What editors *actually* want authors to do with their editorial feedback

This isn't a hostage situation. You don't have to choose whether to capitulate to our demands or try and negotiate the demands away. Here's what we're hoping to do instead.

If you’re a first-time or aspiring author: do you know how to work with editors? Book editors?

Do you know what the people who’ll edit your work—literary agents, acquiring editors, etc.—hope you’ll do with their feedback?

Do you really?

Here’s why I ask: in my experience, many, many more industry n00bs think they know how to work well with editors than actually do. This is as true for agents, etc. as it is for authors, but since most of you reading this are in the latter category—and I’m just generous—we’re going to focus on criticizing you today. Not me. You.

Here’s the thing: responding well to editorial feedback on a book is its own distinct skillset. It DOESN’T look like any of the following:

• integrating a thesis advisor’s feedback into an academic paper

• responding to a magazine editor’s notes or ideas as a freelance journalist

• completing a copywriting assignment for a corporate client

• working with a fact checker

• employing a ghostwriter

• people-pleasing

• being graded

• being wrong

• being in an argument

• getting in trouble

• subconsciously reenacting childhood trauma

When an author-editor relationship is going wrong, however, it generally does resemble one or more of the above.

What results is a lot of needless suffering and dull writing. See also: career disappointment.

Through trial and error, most authors do eventually figure out how to work well with their editors—but I’d rather spare you that journey if I can.

Forthwith I will show you how to make the most of your editors and editorial feedback like the seasoned pro I know you will one day be.

Let’s start by going over the fundamental point of why we do so much developmental editing in this industry: