Ah, but I'm always speaking as a perfectionist, you know? I *know* the flaws aren't *that* massive. But, *any* flaw is a huge flaw to me. And flaws of characterisation (and speaking in a way that does not fit the character in that situations *is* a flaw of characterisation) are the worst kind of mistakes you can make in fanfic. IMO.
>Plus, the great thing about having a beta reader is that you can ignore whatever you want.
Oh, I'm good at that - I have my own mind, but I weigh a beta's suggestions carefully, and more often than not I agree with them, at least since I found the 'right' betas. It's taken me a long time to find betas I'm *really* happy with (and yes, you're one of them, in case you're wondering, and I'm never going to let you go! Mwaahahahaaa! ;-)) because I felt I needed people whose ideas of writing and of the characters were similar enough to mine for them to spot exactly the kind of thing *I* would find distracting or annoying in a fic.
>That's your right, as the author. And I won't be offended. Beta readers give you their opinion, and you have to take it with a grain of salt.
I know. And I do. And I probably will reject a few of your suggestions. But quite a few of them are spot on, and in some cases it's just a bit scary how I could miss these things for so many years.
>I'm having a similar experience, had someone look at "Last Enemy" and she pointed out a few things that I agree with and that aren't really easily fixable without changing the whole story dynamic.
Eeek. What things, if I may ask? You know, sometimes you need a second opinion, too... (or a third)... ;-)
>And you know what, sometimes you just have to chalk it up to experience and remember it for next time. Because the piece might be succeed as an organic whole as it is, and if you tinker too much with it trying to fit it to the beta's vision, it will all fall apart.
Definitely. But I'm not trying to fit it to the betas vision. I'm trying to fit it to my own. And, this may be different for different writers, but I've never yet reached a point of 'too much tinkering'. I've tinkered with "Endure" for more than two years, and with "Normal" for almost exactly three years, and those are the two stories I'm happiest with out of all my stories. I think I'm a natural tinkerer. ;-)
>Thanks for sharing your thought process. Sometimes it feels like I'm the only one with these feelings.
Oh, I'd be willing to bet most writers know these.
>PS I don't think you need to give much more background.
No, not much more. Just a little, in a couple of cases. Maybe just a word here or there. This will take some pondering, before I start tinkering, though. ;-)
Some of those questions I had were my curiousity and don't need to be in the story for it to work.
>It wasn't the characterization that was off, at the heart.
Oh, not at the heart, no. But small things can take a reader right out of the story, at least if that reader is me, and I suspect I'm not the only one. So the small things need to be fixed. And I think I can do it, you know... even if it takes a couple more weeks or months of thinking and... tinkering. ;-)
>Just doubts about whether I thought a character would express things the way they did in isolated parts. Overall the characterization is spot on. But we all view the characters differently, so you don't have to accept my interpretations...
Which reminds me I meant to write a meta post about Methos characterisation... *sigh*
Don't worry.
Ah, but I'm always speaking as a perfectionist, you know? I *know* the flaws aren't *that* massive. But, *any* flaw is a huge flaw to me. And flaws of characterisation (and speaking in a way that does not fit the character in that situations *is* a flaw of characterisation) are the worst kind of mistakes you can make in fanfic. IMO.
>Plus, the great thing about having a beta reader is that you can ignore whatever you want.
Oh, I'm good at that - I have my own mind, but I weigh a beta's suggestions carefully, and more often than not I agree with them, at least since I found the 'right' betas. It's taken me a long time to find betas I'm *really* happy with (and yes, you're one of them, in case you're wondering, and I'm never going to let you go! Mwaahahahaaa! ;-)) because I felt I needed people whose ideas of writing and of the characters were similar enough to mine for them to spot exactly the kind of thing *I* would find distracting or annoying in a fic.
>That's your right, as the author. And I won't be offended. Beta readers give you their opinion, and you have to take it with a grain of salt.
I know. And I do. And I probably will reject a few of your suggestions. But quite a few of them are spot on, and in some cases it's just a bit scary how I could miss these things for so many years.
>I'm having a similar experience, had someone look at "Last Enemy" and she pointed out a few things that I agree with and that aren't really easily fixable without changing the whole story dynamic.
Eeek. What things, if I may ask? You know, sometimes you need a second opinion, too... (or a third)... ;-)
>And you know what, sometimes you just have to chalk it up to experience and remember it for next time. Because the piece might be succeed as an organic whole as it is, and if you tinker too much with it trying to fit it to the beta's vision, it will all fall apart.
Definitely. But I'm not trying to fit it to the betas vision. I'm trying to fit it to my own. And, this may be different for different writers, but I've never yet reached a point of 'too much tinkering'. I've tinkered with "Endure" for more than two years, and with "Normal" for almost exactly three years, and those are the two stories I'm happiest with out of all my stories. I think I'm a natural tinkerer. ;-)
>Thanks for sharing your thought process. Sometimes it feels like I'm the only one with these feelings.
Oh, I'd be willing to bet most writers know these.
>PS I don't think you need to give much more background.
No, not much more. Just a little, in a couple of cases. Maybe just a word here or there. This will take some pondering, before I start tinkering, though. ;-)
Some of those questions I had were my curiousity and don't need to be in the story for it to work.
>It wasn't the characterization that was off, at the heart.
Oh, not at the heart, no. But small things can take a reader right out of the story, at least if that reader is me, and I suspect I'm not the only one. So the small things need to be fixed. And I think I can do it, you know... even if it takes a couple more weeks or months of thinking and... tinkering. ;-)
>Just doubts about whether I thought a character would express things the way they did in isolated parts. Overall the characterization is spot on. But we all view the characters differently, so you don't have to accept my interpretations...
Which reminds me I meant to write a meta post about Methos characterisation... *sigh*