# The dynamic between a writer and his or her “first reader”



## The Backward OX (Jan 19, 2012)

'Smee again

I’m interested in hearing your views about

1) the level of preparedness that a "*completed"* work of fiction should reach, before it’s seen by any professional reader, 

*and/or,*

2) the specific types of advice that a writer should be seeking from such a reader. Should, for example, a writer ask such a reader to correct punctuation? Or to make suggestions to improve the flow of the story? 

Okay, some of you may nitpick my use of the word “completed”, saying that if it’s completed it should be on its way to an agent. So maybe what I mean by “completed” is “a work that has flaws the writer has either missed or is incapable of seeing.”

Thanks.


----------



## Bloggsworth (Jan 19, 2012)

Finished.


----------



## shadowwalker (Jan 19, 2012)

My betas get each chapter as I finish it - and since I edit as I go, the chapters are pretty much the way I think they should stay. And since we exchange work, my betas also send the rest of us their work chapter by chapter. (Whether the writer has finished writing the whole story or not is immaterial in this method). We also look at everything about the work - from grammar to phrasing to flow to characterization to whatever. It works because each of us tend to concentrate on one area (mine's typically grammar and phrasing) while also giving more general comments on the whole.

I couldn't stand to send a whole book to them and have them find a major problem in the first couple of chapters...


----------



## RomanticRose (Jan 19, 2012)

My first reader is my husband.  When we get in from the separate places where we have done our writing for the day/evening/night we swap notebooks.  A nightly ritual for us.  If one of us sees the other heading down a perhaps less than productive path, it can be nipped in the bud or explored in a brainstorming session to see if that path can be tweaked to work.


----------



## Robdemanc (Jan 19, 2012)

Its a good question.  I am finding it hard to get someone to read my stuff.  So far my mother has read some, and my Uncle is reading some.  But as for the type of feedback you expect then it could range from nitpicking about the grammer, to an overall criticism of the story or characters.

I think there is a general order to go when getting feedback.  Grammer, punctation etc should be the last thing anyone reads for.  The first thing should be like a test read, to see if someone has picked up the story/plot you intended to put across.  If they have then great, then its time to ask about style/flow/tone etc.

I reckon only when the story is complete and needs no further edits of the story to improve clarity or flow etc, then is the time to ask someone to look for grammer and punctation.


----------



## shadowwalker (Jan 19, 2012)

Robdemanc said:


> I think there is a general order to go when getting feedback.  Grammer, punctation etc should be the last thing anyone reads for.  The first thing should be like a test read, to see if someone has picked up the story/plot you intended to put across.  If they have then great, then its time to ask about style/flow/tone etc.
> 
> I reckon only when the story is complete and needs no further edits of the story to improve clarity or flow etc, then is the time to ask someone to look for grammer and punctation.



See, I'm just the opposite. I figure the grammar/punctuation should come first, because often those problems make the story unreadable. If one is constantly finding mistakes in that, it interrupts not only the overall reading, but the ability to concentrate on the story itself.

Different strokes :smile:


----------



## The Backward OX (Jan 19, 2012)

shadowwalker said:


> My betas get each chapter as I finish it - and since I edit as I go, the chapters are pretty much the way I think they should stay. And since we exchange work, my betas also send the rest of us their work chapter by chapter. (Whether the writer has finished writing the whole story or not is immaterial in this method). We also look at everything about the work - from grammar to phrasing to flow to characterization to whatever. It works because each of us tend to concentrate on one area (mine's typically grammar and phrasing) while also giving more general comments on the whole.
> 
> I couldn't stand to send a whole book to them and have them find a major problem in the first couple of chapters...



This sounds organised, but let me ask you this: how does such a system manage stuff like flow and plot holes for example – stuff that needs the entire story before its existence can be seen/uncovered? To my untutored mind, it looks like it can't be done.


----------



## shadowwalker (Jan 19, 2012)

The Backward OX said:


> This sounds organised, but let me ask you this: how does such a system manage stuff like flow and plot holes for example – stuff that needs the entire story before its existence can be seen/uncovered? To my untutored mind, it looks like it can't be done.



Sure it can be done. It's just caught earlier in the writing process. Whether the story is completely written or only as far as the upcoming chapter, it doesn't change the flow, or lessen the chance of plot holes - it still gets read one chapter at a time. So if there's something jarring, or off-kilter, or contradicts what happened earlier, it's caught before the whole story has to be rewritten. It works especially well for me, because I base the next chapter on what has already happened in the story (and been 'finalized').


----------



## The Backward OX (Jan 19, 2012)

shadowwalker said:


> See, I'm just the opposite. I figure the grammar/punctuation should come first, because often those problems make the story unreadable. If one is constantly finding mistakes in that, it interrupts not only the overall reading, but the ability to concentrate on the story itself.
> 
> Different strokes :smile:



Rdm did say “test read”, which some could take to mean that another read would follow. Whatever, whilst I whole-heartedly agree that faults can make a story unreadable, the idea of correcting punctuation and grammar first _could_ mean – not would mean but could mean - that large chunks of text change, and due to the domino effect, this in turn _could_ have an effect on the overall story. What I’m really saying here is that a writer needs to be sufficiently proficient that anything sent out for reading should be publisher-ready, that a writer should be capable of being their own editor.

I’d like to hear argument on this.


----------



## Terry D (Jan 19, 2012)

I agree that any work sent out for that important 'first read' should be in as pristine a condition as the writer can make it.  After all, part of honing our craft is that relentless -- and elusive -- pursuit of perfection.  However, all of us have certain grammatical, or stylistic 'blind spots' which are nearly impossible for us to see in ourselves.  For instance, I've noticed many posters on these forums (I know the proper word is _fora_, but I hate that pretentious syllable) confuse the words 'than' and 'then'.  At one time I habitually followed the word 'off' with 'of', as in, "I took the coffee cup off of the table".  It was something so much a part of my nature based on the way everyone speaks here in the Midwestern US, that I didn't even know it was not proper grammar.  It took others reading my work to point it out.


----------



## The Backward OX (Jan 19, 2012)

shadowwalker said:


> Sure it can be done. It's just caught earlier in the writing process. Whether the story is completely written or only as far as the upcoming chapter, it doesn't change the flow, or lessen the chance of plot holes - it still gets read one chapter at a time. So if there's something jarring, or off-kilter, or contradicts what happened earlier, it's caught before the whole story has to be rewritten. It works especially well for me, because I base the next chapter on what has already happened in the story (and been 'finalized').



With respect, that’s nonsense. Given all the other stuff going on in a reader’s life in between reads, they can’t necessarily be expected to remember, when reading Ch 7, of something in that chapter that's inconsistent with something in Ch 2. Inconsistencies need the entire story in the reader’s mind at the one time if they are to be uncovered. A reader with an eidetic memory might cope with time gaps n their reading and still be able to pick the inconsistencies, but most of us aren’t blessed in that way.


----------



## The Backward OX (Jan 19, 2012)

Terry D said:


> At one time I habitually followed the word 'off' with 'of', as in, "I took the coffee cup off of the table". It was something so much a part of my nature based on the way everyone speaks here in the Midwestern US, that I didn't even know it was not proper grammar. It took others reading my work to point it out.



Haha. How about 'in back of' for 'behind'?


----------



## shadowwalker (Jan 19, 2012)

The Backward OX said:


> With respect, that’s nonsense. Given all the other stuff going on in a reader’s life in between reads, they can’t necessarily be expected to remember, when reading Ch 7, of something in that chapter that's inconsistent with something in Ch 2. Inconsistencies need the entire story in the reader’s mind at the one time if they are to be uncovered. A reader with an eidetic memory might cope with time gaps n their reading and still be able to pick the inconsistencies, but most of us aren’t blessed in that way.



With respect, it's not nonsense. It's worked very well for our group (which includes one writer who will have her third commercially published novel out next month). It won't work for everyone, but it works for us. The proof, as they say, is in the pudding. And quite frankly, I wonder how many readers have time to read an entire book in one sitting and make comments - which is the only way you seem to think it can work.


----------



## The Backward OX (Jan 19, 2012)

Okay.


----------



## Robdemanc (Jan 20, 2012)

The Backward OX said:


> Rdm did say “test read”, which some could take to mean that another read would follow. Whatever, whilst I whole-heartedly agree that faults can make a story unreadable, the idea of correcting punctuation and grammar first _could_ mean – not would mean but could mean - that large chunks of text change, and due to the domino effect, this in turn _could_ have an effect on the overall story. What I’m really saying here is that a writer needs to be sufficiently proficient that anything sent out for reading should be publisher-ready, that a writer should be capable of being their own editor.
> 
> I’d like to hear argument on this.



I think writers should be good enough at writing to take care of their own grammer and punctuation.  However, on the off chance that a few mistakes have slipped through I would imagine they would not be severe enough to affect the flow or the story itself.   My logic in my prior post was: take care of the major issues first (story, plot, chars, flow etc), then the minor (perhaps cosmetic) issues like punctuation and grammer.   I would not like to spend a lot of time with a reader going over the grammer and punctuation only to turn around afterwards and say "btw the story is boring and the characters unbelievable".


----------



## qwertyman (Jan 20, 2012)

Robdemanc said:


> I think writers should be good enough at writing to take care of their own grammer and punctuation.  However, on the off chance that a few mistakes have slipped through I would imagine they would not be severe enough to affect the flow or the story itself.   My logic in my prior post was: take care of the major issues first (story, plot, chars, flow etc), then the minor (perhaps cosmetic) issues like punctuation and grammer.   I would not like to spend a lot of time with a reader going over the grammer and punctuation only to turn around afterwards and say "btw the story is boring and the characters unbelievable".



Makes sense to me.




			
				OX said:
			
		

> With respect, that’s nonsense. Given all the other stuff going on in a reader’s life in between reads, they can’t necessarily be expected to remember, when reading Ch 7, of something in that chapter that's inconsistent with something in Ch 2. Inconsistencies need the entire story in the reader’s mind at the one time if they are to be uncovered. A reader with an eidetic memory might cope with time gaps n their reading and still be able to pick the inconsistencies, but most of us aren’t blessed in that way.



That makes sense too. It's very rare that a writer gets the opportunity to have his work read straight through and it's probably the most valuable sounding board there is. And on those grounds alone I would go with OX.

Yer pays yer money and yer takes yer choice.


----------



## shadowwalker (Jan 20, 2012)

qwertyman said:


> That makes sense too. It's very rare that a writer gets the opportunity to have his work read straight through and it's probably the most valuable sounding board there is. And on those grounds alone I would go with OX.



Well, one can 'go' with whomever they wish. I was only stating that it wasn't nonsense since it works.


----------



## garza (Jan 20, 2012)

I put my stories together the best I can and post them in Fiction, so my first readers are always those who peruse that board. I read the responses and include any suggestions in the folder with the story in my computer. 

For me, the views/replies ratio is just as important. If 50 people read it and two offer a comment, that tells me a great deal of work remains to be done before story can be called completed. So far everything I've posted has gone back to the shop for revision. Eventually, hopefully, I'll get better.


----------



## The Backward OX (Jan 20, 2012)

garza said:


> For me, the views/replies ratio is just as important. If 50 people read it and two offer a comment, that tells me a great deal of work remains to be done before story can be called completed. So far everything I've posted has gone back to the shop for revision. Eventually, hopefully, I'll get better.


garza -
Elsewhere on this site the Cap’n pointed out that a great many of those viewers are robots. If you’re happy to have your life’s direction resolved by electronic devices…

OX gets idea for story!!


----------



## garza (Jan 20, 2012)

I missed that. So there is something like a boiler room operation, only instead of the 'operators standing by' it's filled with little metal people scanning the web for new stories. I picture them as looking like the little fellow in the comic strip 'Monty'. He seems smart enough, despite the fact that he has the hots for a vacuum cleaner. He may be a good judge of writing. 

But I really don't have much else to go by. I'm increasing my responses to posts by other people, and perhaps that will give me a better view/response ratio and a greater number of helpful hints and usable critiques.


----------



## archer88iv (Jan 22, 2012)

When I talk with any reader, I'm mostly looking to see whether or not they have gleaned from the text what they should have. "I like it" is never really all that helpful, so I ask the same kinds of questions an English teacher is (God willing) going to ask in a hundred years, regarding concrete issues of plot, setting, and characterization and, occasionally, more subjective questions about reactions and feelings (but only where such issues are important and related to the first three).


----------



## Fallen (Jan 22, 2012)

The Backward OX said:


> Okay, some of you may nitpick my use of the word “completed”, saying that if it’s completed it should be on its way to an agent. So maybe what I mean by “completed” is “a work that has flaws the writer has either missed or is incapable of seeing.”
> 
> Thanks.



I think 'completed [to the best of a writer's ability]' is fine. 

Depending on the experience of the reader, anything from plot holes to grammar and syntax etc, will stop the flow of reading. I think it's just best to ask 'anything that trips you up', and that can be the 'huh? he wasn't holding a mug a second ago', or 'that sentence doesn't make much sense.' or 'too much information' etc. Some readers have strength for plot, character and weak grammar/syntax areas etc, or vice-versa. So the basic 'anything that trips you up' works for me.

As for how polished a script has to be? Humble pie is the answer there, I think. I'm page-blind to my own missing words. I read them as there, insert them in without knowing, that and dropping articles. I drop my a/an/the too frequently. They're my bad quirks. One thing about proofreading, though, is that you recoginse every writer has their own, their linguistic fingerprints that say 'I'm human, don't shoot'. I love that about writing.

Establishing a few ground rules are essential, though, I think: I'm Engish writing for an English market and the partiular publisher I'm targeting favours has their own in-house styleguide as well as reference to Oxford usage and my own style *takes breath* If you're American, some things are going to trip you up. 

And then I get the real smart ones that say 'okay, you're English writing for the English market, why the **** is the grammar and syntax tailored toward the American market? Do I really need to point out the differences between you/us the whole doubling of the consonants thing etc?'

I just offer a smiley-shrug in defeat.


----------



## Mystery (Jan 23, 2012)

I have two people I let read what I write at the moment(after my looong 2 year break).

Basically, I give them whatever I have when I feel like I need some pointers/critique.

They know that I'm not looking for anything writing wise(grammar, use of words, etc) but more storywise and how certain elements are coming off.


----------



## squidtender (Jan 24, 2012)

After reading Stephen Kings "On Writing" years ago, I began to follow his rules for letting others read my work. I work behind "closed" doors, meaning no one gets to read anything until I have finished the original draft, followed by one rewrite. Then, I "open" the door, and let others read it. I have two people that read my work: my wife and a work friend. This approach keeps me focused on getting the story finished, instead of writing a little, then editing, then writing, then editing and so on.


----------

