Color me as a writer who thinks it’s a great idea to use the competencies of your friends…and if you happen to be able to recruit beta readers specifically for those competencies, go for it. In those areas where we know we’re lacking, it just makes sense to pursue outside expertise.

“If the magic or worldbuilding doesn’t work, most beta readers are going to twig to that pretty quickly. If the romance or the love story in a book is too over the top or twee, your average reader is going to pick up on that too.”

I make the assumption (crazy optimist that I am) that the author has done his/her research and has a pretty tight book before it sees its first beta reader. So the beta readers are checking, say, the magic system for consistency – odd little wobbles that the author may have missed or never considered the full implications of.

As for the ‘average’ reader – you only have to look at Amazon reviews to see how varied their opinions can be. Some subgenres even have different sets of rules and expectations that readers/writers unfamiliar with might not appreciate. I’m short of time at the moment, so I’m rushing to finish this, but I’ve heard that Romance readers can get quite annoyed if their expectations are not met. And, I may be wrong, but I think the MilSF or AltHist readers are much more forgiving of infodumps. They like the extra detail. So if you’re straying towards another genre and want to know how your book will be received there it makes sense (IMHO) to canvas a wide opinion.

But parceling out elements of a novel to beta readers and asking them to concentrate on that one thing, i.e., the magic system or what ever, is just counterintuitive to what I see the function of beta readers as being. I see them as separate from any experts I might consult for technical details, historical accuracy, etc. All those detail bits come under the heading of research and are on my head. It’s up to me to make sure they all mesh and work and aren’t wrong.

Beta readers tell me if the story works, if the characters are too stupid to live and if I actually have a plot. They view the work as a whole, because in the end, that’s how readers are going to view the story, as one interwoven piece.

If the magic or worldbuilding doesn’t work, most beta readers are going to twig to that pretty quickly. If the romance or the love story in a book is too over the top or twee, your average reader is going to pick up on that too.

Frankly, if the love story in one of my books only works for a romance reader, I’ve failed. That subplot or character element needs to work for everyone.

So this whole idea of splitting story elements up and pulling out individual threads kind of baffles me. How do you balance that? How to you pull it all together into a coherent story arc if no one tells you how the story works as a whole?

I think about process a whole lot, which is why I’m asking. I couldn’t do this, I’d get nothing out of it but confusion.

Of course the problems begin when the different reviewers start giving conflicting advice. The New Weirders want it weirder and the Supers want that aspect played down. Hopefully that won’t happen and you’ll discover a new, untapped subgenre:)

What I did though was join an online workshop. At first it was very difficult to find anyone to review my work but by reviewing other writers’ work and joining a mutual reviewer’s list I built up a list of excellent contacts. It’s also where I met fellow SF Novelist Simon Haynes – we were both on a list of people who would reciprocate reviews.

That’s a good idea to assign each one a specific task though – might nab that for the same process with the next book.

This is a great recommendation, and thanks for sharing your perspective. If we only ever have the same people read our work, we’ll just end up writing for those beta readers, and aren’t likely to broaden our readership.