Yes. An editor can be wrong about your manuscript.
I know that may sound like an odd thing for an editor to say. After all, you hire an editor because you want an experienced reader to tell you what’s working, what isn’t, and what might make your manuscript stronger.
But editors are human.
We can misunderstand what you’re trying to accomplish. We can miss something. We can make an assumption that isn’t correct. And sometimes we can identify a problem correctly but suggest a solution that isn’t right for your manuscript.
That doesn’t mean you should dismiss editorial feedback when you disagree with it.
In fact, disagreement can be useful.
The important question isn’t simply “Is my editor right?”
It’s “What is my editor seeing that led to this conclusion?”
Your Editor Only Has the Manuscript
You know your manuscript better than anyone else.
You know what you intended to say. You know the backstory you developed for your characters. You know why you structured the book the way you did. You know what you want readers to understand or feel.
Your editor doesn’t know all of that.
Your editor has the manuscript.
As I wrote in What Are You Missing When You Read Your Own Manuscript?, familiarity with your own writing can make it difficult to see what a new reader actually experiences. Your editor comes to the manuscript without all the information you carry in your head.
That can be useful.
Sometimes an editor’s comment reveals a problem you didn’t know was there. You thought something was clear, but a reader doesn’t have the information you have.
But sometimes an editor misunderstands your intention. The manuscript may be doing what you intended, but the editor interpreted it differently.
That can be useful information, too.
If your intention isn’t coming through to a reader, you have something to consider. You may decide the manuscript needs to change. Or you may decide that the editor’s interpretation isn’t the right one.
Either way, you’ve learned something about how the manuscript is being received.
A Problem and Its Solution Aren’t Always the Same Thing
An editor might identify a genuine problem and then suggest one way to address it.
You might agree with the problem and disagree with the solution.
That doesn’t mean the feedback was wrong.
Suppose I tell you that a section of your book slows the pace. I might suggest cutting part of it. You might decide to tighten the section instead, move some information to earlier in the chapter, or restructure the chapter.
The important thing is to understand what I’m seeing.
Once you understand the problem, you may be the person who is best equipped to solve it.
An editor’s suggested revision isn’t necessarily the only possible revision.
This is especially important because your manuscript needs to sound like you. An editor can point out where something isn’t working, but that doesn’t mean the editor should rewrite it in the way they would write it.
The goal is to strengthen your manuscript—not turn it into someone else’s book.
Sometimes the Feedback Is Simply Wrong
There are times when an editor misunderstands something.
Maybe I made an assumption about your audience that wasn’t correct. Maybe I missed an important piece of information in the manuscript. Maybe I interpreted a passage differently than you intended.
If you explain the reasoning behind a choice and I realize I misunderstood, I need to be willing to reconsider my recommendation.
That’s part of being an editor, too.
Experience matters, but experience doesn’t make an editor infallible.
I can be wrong.
And if I am, I should be willing to say so.
But Disagreement Doesn’t Automatically Mean Your Editor Is Wrong
This is the other side of the equation.
Sometimes an author disagrees with feedback because the feedback is uncomfortable.
Your manuscript is your work. You may have spent months or years writing and revising it. It’s difficult to hear that something you thought was working isn’t.
And sometimes the thing you want to defend is exactly what a reader is struggling with.
As I wrote in Why Do Two Editors Give Different Feedback?, editorial judgment can differ because editors bring their own experience, perspective, and reading of a manuscript to the project.
That doesn’t mean every editorial opinion is equally useful. It means that disagreement deserves some examination before you decide what to do with the feedback.
Ask yourself:
What exactly is the editor responding to?
Can I see the problem from the reader’s perspective?
Am I disagreeing with the editor’s reasoning, or do I simply not want to make the change?
Those questions can be uncomfortable.
They can also be useful.
You don’t have to automatically accept every editorial suggestion. But before you reject one, make sure you understand the concern behind it.
Ask Questions When Something Doesn’t Make Sense
If you don’t understand an editorial comment, ask about it.
If you disagree with it, ask about it.
You might ask:
What made you think this section wasn’t working?
Where did you become confused?
Is there a problem with this passage, or are you seeing a larger pattern?
What were you hoping would change if I made this revision?
Sometimes the answer will confirm the editor’s concern.
Sometimes it will reveal that the editor misunderstood what you were trying to do.
Sometimes it will show that the editor identified a problem but suggested a solution that doesn’t fit your manuscript.
And sometimes the conversation will change the editor’s mind.
An editor shouldn’t defend a recommendation simply because they made it.
A good editorial relationship should leave room for questions and discussion. You should understand what your editor is seeing, and your editor should be willing to listen when you provide context they didn’t have.
If you’re looking for an editor who will explain the reasoning behind editorial recommendations and work with you rather than simply hand you a list of changes, learn more about my editing services.
Editing Requires Judgment
I don’t think an editor’s job is to be right about everything.
My job is to read carefully, pay attention to what is happening in the manuscript, explain what I’m seeing, and make recommendations based on my experience as a reader and editor.
But those recommendations are judgments.
They aren’t facts handed down from above.
That means I need to be able to reconsider them when I’ve misunderstood something or when an author gives me information that changes the situation.
It also means an author needs to be willing to consider feedback that isn’t immediately comfortable.
Sometimes your editor is wrong.
Sometimes your editor has identified something you couldn’t see.
And sometimes the editor has identified a real problem but suggested a solution that doesn’t fit your manuscript.
That’s why I don’t think the most useful question is “Who’s right?”
It’s “What are we seeing, and why?”
Once you understand that, you can make a better decision about your manuscript.
An editor gives you another perspective on your work. That perspective can reveal something you missed, challenge an assumption, or occasionally be mistaken.
And sometimes, after we’ve looked at the manuscript from both sides, I’ll discover that I was wrong.
I’m okay with that.
In fact, I think being willing to reconsider my own recommendations is part of doing my job well.
About the Author
Cassie Armstrong is the owner of MorningStar Editing LLC and a book editor, writing coach, and mentor with more than nineteen years of experience. She works with authors of children’s books, cookbooks, and craft and how-to books, helping them strengthen their manuscripts while developing their skills as writers.
Cassie believes that editing should strengthen the writer, not just the manuscript.