran on April 25, 2013.

Today I'm talking about critique groups, specifically the sort where work is presented in small bites rather than having someone evaluate an entire manuscript. The ideal critique group has people who write as well or better than you do, and understand your genre. Members should agree to a schedule for submitting and giving feedback. They should be willing to accept the positive and the negative, and understand that if several people have problems with an aspect of the work, it deserves rethinking no matter how good you think it is.

Critique groups can be Face to Face, or they can be done online. I've done both, although now I'm with a small (3 member) online group.

Face to Face gives you a chance to discuss critiques in more depth. One of my constant questions as a beginner was, "Am I writing it wrong, or are you reading it wrong?" because I thought I knew what I meant to say, and needed to know where I'd gone wrong. The feedback in a live group is immediate, and can go into some depth. However, it's also slow, depending on how often you meet. If you're only allowed to present a limited number of pages once a month, then you're likely to be writing faster than you get feedback. It's not unusual to find that you're finished writing, but your group is only halfway through the book.

An online group lacks that immediate feedback. In some groups, you still might have restrictions on how long a submission can be, and how often you can submit to the group. There are some groups online that seem to be filled with people who want to hear only the good, and they refuse to accept any flaws in their work. Get out of those. Fast.

I remember one of the first online groups I found, where the leader told me she didn't want to see any more bad stuff happen to Sarah. I left that group, too. Clearly the leader didn't understand there has to be conflict in a story.

My current group has been through at least 4 or 5 manuscripts each, so we know each other very well—or at least our writing. We've never actually met. We've reached the point where we don't need to be stroked. Yes, we like the warm fuzzies, but we need to see the weak spots more. We want to know what's wrong so we can fix it. A newcomer to the group would probably find us harsh, but we know that if comments are sparse, it means "good job" without having to stop to point out all the good stuff. And, I'm pleased to say that thanks to my partners, my editor knows she's going to get a 'clean' manuscript from me, and that ends up saving me money.

I asked one of my partners to share her thoughts about being in a critique group. She said, Beta readers are most helpful for brainstorming. I find that sometimes I'll write a chapter that I'm not sure of, and a beta reader can check me by pointing out what I've overlooked or missed, or when I've gone too far afield. They also provide a good thermostat for what's working/not working.

Even though we write in different sub-genres, my partners and I have learned a lot about each other's niches, and we understand that if we point out something that bothers us, an answer of "readers in my genre expect it that way" is acceptable.

Have you worked with critique partners/ groups? What has worked for you? Any warnings?

Terry Odell is the author of numerous romantic suspense novels, mystery novels, as well as contemporary romance short stories. Most of her books are available in both print and digital formats. She’s the author of the Blackthorne, Inc. series, steamy romantic suspense novels featuring a team of covert ops specialists, the Pine Hills Police series, set in a small Oregon town, and the Mapleton Mystery series, featuring a reluctant police chief in a small Colorado town. To see all her books, visit her website. You can also find her at her blog, Terry's Place, as well as follow her on Twitter, or visit her Facebook page.