# Do you think that beta readers and writing consultants can nitpick too much maybe?



## ironpony (Dec 16, 2015)

I send my stories out to beta readers and writing consultants to ask their opinions on if it makes sense, if it works, and what should be changed.  I usually find 30% of the advice to be very helpful, and I am glad they suggested the changes.

But the other 70% I find to be perhaps too nitpicky.  Maybe it's me and it's hard for me to take criticism on some parts.  However, do you think that some of these examples are overthought too much?

In my story one sections of plot is a cop trying to get a kidnap victim to open up about her ordeal, in order to want to testify against her captor.  She doesn't want to and just wants to put it all behind her, but the cop doesn't want him getting away with it, so he can do it again, since he is a serial offender in this department.  The cop finds her at a bar, and buys her a drink to try to get her to open up about it.

I was told by the readers that the scene is unrealistic as a cop would not by a material witness an alcoholic drink.  Even though it's not the most professional thing to do, alcohol does not get people to open up and talk.  Even if the cop cannot use the info directly it is a start to find out more.  But I was told that it's not believable.

Later on, the woman is assigned police protection because the cops believe that the kidnapper may come for her to finish her off, to keep her from talking.  But I was told that this is also not believable.  Since she is choosing not to testify against her kidnapper, she would not be given police protection, because the police only assign protective custody to witnesses who choose to cooperate, and give up the crook, or give the DA something he can use before charges are laid.  I thought that the police could choose to assign her protection because her life is in danger, and that would be enough of a reason, cooperative witness or not.  But quite a few readers agreed that it wouldn't happen unless she was cooperating.

There is also a scene where a woman character is smoking a cigar, and I was told by a reader that a woman in real life would not do that, and it's not believable.

But do you think that maybe some of these things are nitpicking, or overthinking by the readers?

I could give many more examples, but maybe it's just me, and I underthink my story and characters too much, and need to make things more realistic and believable?  Does a story or character have to be 100% realistic?


----------



## popsprocket (Dec 16, 2015)

I think you do an awful lot of consulting with other people on how to write your story. Just write it yourself and let the chips fall where they may. It might turn out to be a terrible story but so what? Everyone on this site has at least seven piles of bad stories they've written. 

Finish this story, then move on to something else.


----------



## PhunkyMunky (Dec 16, 2015)

The cigar thing... It's not unusual. Lots of women smoke cigars and I knew a gal in the Army that used chewing tobacco! BTW, women smoke blunts too but nobody claims that doesn't exist... And a blunt is a cigar with weed in it pretty much, so I don't see how anyone can say it's unbelievable. 

Cops do witness protection for many things. If nothing else, they'll put a car on her to watch her while things are going on. What.. So the cops are supposed to not care if this victim is murdered because she refused to giver her testimony? "Sorry, ma'am, but you're going to have to piss off. We ONLY protect those who wish to testify in court"... Doubtful. They'd assign a watch to her, if only to watch from a parked car, until everything was said and done. 

I think popsprocket's suggestion is a fair one. I don't really submit the things I have written for people to critique. I may, when I feel I've got my work completed, but I'll be submitting it to a friend and mentor of mine who has his own publishing company. He does comics, not books, but he's got a good eye for what's plausible and what is not. I won't likely ask him to publish it, or attempt to anyway... I feel weird about that, but as a friend and mentor, I've no problem sending him manuscript and asking if there are any holes.


----------



## Riptide (Dec 16, 2015)

I do get it because a writer is looking at it as a writer. A reader, though, is a whole 'nother beast. When writers read to beta and fix they're looking for mistakes. A reader... not so much. At least not me when I'm reading in my spare time. But see, putting it for reader to comment is a lot harder to do because I doubt they'd really comment, and they aren't just right there for the picking like many of us writers are.


----------



## LeeC (Dec 16, 2015)

There are many stories written which are not completely realistic, and where such bothers me is when the author fails to immerse me sufficiently in a story to facilitate suspended belief. 

That is if the story is seemingly realistic, but contains bits that to me are not and those stand out to me, then the author has failed to involve me enough in the story to accept whatever has been conjured up. 

Thus to me it's more a matter of how good a storyteller is ;-)

Something I see overly often in our more visually orientated entertainment society is stories that are told like the author is reciting a movie scene. Immersing an audience through visual means, as opposed to doing so with the written word, are two very different things. To me good writing, regardless of the storyline, is about wordsmithing in drawing the reader in so they imagine it in their mind's eye. Further to me, this also implies making every word count as much as possible in flowing smoothly and with depth, so as not to distract me from my imagining. 

So, what I'm getting at is just maybe the second quote in my sig is at least partially applicable to your question. 

Understand that with the diversity of readers, there are always some that will find fault with one's writing, so you're also left with a balance to strike if trying to please the greatest number of people. Also, as Rip alluded to, a primary point of beta reading is noting what they as individuals think distracts from a story. If you get mixed takes, you're close to doing well, but if several takes are the same, one best rethink their story. On the other hand if an author receives only a pat on the back from beta readers, then the opinions aren't that useful.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 16, 2015)

Okay thanks.  If I don't submit my work for criticism before sending it out to a publisher though, how do you know if it's good, or if it's believable even?


----------



## popsprocket (Dec 16, 2015)

ironpony said:


> Okay thanks.  If I don't submit my work for criticism before sending it out to a publisher though, how do you know if it's good, or if it's believable even?



You don't and no opinion you ever get from a beta reader or consultant will change your chances of getting published. Write and read as much as you can so that you can develop your own sense of what good writing is.

Also don't shoot for the stars on your first attempt. Work up to writing something of publishing quality.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 16, 2015)

Okay thanks.  Why is it that taking reader's suggestions will not change the chances of being published, since I am trying to give the reader what they want?


----------



## violinguy (Dec 16, 2015)

Suspension of disbelief.  Very important.  In modern-time stories, there will always be people who will find something "unrealistic," but if the story is good, your writing engaging and your protagonist NOT super-human (as in doing truly impossible things) then you should be fine.  No picking up a car or surviving falls of unrealistic height (a new thing I'm seeing in a lot of film and tv lately).

There will always be a person who knows things about things who will tell you that something isn't right.  I always do that whenever there is classical music in a movie.  _That guy would never hold a violin like *that*!

_It's not an exact science, but you need to take in all the criticisms, and then decide which have merit and which are unimportant.


----------



## popsprocket (Dec 16, 2015)

ironpony said:


> Okay thanks.  Why is it that taking reader's suggestions will not change the chances of being published, since I am trying to give the reader what they want?



Because giving the reader what they want =/= being publishable. 

There are lots and lots of factors that go into deciding whether or not a book will be published and being marketable is just one of them.


----------



## LeeC (Dec 16, 2015)

popsprocket said:


> You don't and no opinion you ever get from a beta reader or consultant will change your chances of getting published. ...


I wouldn't go that far pops  and I think you can see the misleading breadth of that statement ;-) 

On the other hand, agents and publishers are looking for a "product" with near term returns, not necessarily the best writing.


----------



## popsprocket (Dec 16, 2015)

LeeC said:


> I wouldn't go that far pops  and I think you can see the misleading breadth of that statement ;-)
> 
> On the other hand, agents and publishers are looking for a "product" with near term returns, not necessarily the best writing.



Why is it misleading? The narrow scope of a beta reader saying they liked something has no bearing on whether or not a publisher will pick it out of the pile and say "This one!"

Just the same, having a beta reader tear a book to shreds doesn't prevent a book from passing through the publishing sieve. If I had beta read for The Hunger Games I could have written a book-length essay on what's wrong with it, but it's now one of the biggest literary successes in the last decade.


----------



## LeeC (Dec 16, 2015)

popsprocket said:


> Why is it misleading? The narrow scope of a beta reader saying they liked something has no bearing on whether or not a publisher will pick it out of the pile and say "This one!"
> 
> Just the same, having a beta reader tear a book to shreds doesn't prevent a book from passing through the publishing sieve. If I had beta read for The Hunger Games I could have written a book-length essay on what's wrong with it, but it's now one of the biggest literary successes in the last decade.


Simply put pops, in doing a bit of beta reading I've seen a range of drafts the author thought near final. Regardless of whether I enjoyed (was interested in the theme) the book, manuscripts ranged from what I thought exceptional writing to what I thought (euphemistically speaking) were written by a ten year old. The former doesn't have that much bearing on what a publisher will pick, but the latter diminishes an author's chance of being picked. There are of course exceptions which either of us could name, but I thought your statement was too general. If it isn't, then why do we bother to have beta readers and editors. Just throw anything out there, and if one has enough of what titillates some segment of readers proclivities, they're a shoe in. There are success stories in doing so ;-)

In the end, I agree with you in the sense of the standards we set for ourselves, and just how questionable such might be to getting published. I was going to say maybe the readership has dumbed down, but remembered the dime store "novels" of my youth


----------



## ironpony (Dec 17, 2015)

Oh okay.  Well so far no character is superhuman or anything, just the parts that are not realistic that have been pointed out is behavior and decision making.


----------



## Sam (Dec 17, 2015)

Pop is correct. 

A beta reader will not improve your chances of getting published. That's not what a beta reader is for. 

Betas go through a piece of work and point out their thoughts from a _reader's _perspective, something that we do in a smaller capacity here in the Workshop or other such creative sections. The beta goes through the novel and points out plot holes, continuity errors, thoughts on characters, and other things that either draw them in or out of the story. 

They are not, however, an editor or proofreader. They exist to tell you what they feel works and doesn't work in your story, focusing primarily on the plot, characters, and their enjoyment/lack of enjoyment of the piece. 

You can have all the betas in the world and it won't mean your chances of publication are higher. Publication boils down to three things: timing, luck, and perseverance.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 17, 2015)

Okay thanks.  But the readers still have some use then?

Well as far as the notion of as long as the story is good goes, I asked another writer who read it over, and he said that a story can be about the most powerful subject matter in the world but it won't matter if not every character behavior is completely realistic.


----------



## Jeko (Dec 17, 2015)

If your beta readers are 'nitpicking' like this, the issue of believability isn't in these details, but in the story and narrative as a whole. Fiction often invites the reader to believe the unbelievable, but it can only do so if you write that 'unbelievable' side of it in a way that makes the reader not want to care about whether they believe it or not. To believe Harry Potter cast the spell we need to believe the wizard, not the spell, and believe that the wizard believes in the spell. Our focus, after all, is always on characters.

If the characters and plot are gripping enough, you won't get these kinds of comments. I'd focus on those basics and leave details of 'realism' for the reader to put aside once you've got their attention properly. The comments on what a cop would/wouldn't do, for instance, are a clear sign that your cop character hasn't got enough individuality yet to get the reader on his side, in order for him to do what he wants to do rather than what is generic 'role' may imply. You can even use those mildly unconventional actions of his as food for his character development if the narrative/story makes a point out of them and connects them to other aspects of his personality and approach to his job. Does he usually make more progress off duty?

As for the assignment of protection issue, it could be raised in the story (the protagonist's boss doesn't think she should be given custody) and then a conflict can form from it (the protagonist needs her to have custody, and so has to persuade/overcome his boss).


----------



## shadowwalker (Dec 17, 2015)

Betas can help you see the things you're too close to see, but sure, they can be too nitpicky. They can also point out things that destroy the reader's involvement in the story. It's up to the writer to determine which comments to go with and which to ignore. (Frankly, I think non-writers can often be more helpful than writers as betas. They only know what does or doesn't work, and don't get caught up in writer stuff.  )

Now, to diverge a bit - when someone points out a factual error (or one they believe to be a factual error), you can do a couple of things. The first thing you _should _do, IMO, is find out from an expert source if it actually is an error. In the case of protection, call the police department and ask. Very simple. If you find out that the beta is correct and there is an error, determine how important that is. If there is no Rose Street in Detroit, how many people who actually read your story will know that _and _object? Probably not many. On the other hand, if you're writing a police drama, your readers will more than likely know if this type of protection is just not done. They're going to be taken out of the story and that's not good (especially if it's an on-going part of the story and thus causes a constant "But that wouldn't happen!"). Then you either need to fix it so it is correct or figure out how to make it a believable exception.


----------



## David Gordon Burke (Dec 17, 2015)

ironpony said:


> Okay thanks.  If I don't submit my work for criticism before sending it out to a publisher though, how do you know if it's good, or if it's believable even?



A couple of people read your story.
They mention a bunch of different issues.  If  you agree change.  If you don´t, don´t.
They all mention the same issue ..... Houston, we have a problem.
As for the issues you mentioned in your post .... I disagree completely with your readers .... all those ideas seem plausible.  However,, it all depends on how good a salesman you are .... did you sell it?

David Gordon Burke


----------



## Bishop (Dec 17, 2015)

Can betas be too nit-picky..? Sure, anything's possible. Are these ones being too picky? I can't really say--I've not read your story. I will say, my advice on any reader response or criticism: Weigh it for yourself, if you agree with it or doubt that section of your own work, make the change. Otherwise, leave it. Your story, your rules. They're just telling you what doesn't work for them.


----------



## Tettsuo (Dec 17, 2015)

You may be focusing on the micro instead of the macro of the feedback.  The individual criticisms are often related to a larger issue with the writing (sometimes).  There could be sometime specific that's throwing the readers off and allow them to focus on other inconsequential aspects of the material as a result.


----------



## LeeC (Dec 17, 2015)

I see you missed my point also Sam, so I'll try to explain myself better. 

Yes, traditional publishing is a crapshoot in essence for the new author at least, at a minimum in the sense of a manuscript falling into the right hands at the right time, if at all. And the things a beta reader typically looks for aren't necessarily what a publisher looks for as evidenced by enough of what is published. As you know a publisher will make their own assessment based on a "potential product" perspective and commonly require some reworking of a storyline and/or presentation to improve what they see as appeal. 

On the other hand, if the publisher sees a level of writing skills that doesn't indicate the ability to accomplish reworking to their satisfaction, they may pass unless they perchance employ ghost writers (I doubt many do). So in this aspect beta reading is an extension (or maybe a litmus test) of what is done on the creative boards, if more generalized, and potenntially if only to indicate to the author that they might go back to the creative boards to improve their skills. There are plenty of examples where the author is not, as they believe, ready for beta reading in a basic sense, and there are cases, being a subjective call, where the beta reader isn't helpful and may incorrectly influence the author. That's for the author to sort out, but if they're led to believe that beta reading isn't necessary if they're primarily interested in getting published, we're failing the novice writer.  

So, with more accomplished writers, beta reading will likely not improve one's chances of getting published. Even so, accomplished writers may go through a beta reading exercise simply for the sake of insuring their own standards. 

Again on the other hand, less accomplished writers may improve their chances of getting traditionally published with beta reading, if and when their number comes up. Such is evidenced not only by the little I've beta read, but by a fair share of what is self-published. If a less accomplished writer doesn't filter through beta reading comments in trying to polish their manuscript, then they're shortchanging themselves however they publish.

So, if you and pops can't see the misleading generalization in the statement "A beta reader will not improve your chances of getting published." then I'm at a loss of what else to say. For heavens sake, I see terms like beta reading and proofreading used (by members here that should know better) as if meaning the same thing, where they are in fact completely different exercises. Standing on a strict interpretation in one instance, and not adhering to the accepted meaning of words in other cases is contradictory. Must we persist in blurring interpretation? 

Sorry if I've caused you any confusion ironpony, but interpretations vary by individual and I believe overgeneralized/unqualified statements may well lead to confusion. In your situation I'd look for a range of takes, and work mostly on issues that are seen by a majority of the readers.


----------



## Kyle R (Dec 17, 2015)

Feedback is a subjective thing. What works for one reader may not work for another, and vice versa.

Me? I try to limit the amount of feedback I get on my writing. Mostly, I limit it to a very few readers whose reading instincts I trust and agree with. As the saying goes: "Too many cooks spoil the broth." If I followed the advice of every Tom, Dick, and Harriette who commented on my writing, my story might very well turn into an incoherent jumble of crap.

I also make sure to dismiss any feedback that doesn't work for me. Remember, you're the writer. It's nobody's story but your own. The decisions are yours to make, and at some point you have to trust yourself above all others. Sometimes this means keeping something in your story even though one of your readers may not like it. If _you_ think it works, then that's all the justification you need.

In summary: when it comes to feedback, sometimes less is more. Also, sometimes it's important to trust your instincts. _You're_ the writer. Nobody else is the writer but you. :encouragement:


----------



## JustRob (Dec 17, 2015)

My angel and I discuss the plausibility of stories while watching TV. Quite often the cops will do something quite absurd and we will groan about it, but we always remark that if such absurdities didn't occur there wouldn't be a worthwhile story. Let's face it; if everyone behaved exactly as expected then the world would be a pretty dull place. Actually _The Stepford Wives _just popped into my head and I'm suffering some male chauvinist doubts about that statement. Okay, I've recovered from that now.

Isn't it these deviations from the norm that create the unique story? I wouldn't criticise such things if they were essential to the story although I might suggest achieving the same results some other way if I really felt that they were inappropriate. 

I agree entirely about beta readers acting primarily like readers, not writers, but that's a matter of giving them clear terms of reference on what you expect from them. I have a novel at the stage where I invite beta readers to look at it, but that's only to determine whether the story itself is actually worth my effort to write it better and also whether I am potentially capable of doing so. I have had a reader say that he thought that I could write one chapter better because I had written another so well. That helps, knowing that one was that much better than another _in his opinion_. I will put in enough effort to make beta readers' experiences as painless as possible of course, but that doesn't mean that I would consider the story to be anywhere near being suitable for publication. If they happen to comment on details which help me to make improvements with regard to publication, then that's a bonus to my mind. 

I have had people suggest significant changes to my story but my reaction, even if not uttered, is that that would make it someone else's story even if it were a better one. The bottom line is always to write _your_ story. There's nowt so queer as folk, whether readers or fictional characters.


----------



## Terry D (Dec 17, 2015)

If you ask people to read your work and give you feedback from a reader's perspective and then disregard that feedback (especially if the comments are frequent and consistent), I think you do so at your own peril. Reality is pretty important in crime fiction -- in good crime fiction, anyway.


----------



## Kyle R (Dec 17, 2015)

Another penny of thought to toss into the well: readers will always find something to fix with your story from their perspective. Always and forever.

The trick is to know when to stop seeking feedback—when to close the door and finally pull the trigger. I suggest doing this sooner rather than later. Otherwise, your story might never be completed. :grief:


----------



## KellInkston (Dec 17, 2015)

Frankly, I'd finish the story, and then ask for opinions. I know nitpicky beta readers can be a slight irritation, but remember that they're just reflecting their reader's experience upon it- to them the stuff they bring up are important, and worth at least some consideration.

More importantly, we wouldn't get all that juicy advice and edits if we didn't also brave the useless ones; I'd rather have too many edits than too little any day.


----------



## LOLeah (Dec 17, 2015)

Well...not every criticism is going to reflect the opinion of the majority of the people who read it. If more than one beta reader pointed something out, I would strongly consider trying to improve it. I have had people have completely opposite opinions about scenes and sentences. Then, and when only one person criticizes something in my writing or the story, I have to decide if any part of me agrees with them enough to alter something I was otherwise happy with. Nobody said this was going to be easy lol


----------



## dale (Dec 17, 2015)

most writers are basically making the same mistakes in everything they do. this way works easier if you've
written enough short stories, because some zine publishers do still offer feedback and critique with a rejection.
and i basically got the same type of feedback with everyone of those rejections on almost all my stories. mainly
that what i write is well written, but always too elusive. after hearing that same critique enough times, i knew
that was what i needed to work on. i really don't use beta readers anymore. like kyle mentioned....it's come
to the point where i'd rather just "trust myself" and go with it. but that's just me.


----------



## Terry D (Dec 17, 2015)

Frankly, getting irritated with the opinion of a beta reader is like getting pissed when you ask a friend if the picture you've just hung is straight and he says, "No." Don't ask for opinions if you really don't want them.


----------



## dale (Dec 17, 2015)

Terry D said:


> Frankly, getting irritated with the opinion of a beta reader is like getting pissed when you ask a friend if the picture you've just hung is straight and he says, "No." Don't ask for opinions if you really don't want them.



lol. well...i think the sad truth is, that a lot of writers submit their works to betas for purely
ego-driven reasons. they really don't wanna hear criticisms. what they want to hear is....
"wow, dude. this is totally awesome. you're gonna be the next kurt vonnegut." or something
along those lines.


----------



## lvcabbie (Dec 17, 2015)

My experience has been that if you find someone who says they're willing to read your work, only half of them bother to reply. And those who do have an amazing amount of input. Some good. Some inane.

If ya cain't take the head of criticism, git outta the kitchen!!!!!  [-X


----------



## Sam (Dec 17, 2015)

LeeC said:


> I see you missed my point also Sam, so I'll try to explain myself better.
> 
> Yes, traditional publishing is a crapshoot in essence for the new author at least, at a minimum in the sense of a manuscript falling into the right hands at the right time, if at all. And the things a beta reader typically looks for aren't necessarily what a publisher looks for as evidenced by enough of what is published. As you know a publisher will make their own assessment based on a "potential product" perspective and commonly require some reworking of a storyline and/or presentation to improve what they see as appeal.
> 
> ...



Sorry, Lee, it's not a generalisation. 

Saying it is would be tantamount to proclaiming that everything a beta reader says is exceptional advice and should be adhered to no matter what. It doesn't work that way. Beta readers do as I've mentioned above: they read. If they don't like it, they say that, but that doesn't mean a publisher won't like it, nor does it mean if they do like it that a publisher will also like it. 

The advice of a beta is just one person. If, as DGB mentioned earlier in the thread, multiple betas start saying the same thing, you're on to solid advice. That advice gives you a better well-rounded story. What it demonstrably doesn't do is give you a shot at getting published. 

To get a shot at publication, you have to have a good novel to start with. What a beta does is help you fine tune it, but the author of the piece has to have the ability to tell a cracking story to start with. 

Otherwise, you're just polishing a turd and hoping to uncover a gold nugget. 

Betas don't work miracles. They take what's there -- the raw, unrefined talent -- and try to refine it as best they can.


----------



## Gamer_2k4 (Dec 17, 2015)

I'd argue that's the whole point of getting people to read your story.  I want to know every little thing wrong with it, no matter how big or small.  Once everyone has offered feedback, I can just which to accept and which to discard, but there's no such thing as too many comments or criticisms.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 17, 2015)

Okay thanks, you're right.  I want to take the advice of the readers, but the reason why it is difficult for me to, is because I feel that other stories I have read, do the exact same things mine does.  I have seen stories where witnesses get protection, even though the police cannot afford to do so in real life, after researching it for my story.

I have also seen stories where women smoke cigars.

There are many more examples, but you see all these things happen in other stories, yet the beta readers are setting my story in a different world, as if it's in a higher category of exceptions to the rules.  They beta readers do not point out what makes mine different from when it has been done before.  They do not point out what the exceptions to the rule are that I am setting.  I mean I agree with about 30% of what they are saying, it's just the rest of the little details here and there, which they point out, have been done before and often, so I do not see why mine has to be an exception.  That's all.

Plus, so many thriller stories through realism out the window compared to how the police actually work in real life, so I feel that that issue needs to be addressed if one is told to go for realism.  I want opinions from people, but I feel there has to be reason behind the opinion to follow.  Otherwise I do not know how to fix the problem if I do not get the reason why it's wrong.  I got the what, when and who, but not the why, which is the most important plot.  The problems I have gladly fixed, were because I got the why, as to what was wrong with them, because then I know how to fix them.


----------



## Maxton (Dec 17, 2015)

I personally would want it to be as realistic as possible. If what I as a reader perceive as a important element to be unrealistic, it will pull me from the story.  Not many women that I know that smoke would even go near a cigar.  Not to mention that, a cop buying the witness/victim a drink for information could Jeopardize the entire case. AS in it gets thrown out, or any information  you find after buying the girl a drink, could be inadmissible. Any defense attorney worth his salt would get the perp off scot free if a real cop did that..  

Realism keeps me in the story. To much un-believability will ruin the story for me.


----------



## dale (Dec 17, 2015)

i actually know a girl that smokes cigars. it's a turn off for me to watch and i find her
much more unattractive than she even is because of it....but she does smoke cigars.
and i wouldn't put it past a cop to buy an informant a drink for info. hell...i wouldn't 
even put it past one to give him a line of coke or something.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 17, 2015)

Okay thanks.  However, what if the information is not used directly?  Like the cops just uses the info as a guide for the investigation and is not going to take what she said that night to court at all?  Well I can take out the drink thing, that's an easy fix.  For the woman, the cigar is part of her character in a way, so I didn't want to change that.  I guess it being unusual is not a good enough reason for me.  But just because lots of women don't do it, does not mean it's unrealistic is it not?  My girlfriend smokes the occasional one, once in a while.  Does this mean that she's one in a million, and will not be believed in fiction?

As for being as realistic as possible, I believe in that but it seems to me that some stuff has to be made up to support certain parts of the story for entertainment, unless I am wrong?


----------



## bazz cargo (Dec 17, 2015)

Dunno why, CSI springs to mind.

Hi Ironpony, good to see you still plugging away.

I have yet to submit my work to a Beta reader, it will be interesting to see their take on it. I'm pretty sure my first attempt will be crap. Gotta start somewhere. 

I suspect some of the stuff a beta reader picks up will make me go Doh!, how did I miss that? Some will be a question of more subtle problems and some will be a case of a judgement call. fortunately it is my work so I get to judge. 

Good luck
BC


----------



## Jeko (Dec 17, 2015)

> Not many women that I know that smoke would even go near a cigar.



Then ironpony should definitely make use of the trait. It'll immediately feel strange and unique to the character - as long as she sells the fact that _she_ should be smoking that cigar, it'll work well with the story.



> Well I can take out the drink thing, that's an easy fix.



Don't cut out interesting traits of your characters because you haven't made them believable yet. Work on making them believable, not finding more boring and commonplace traits to replace them with. They're a product of your creativity. Giving up on them is like giving up on your fashion sense; your story, even if it sells, won't reek of your authorial style as much if you don't let the cool things come out of your head grow into concepts that grab the reader.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 17, 2015)

Okay then.  Well one of the readers got back to me, and this is what he said, so I am not sure if it counts for the others that have had problems... He said that the reason why a lot of the the little things bother him, is because of the villain's plan.  The villain's plan is really complicated and it relies on him having to predict how people will behave and hope that they will behave that way and his plan will all work out.  When in fact, there are too many things that could go wrong, and none of them go wrong, and the plan works out.

He says that is the problem, and this is why he has a problem with so many things, because they are all part of the villain's plan.  It's true that the villain has to rely on a lot, and it works out for him luckily.  But a lot of times, especially in the real world, in order to get away with high crimes, you pretty much would have to rely on a complicated plan and hope everyone behaves how you predicted they would.  Unless I am wrong?  This could be the problem maybe.


----------



## dale (Dec 17, 2015)

probably best not to let someone infiltrate your conceptions of the characters themselves. if they are pointing
out matters of clarity or continuous typos or ways which the writing itself throws them out of the story? then i
might listen. but i personally wouldn't let anyone try to change my characters to better suit what THEY want
my characters to be. after all....my characters are MINE and mine alone.


----------



## shadowwalker (Dec 18, 2015)

ironpony said:


> Okay then.  Well one of the readers got back to me, and this is what he said, so I am not sure if it counts for the others that have had problems... He said that the reason why a lot of the the little things bother him, is because of the villain's plan.  The villain's plan is really complicated and it relies on him having to predict how people will behave and hope that they will behave that way and his plan will all work out.  When in fact, there are too many things that could go wrong, and none of them go wrong, and the plan works out.
> 
> He says that is the problem, and this is why he has a problem with so many things, because they are all part of the villain's plan.  It's true that the villain has to rely on a lot, and it works out for him luckily.  But a lot of times, especially in the real world, in order to get away with high crimes, you pretty much would have to rely on a complicated plan and hope everyone behaves how you predicted they would.  Unless I am wrong?  This could be the problem maybe.



Yeah, if everything fell perfectly into place, no matter how odd it seemed, I doubt I'd buy it. Particularly if it's based on predicting how someone (or especially several people) behaves. One can assume that guards are going to alter their routine very little - but can one really predict that someone will zig left when normally they would zag right? If that's the kind of "luck" the villain is having, it's going to be a problem if it keeps happening through the book.


----------



## Gavrushka (Dec 18, 2015)

ironpony said:
			
		

> Okay then. Well one of the readers got back to me, and this is what he said, so I am not sure if it counts for the others that have had problems... He said that the reason why a lot of the the little things bother him, is because of the villain's plan. The villain's plan is really complicated and it relies on him having to predict how people will behave and hope that they will behave that way and his plan will all work out. When in fact, there are too many things that could go wrong, and none of them go wrong, and the plan works out.
> 
> He says that is the problem, and this is why he has a problem with so many things, because they are all part of the villain's plan. It's true that the villain has to rely on a lot, and it works out for him luckily. But a lot of times, especially in the real world, in order to get away with high crimes, you pretty much would have to rely on a complicated plan and hope everyone behaves how you predicted they would. Unless I am wrong? This could be the problem maybe.



If you can't suspend the disbelief of a beta, I'd be a little concerned. - If all dozen of them come up with the same problem, I'd be a lot concerned.

And don't think to argue with them, unless you're planning on arguing your case with every reader, as the only interaction you really would have is the words you write. - If you can't state your case within the confines of your story, you've failed.

In my opinion, there's little better than a pedantic beta, as I'd rather dismiss a possible issue than not hear about it, and find out it was a huge chasm in the midst of the story.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 18, 2015)

Okay thanks, a few of them had the same problem, so I will change the villain's plan to something else.  Mainly it's almost half the story, so I need to change the plan to something that is more predictable for the villain.  Other stories though, do have complicated and elaborate villain plans where the villain is able to predict everything falling into place, and it does.

So I am wondering, what is there to be mindful of, when it comes to making such a plan believable?  In heist stories, where the thieves have to rely on everyone doing everything just right to work, and it does, or terrorism stories?  How are the villains able to manipulate all these people into falling into the exact places they want them, but at the same time, it's plausible to the reader?

Mainly in my story, the villains want a certain cop assigned to protect the witness, so they can take out the witness and frame that particular cop, specifically.  But they have to make sure that it's that cop who is there guarding her, and they have to make it so he goes into her house alone, with no back up, and this is the problem.  How do they know he will have no back up?  How can they make sure that it's him there?  How do they know that he will stay their with the witness for a few hours, rather than take her to the station for protection, etc.

Is their anything to mindful of, when coming up with plans where the villain has to rely on the action of pawns, who are unaware?


----------



## Terry D (Dec 18, 2015)

ironpony said:


> Okay thanks, you're right.  I want to take the advice of the readers, but the reason why it is difficult for me to, is because I feel that other stories I have read, do the exact same things mine does.  I have seen stories where witnesses get protection, even though the police cannot afford to do so in real life, after researching it for my story.



You are right. Many books do have have implausible plot developments that are crucial to the the story. Our books shouldn't be step by step reflections of real life because, in most cases, real life criminal investigations are tedious, sloppy, lengthy, and boring. No one wants to read fiction like that, so some implausibility is needed. The question then is, "How much?" If too many things need to fall into place it will disrupt the reader's suspension of disbelief. The concept of a criminal 'mastermind' who can manipulate events and people to his will, is a dated concept (not saying it can't work, just that it's been used a lot). More believable, at least to me, is an antagonist who is very skilled at manipulation, but who is still fallible. We all know our protagonists must face and overcome obstacles for our stories to work, but the same should happen for the antagonist also. Hannibal Lechter was tricked by Clarice Starling, but he turned that defeat into a victory. He didn't get everything he wanted from Starling (her psychological destruction), but he did end up getting his freedom. Lechter was good, but not perfect.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 18, 2015)

Terry D said:


> You are right. Many books do have have implausible plot developments that are crucial to the the story. Our books shouldn't be step by step reflections of real life because, in most cases, real life criminal investigations are tedious, sloppy, lengthy, and boring. No one wants to read fiction like that, so some implausibility is needed. The question then is, "How much?" If too many things need to fall into place it will disrupt the reader's suspension of disbelief. The concept of a criminal 'mastermind' who can manipulate events and people to his will, is a dated concept (not saying it can't work, just that it's been used a lot). More believable, at least to me, is an antagonist who is very skilled at manipulation, but who is still fallible. We all know our protagonists must face and overcome obstacles for our stories to work, but the same should happen for the antagonist also. Hannibal Lechter was tricked by Clarice Starling, but he turned that defeat into a victory. He didn't get everything he wanted from Starling (her psychological destruction), but he did end up getting his freedom. Lechter was good, but not perfect.



Well how much reality should I bring to it I wonder... For example, in real life police procedure, everytime a cop fires his/her weapon, the cop must then be investigated to see if firing the weapon was justifiable. The cop is not in trouble or anything, it's just standard procedure to take the cop off the case at that point and investigate.  However, in my story, the main cop character fires his weapon at least three times throughout, before the ending. Should he be taken off the case each time to be investigated?  Cause doing this could bring the story to a halt each time, and it would mean that the villain would get ahead of him, and when the MC is put back on the case, he would have to play catch up, that is, if his temporary replacement is not already too far ahead.  Should I obey reality to that extent, or is it okay to have him still on the case and keep going, even if he has to fire his weapon a few times throughout?

When it comes to the villain though, is it too far fetched for his plan that he can arrange for two people to arrive at the same place, but both alone, so he can kill one and frame the other?  Or does this sound too far fetched, like there is too many chances of things going wrong for it to work?  I don't really find the concept that dated though, as you still see it once in a while, and it's been used a lot, so doesn't that mean the writer is doing something right?


----------

