I know I should pretty much always trust an editor I'm working with, but some changes and cuts can be hard to make. I'm not talking about an editor you hire but one that is buying your work. These guys know what they're doing and when something is good for publication. I do trust the process and know that things come out better with an editor than I can make them on my own. Still, it's tough to kill those darlings and see what I once thought were some of the best parts go. I'm not new to working with editors, but I'm not sure it's any easier. If I know my writing will come out better, why does part of me want to resist all changes? Of course, I don't. But is it hard for any of you to work with editors? Is there anything that's made it easier even knowing there are probably more than one round of edits? It's all for the greater good of the writing, right?
It depends on the editor and it depends on you. If you find the right editor, it's not hard at all. If you're going to be stubborn and not make any changes and fight for every single word, why do you have an editor in the first place?
There's some give and take I think in an author/editor work relationship. From what you indicated, the editor assigned to your project is knowledgeable and familiar with the type of writing you produce. I get pretty much the same from my editor, assigned through my publisher. That said, I don't go 100% with what the editor suggests. But when I disagree, it's for a good reason. Sometimes we discuss it, and the editor comes around to seeing my perspective and agrees. Sometimes not. But in the end, it's my work, with my name behind it (well, plus the publisher). Over the years, I've worked with three editors. Each has been pretty darn solid, and I actually learned from them--so I make fewer errors...or oversights. But the experience with each has been just a little different. What makes it easier is knowing that we're all on the same side (author, editor/publisher), striving to produce what's best for the readers.
