Betas vs. Critiques

Last month, Jade asked a fantastic question:

@victoria_grif7 What do you prefer -- manuscript reading services or beta readers? Why? Do you think manuscript services are a good option?

— Jade - A Writer (@popculturegrnch) June 1, 2017

I thought this question deserved more than a 140-character answer, so here we are. Let's toss betas and critiques into an arena, let 'em fight it out, and see who wins.

First of all, what are these things?

Beta Readers
​

If you've been writing seriously—as in, working toward publication—you've probably used beta readers. Actually, if you've ever let someone read your work, asked what they thought, and then revised based on that info, you've used beta readers—regardless of what you called them.

Hey, I just defined a beta reader, didn't I?

Manuscript Critiques

A manuscript critique is a service offered by professional editors. Here's the description from my Editing Services page.
​

This is the most budget-friendly option. I will read your manuscript and deliver a written critique of its strengths and weaknesses. After the critique, you will have a better understanding of your manuscript and a plan for tackling revisions.

Not too scary, right? The editor will read your work and send you feedback. Then you will revised based on that feedback.

Hold on a second. That sounds just like what a beta reader does. So what's the difference?

Beta Readers vs. Manuscript Critiques
​

via GIPHY

In one corner, weighing in at "we weren't math majors," they're fond reading, writing, and furry things with four legs... Beta Readers!

In the other corner, weighing in at 300 pounds because of the human-sized stack of manuscript pages in their arms, they would kill for a cup of coffee and a correctly placed Oxford comma... ​Editors!

Round 1: The Reader

​One of the primary differences between beta readers and manuscript critiques is the person who's reading your work. A beta reader is an "amateur" in the sense that you're not paying them and they don't do this for a living. Of course, your ideal beta reader will look a lot different than someone off the street.

Ideal Beta Reader
​

• is a writer
• regularly reads in your genre
• is not a close friend or family member
• has time and is willing to read in a timely manner and offer thoughtful feedback

​This is who you're looking for. If you've ever sought out beta readers, you know how rare it is to find all these qualities rolled up in one person at the exact time you need them. And did I mention you'll need at least three betas? Preferably five. If the majority points out the same issue, you know it probably needs to be fixed.

On the other hand, a manuscript critique is provided be a professional editor. This is someone who works with fiction for a living. We spend every day editing manuscripts, so we know exactly what to look for. Like writing, editing is an art form that requires consistent practice, so the sorts of insights a professional editor can provide are going to be different from those of a beta reader.

Round 2: The Cost
​

That "professional" thing means professional editors aren't free. You will have to pay for a manuscript critique.

On the flip side, beta readers aren't exactly free either. You'll often hear the term "critique partner." That means one writer will give feedback in exchange for feedback on their own work. That's often the deal with beta readers. Especially since the best betas are writers themselves, you may find yourself sacrificing time down the road to "pay" those five betas.

Round 3: The Feedback
​

Here's where it gets down to the nitty gritty. What is the difference in the type and quality of feedback you receive from beta readers versus a manuscript critique?

The biggest differenced, I've found, is that beta readers often know they don't like something but they can't always articulate why.

That's a skill that comes with practice and understanding what makes stories tick. Professional editors are able to see past emotional reaction and understand what's not working within the story—as well as offer suggestions for fixing it. A beta reader might say, "I didn't care when Sheila died." In a manuscript critique, a professional editor might say, "You didn't spend enough time developing Sheila in this specific scene, so the reader would not be emotionally invested when she dies."

Those sorts of specifics and causations make the revision process much easier to tackle.

Also, you never know what kind of feedback you're going to get from a beta reader. You may stumble on an amazing beta who sends ten pages of detailed feedback, or they may give you one line. It helps to have questions prepared for your betas. (How did you feel about this scene? Was this plot twist believable? Etc.) But in the end, it's up to careful beta selection and chance. With a manuscript critique, you'll know exactly what you're getting up front.

Let's check the score card...

---

Beta Readers

• "Amateur" reader
• Free (except maybe time)
• Feedback quality is a toss-up

Manuscript Critiques

• Professional reader
• Costs money
• Provides in-depth feedback

---

Do I need beta readers at all?

I know how this sounds. You think, Okay great, I'll skip beta readers altogether and just get a manuscript critique.
​

via GIPHY

You do need beta readers. Everyone say it with me. "I need beta readers."

They are an incredibly important part of the process. Yes, they play a role. No, it is not the same role a professional manuscript critique plays. Here's what your process should look like:
​

1. Draft manuscript.
2. Let draft rest. (Don't even think about it!)
3. Edit for high-level elements.
4. Line edit.
5. Proofread.
6. Repeat steps 2-5 as necessary.

Follow these steps until your manuscript is as good as you can possibly make it. You can't see your manuscript getting any better. Then send it to beta readers. After they've returned feedback, dig into your manuscript again. Follow all the above steps again, revising to correct issues betas noticed (or you noticed in the meantime).

Then, once your manuscript is as good as you believe you can ever make it, it's time for a manuscript critique. Send it off. Get feedback. Revise again. And that is only if your manuscript is already solid enough that it doesn't need a full professional developmental edit.

The Winner Is...

It's a tie! Beta readers and manuscript critiques play different roles in the process, and you'll need them both at different times. Of course, when you're ready for that critique, I'd love for you to come to me. But regardless, make sure you're giving your manuscript what it needs to reach its full potential. There is nothing worse than looking back at a completed piece of work and knowing you could have done more to make it better.

If you have questions about beta readers, manuscript critiques, or the editing process in general, feel free to email me! And leave your thoughts in the comments below. How do you feel about betas and critiques?