I’ve dished out plenty of edits as a former literary agent and current freelance book editor, and been on the receiving end as the author of a middle grade trilogy and several guides to writing and publishing.
When I receive an edit, I know that the (usually brilliant) suggestions my editors make are nothing personal. I know how important it is to take the changes to heart and try my absolute best to make the manuscript better.
Easier said than done.
Utilizing feedback to take your book to new heights is one of those stages of the writing process where great books are made. If you can zero in on the current weaknesses and put in the work to make effective changes, you can truly elevate your novel in ways that wouldn’t have been possible without an edit. If you get caught up in your knee jerk reactions and/or don’t put in the work, your book may remain in the muck.
Having gone through the editing process on both sides, here are some suggestions for processing the feedback, coming up with a plan to tackle the changes, and executing a revision in an efficient and effective way.
Read the editorial letter once and put it away
The first stage of processing feedback is to deal with the (inevitable) emotions that get stirred up when you have your work critiqued.
As a writer, you’ve just spent hundreds of hours to chip away a piece of your soul, which is just lying there exposed and vulnerable in a Microsoft Word document. You’re naturally going to feel protective of your creation. Some nervousness and even anger is absolutely to be expected. The thing you most want to hear (“It’s perfect!”) is also the least helpful.
An editorial letter is kind of like a radioactive substance that you need to become gradually acclimated to over the course of several days. It needs to be absorbed in small doses and kept at arm’s length and quarantined when necessary until you are able to overcome the dangerous side effects: anger, paranoia, excessive pride, delusions of grandeur, and/or homicidal tendencies. Should you find yourself experiencing any of these side effects, consult your writing support group immediately for an antidote.
So when you get your editorial letter/critique, just steel your resolve, read it once, put it away, and don’t think about it or act on it for at least a couple of days.
Just know that this is a completely normal reaction and in a couple of days you’ll feel better. Once you’ve calmed down and are able to consider the changes without your heart racing: that’s when you know you’re ready to get working.
Contextualize the editor’s background and “gaze”
Before you start sifting through the feedback in order to make decisions on the suggestions to keep and the ones to discard, it’s worth taking a moment to pause and consider your editor or critique partner’s background, level of expertise, and the “gaze” they’re bringing to the table.
All things being equal, you’re probably going to weigh an expert’s view over an armchair editor’s, even if good feedback can come in many different forms. If you receive contradictory advice, the tie is probably going to go to the person with more experience. But even beyond that, bear in mind the overall background your editor is bringing to the table.
There are two main things editors bring to the editing process: 1) their personal background and 2) the reservoir of stories they’ve internalized over the years, which informs what “good” looks like to them. That reservoir is both shaped by their personal taste and helps form their taste.
Two different people reading the same passage from a novel will project different things onto the page. To over-simplify for the purposes of illustration, if a female character stumbles into a dangerous situation in a novel, a female reader might intuitively grasp the broader dynamics and not need them explained, whereas a male reader might need it spelled out a bit more why she’s doing what she’s doing.
And we’re all shaped by the thousands of stories we’ve internalized over the years, which contribute to the baseline we judge novels against. Someone who only reads 1970s fantasy novels might think head jumping and referring to characters by fifteen different names is normal, when that’s not quite the current storytelling vogue. Editors who only read western novels won’t necessarily recognize when stories follow other storytelling archetypes.
As an editor, I try my absolute best to check my own gaze when I offer feedback and I read as widely as possible, but it’s a bit inevitable at the end of the day that my perspective is going to be shaped by being a straight white cis dude in America and spending twenty+ years steeped in traditional publishing.
Take it all into account as you assess the feedback.
How to decide whether to take or discard feedback
You absolutely don’t have to take every single suggestion your editor makes, and I’m often very glad when my clients don’t listen to all of my suggestions and take only the best ones. If you don’t agree with a change, big or small, it’s okay to stick to your guns if you have a really good reason for it.
Only: make sure it’s really your gut talking and not your lazy bone. Or your bull head.
There’s also a reverse danger here. Sometimes writers try to take every suggestion they receive and end up in a muddle. It really is okay to trust your instincts!
But even if you don’t agree with a suggestion, don’t simply ignore it.
Often when someone makes a specific suggestion for a change to a certain scene or plot line you won’t always agree with it and you’ll throw up your hands and say there’s no way you’re going to make the change.
But! Even if you don’t agree with the specific remedy the editor suggested, something prompted them to suggest the change, and that something could be an underlying problem that needs to be addressed, even if you don’t agree with the fix the editor proposed.
For instance, you may not be willing to get rid of the homicidal bald eagle in your novel, even if your editor or critique partner suggests it. But surely there’s something you can change to alleviate their concerns. For instance, the homicidal bald eagle may need to have a conscience.
Drill past the surface suggestions and try to diagnose the root problems the editor was trying to address. Once you have identified the issue, you the author will be the one who will be best equipped to fix it.
Be systematic with your revisions
Confronting a revision can be extremely daunting because of the Cascade Effect: when you change one plot point it necessitates two more changes so the plot still makes sense after the change, which prompts still more changes and more and more. Ten or more changes can cascade from a single change, even a minor one.
In order to avoid Cascade Effect Terror, I find that it’s helpful to work on only one change at a time and prioritize from biggest to smallest. It’s not helpful to fiddle around at the line level in a chapter that’s going to get deleted entirely because of a bigger change.
First, color code your editorial letter (green = definitely going to make the change, yellow = probably going to make the change, red = don’t agree with the suggestion).
Then list the changes you need to make from the most difficult/impactful to smallest. Start with the biggest change first, then trace it through the book, making all the necessary subsequent changes so everything makes sense. Then move to the next, and then the next.
This way, instead of having to keep every single editorial suggestion in your head as you’re moving your way sequentially through the manuscript you can be targeted and efficient with your revisions.
If you find yourself getting mad it’s probably because your editor/critique partner is right
Great suggestions are easy to accept. You usually smack your head and think, “Why didn’t I think of that??”
Bad suggestions are easy to reject. You just think, “Naw, I’m not doing that.”
I’ve found that almost always when the suggestions make me mad, it’s usually because the editor is right. My brain is just having trouble admitting it for whatever reason.
At the end of the day, listen listen listen to the feedback, try to identify the core problems the editor is identifying, then come up with your best solutions to address them.
Easy to say. Tougher in practice.
Do you have any suggestions for how best to incorporate feedback?
Need help with your book? I’m available for manuscript edits, query critiques, and coaching!
For my best advice, check out my online classes, my guide to writing a novel and my guide to publishing a book.
And if you like this post: subscribe to my newsletter!
Art: Portrait of William Hamilton and John Maitland by Cornelis Janssens van Ceulen
I'm in the minority of writers who looks forward to revision letters. Okay, I'm about to get my first one, but still, I'm excited to get it. I'll be the first to admit I'm not good at editing. I have a very hard time analyzing my own writing. Even after it has sat for a long time, my perspective still pretty much sucks. I do edit as I go along. I pre-plan a lot before I write, so I'm generally pretty solid on what I'm writing, and I try to take care to get down the best words possible for what I wish to convey in the story. So, when I write "the end" it is pretty much the end for me, and I have great difficulty looking for ways to improve. I know it can be, but I just can't really see it. So, I look forward to feedback and revisions because I know things will be seen that I just can't. I'm good at applying other's thoughts into my own and recreating. Give me the edits, I say! Bring it on, but please just give me enough time to do them.
Ah, advice that makes my little editorial heart sing. I can't add much to this except to reiterate that an editor's suggestions are just that: suggestions. I am thrilled when I make a suggestion for a problem spot and the author takes it into consideration but then comes up with an even better way to fix it.
What I find interesting about the editor-revision letter is that it arrives single spaced. What's up with that? A professional writer would not dare send a single spaced manuscript to an agent or editor. Supposedly they read a lot and double spaced is easier for them.
Do writers not read a lot too? If the cost of those extra pages and postage are too much for the publisher, it makes me wonder if I can trust their numbers for my royalties.
Editor revision letters are tough to deal with so I'd really like some white space on those pages. It's so much nicer and makes me feel like the editor actually took some time to format a letter to me.
Great post! Thanks for the opportunity to rant!
For me, before I incorporate feedback, I first need to figure out what's being said in a critique/editorial letter. More often than not, a comment or suggestion is off target, not necessarily off base or foul balls, but expressing aesthetic hunches without suggestions that illustrate what's meant or couched in boilerplate catchphrases with insider meanings that are not altogether clear enough to address them.
Once I've deciphered the cryptic comments, then I can plan a strategy to incorporate feedback points in my own creative ways.
That sounds pret close to my approach, though I have another step I call bitch to my agent, rant and rave then, let him talk me down off the ledge. I didn't reach that step until the 12th editorial letter, but I was sure glad to have someone to share my pain and mediate between the letter and my feelings.
Mr. Bransford, have you been hacking into my computer? Seriously, cut it out. Anyways, great post. Bookmarking for future reference.
I take the position that negative criticism is positive. This is especially true if more than one review comments on the same problem. Willingness to listen, learn and make changes is a smart decision that will help propel my writing to higher levels.
David Ferretti III
These are really good suggestions, Nathan. I really like what you have to say and how you laid it out.
If I'm in this situation at some point, I'm going to look up this post and re-read it.
Nicely said! Thanks.
p.s. If I am in this situation, though, I'll probably re-read this, and then just go with my inital plan, which is to burst into tears, accuse my agent of hating me, accuse my agent of trying to stifle my creative freedom, accuse my agent of giving ME editiorial notes, but not his OTHER clients, whom he likes better, burst into tears again, ask my agent if he's really telling me I have no talent and he's just trying to let me down easily, point out to my agent that his lastest blog post included three typos, and he misplaced a comma, decide to give up writing forever, and go to bed for a week. Then, for variety, I'll burst into tears again.
After all that, I might actually read the notes.
Then I might re-read this post again, and go: Oh yeah. Good points here.
As my novel is at a very early stage (first draft of a prologue and 3 chapters) I don't have direct experience with an editorial critique, nor do I have any good source of informal critique.
However.
An analogous situation occurs as I trawl the Internet collecting evaluating and often rejecting tips, advice, guidelines and even "rules" for how to write well and/or successfully. And, of course, I'm always running a track down at some level where I compare my own work in progress against all these advices.
For a couple of months I've been seeing EVERYWHERE advice about the importance of hooking the agent/editor/reader in the first sentence/paragraph/page. And my response has been okay, my story starts REALLY slow – because that's the kind of story it is and that's THE story I want to tell – not some other – "success" be damned.
And then an odd thing happened. I'd been thinking for about a month – well, if the excitement is all (by necessity) later in the story, why not start at or near the end. And I even sort of knew that should be the answer, but I was too lazy to acknowledge that and make it happen. And, then, suddenly, after the umpteenth reiteration of the same advice, it just came to me that now was the time to do it.
So I took an hour or two, and wrote the scene that I'd been imagining almost from the very beginning of starting the project. A climactic and even triumphal scene. And I avoided letting the action of the scene complete, but it ended with my main character on stage with her band with thousands (well, maybe hundreds) of the audience yelling for the song she had never expected to perform again. And in a flash of revelation she realized that she was compelled to tell the story of how everything happen=ed, and who she and her band were REALLY.
And then we flash back to the beginning and proceed with the necessary-but-boring parts. I'm not going to say that this change miraculously created the great YA novel of the twenty-first century. It did, however, produce an infinitely more "grabby" beginning, and strengthened the story rather than weakening it.
The interesting point relative to this blog post being the months that I struggled with the issue on a semi-conscious level, and how suddenly it happened when it decided to be ready.
-Steve
giggles. This post reminds me of a rather entertaining one on How to write badly well – Regard editorial input as a personal attack
https://writebadlywell.blogspot.com/2009/11/regard-editorial-input-as-personal.html
On a side note, I like getting crits, especially the harsh ones. Should I go see a psychologist now, or now? 😛
As always, a great post! I haven't ever received a manuscript critique/editorial letter for the simple reason I haven't even got an agent and I'm only now finishing my first novel, but I sense that you are spot on!
I've written all my life (much of it as a professional in a big organization) and, let me tell you, critiques from one's boss have exactly the same effect. God, you feel like kicking him/her in the you-know-what… To avoid any unpleasantness, I'd always take refuge in the toilet. Then, after a long moment of solitude and numerous splashes of cold water on my face, I'd go back to my desk,refreshed and ready to tackle the problem…
Bottomline, the source of the criticisms were invariably a misunderstanding: I had not made myself clear. I think that's true for novel writing as well: the really hard part is to come across with what you really want to say.
So a criticism – any criticism – should act as a RED light. It means danger! The suggested solution may not be the right one, but one thing is certain, baby, you've got it wrong. You're not coming across, so you need to rethink the way you're saying it and try again…And that's where you come in, Nathan, with your good advice!
nice one, nathan! one other suggesion: put regina spektor's tune, edit, on a loop and play it over and over again ("you don't even have good credit, you can't write but you can't edit") and remember that only amateurs can't take criticism 😉
Two items.
1) I agree with you all the way from here to infinity about the prudence of absorbing and implementing editorial advice. What amazes me ("me" being a writer somewhere between "having procured an agent" and "having not yet signed a book deal") is how much a fresh set of eyes can see. My agent has offered suggestions that I never would have considered — some suggestions miniscule, other suggestions that seem as if she is saying, "Uh…what were you thinking here?" — and nearly every suggestion has been exactly what the manuscript needed. Well said!
2) Short note – a fellow writer and I are attempting to spread the love of literature. Perhaps help us by Tweeting the link to https://NickBarnesKnowsBooks.blogspot.com? Or…perhaps don't.
Cheers.
~J
So grateful for Cascade Syndrome advice – had thought my brain had developed a serious malfunction. Plus, editing on the basis of a literary consultant's report: not a 'real' editor/agent, so harder to take seriously.
Thanks for this I'm waiting for my editorial letter in the next month or so. It's good to know how to handle this. My agent was once an editor so I kind of know what expect from the publisher. Still …
I think you also need to be wary of not jumping through too many hopes in the hope of securing an agent.
I dramatically changed a manuscript, following the advice of an agent i hoped with subsequently take me on. She didn't and i was left with a book that really wasn't mine. Not her fault, she meant well, but i should have had more faith in myself and knocked on the head my desperation to get published.
So if the critique is from an agent you haven't signed with, choose your hoops carefully.
I'm just sitting down to an edit letter, too. I always put them aside for 24 hrs after reading them.
My writing teacher always said our only response to comments should be revisions. (Whether made or not made.) I've mentioned this to a couple of editors. They seemed relieved to hear it.
"Cascade Effect Terror"
This is absolutely perfect. I know this terror SO well at this very moment. I think you should trademark CET! 😉
Cheers,
Karen
I strenuously disagree that "great" artists are egotistical/divaish about their own work. That's a stereotype that doesn't mesh with the reality I've seen. Once writers start getting divaish about their work they stop listening to the people who are trying to help them, and their work inevitably suffers.
John O. – Thank you for sharing the "Editing Letter" Too funny-
Writers have to have a belief in themselves and perseverance. When I received notes on my second draft of my novel from a trusted editor, I sat on my bathroom floor and cried. I felt like a failure. I felt like a fool for thinking I would ever be published.I questioned my motive for writing. Then I forced myself back to my laptop and read only my notes for chapter one.
It's scary to spend a tremendous amount of time on something that could end up in a drawer. When I saw my notes, that's where I thought my ms was headed. I panicked.I went for a walk and then forced myself to sit down at my laptop.
I recognized the amount of work the editor put into my novel and I thanked her for helping and believing in me. Every day I work on my third draft of my novel knowing there are no promises for publication. I read my editing notes and if any thoughts of giving up cross my mind, I remind myself of the two qualities I need for success. Perseverance and Belief in myself –
You summed it up perfectly. I have found suggestions that made me mad at the moment made much more sense after time.
Maribeth:)
The first thing is to work on the MS until you can find nothing else to fix. Then you won't get mad about missing the obvious things and the editor can focus on the few remaining details.
No suggestions here! Great advice 🙂
Sometimes you are on the same page as the editor, and sometimes you're not. When you are, it's almost as if you can read each others minds, and everything clicks. And when you work with these editors, you actually look forward to their suggestions, because these suggestions make the ms better. And this collaboration is an outrageous feeling.
But there are other times when you just don't click with the editor. It happens. Not often, but you know it from the start. Dipolmacy and e-mails with nice little happy faces help when you disagree. It's a matter of being professional and trusting your own best instincts.
After reading all the comments, all I can say is I agree with Travener. First, you gotta get the feedback.
I entirely agree about being systematic. It's easy to get overwhelmed, and it can happen really fast when you try to juggle multiple corrections and trace them out all at once!
This a wonderful, and very well-timed post, Nathan. Thanks!
Thanks for this great post, Nathan! It's quite interesting to hear this from someone who knows "both sides."
I could especially relate to #3 – Don't simply ignore the suggestions you don't agree with.
I like to think I'm pretty good at being open to suggestions. But, sometimes, there's that certain edit that can't be made. So, after further discussions with my critique partner, I realize that the issue with that paragraph/plot point/etc. is really grounded someplace else. Once I realize this and make that change, then the whole book becomes stronger for having found that weakness.
Such excellent advice, and very timely for me! I'm in the midst of doing editor-suggested changes, and I think the best advice in here is to take some time before acting. Two weeks ago I couldn't see how to do any of it, and suddenly a path has opened up. You just need to let it set in for a day or two or twenty.
Gordon –
Here's an article for you to read. THE GREAT GATSBY wouldn't have been THE GREAT GATSBY without Maxwell Perkins. Who, by the way, was not a writer.
And guess what – Fitzgerald resisted Perkins' changes but eventually realized he was right.
And yeah, I presume to give people advice about their work all the time. It's my job.
Stephen King recently did a book review on Carol Sklenicka's Raymond Carver, A Writer's Life.
Apparently the book goes into some detail on how Carver was heavily (and often poorly) edited "wide and deep" by Gordon Lish.
https://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/22/books/review/King-t.html?scp=2&sq=raymond%20carver&st=cse
Nathan… have you ever NOT signed a potential client because they wouldn't take some of your editorial advice? I'm curious.
As far as editorial advice, sometimes we don't know if it will even work unless we actually write it. No?
Oh… and if you need a beta reader for Jacob Wonderbar… I'm available. FREE!!!
brian-
I've never actually encountered someone who refused to take any and all criticism whatsoever, but as Tina Fey says on "30 ROCK" – that's a dealbreaker!
I'm getting nervous just reading this post and I haven't even started querying yet! Still, it's really good advice. I'm saving this for sure.
By the way, how long does the editing process usually take once you have an editor? Because so much editing happens at that stage, how much time should people take in editing their manuscript on their own before sending it off (assuming they already have an agent and this is, say, the second or third book in the series)?
Great topic Nathan
When you spend the kind of mental and physical energy required to complete a manuscript, it's sometimes hard to hear anything other than what a great job you did.
I don't have trouble hearing the negative comments because I let them in with the idea that they will/can improve my manuscript.
There seems a strange interface between writers and editors. When I first heard the idea of someone editing my work, I thought: If they know so much why don't they write their own book. Then I learned what it is they do and was at peace.
My editor is nearly finished with my first manuscript. I've learned so much about the kind of things I do wrong when I write. So often, she has suggested a single word change, and the effect was terrific. This of course, was without changing the meaning of what I was trying to say. She didnt try to make it her book.
Ultimately, I want my book to get published, to sell and to do well. I must tell my story. If listening to those who know more than I do is required, then I'll gladly do it.
Gordon,
First, I've noticed a real change in the way you write your posts. It makes it much easier to read them – thank you! Props to you!
In terms of what you're saying, I used to feel the same way. I remember I went into my first writing class, and announced that no editor would ever touch a single word of my writing. Not a WORD. It was MINE, and I would not be dictated to!
Then I started to get feedback on my work, and did a 360 degree turnaround.
Boy, did I need that feedback. 🙂
The thing about writing is it's not just self-expression, it's communication. And there is no way to know how the person on the other end is recieving your words without asking them.
That's really what editorial notes are – feedback on how well you communicated your work.
Now, I think there is danger here. I get upset when I hear people changing their work drastically until it becomes something else. I think the writer has to hear feedback, but ultimately trust their own muse. I agree with Nathan when he says: Trust your gut.
But there's great value in getting feedback from the reader. And that's what anyone reading your work is – a reader, whether they have another title (agent, editor) or not.
You can always choose to ignore them. But it's good to hear what they have to say.
Great reminder and well put! Thanks!
There is a nugget of truth in every criticism. As Nathan says, this too is, "Easy to say. Tougher in practice." But believe it's true.
Oh, and Nathan, I think you're right about the dealbreaker.
If an agent or editor gave me feedback on my writing, and I didn't agree with ANY of it, we obviously shouldn't be working together.
We have a different vision; it's not a match.
I think your suggestion to read the editorial letter through and then put it aside for a couple of days, is very sound.
Even though rationally I knew that my editor was merely trying to get the best book possible out of me, my initial reaction was one of defensive aggression and wounded feelings. When I was calm enough to think about what she had said, I was able to see it for the good sense and valuable advice that it was.
I have come to believe that a good editor–who is well matched to the writing-is essential. In some cases, not so much is needed, in other cases, much. But in either, it is a pair of professional eyes looking at the product, buffing and polishing it up.
Much of poetry, love letters, personal writing would seem wrong (to me)to edit.
But fiction and non-fiction?
The single most glaring sign of an amateur self-published book is the lack of finish, both in editing and design.So even if an author decides to go the self-pub route, these services seem often vital.
Very good timing for me, too. I started last week to revise my very first novel, a women's fiction magic realism, that I wrote 4-5 years ago.
A very well-known agent had requested a full and then asked me to revise it, heavily, and send it back. I was clueless. It went in that ubiquitous drawer everyone has for hiding work you'd rather not look at. It has taken me all this time and two other novels and lots of research to have the slightest idea how she wanted me to revise it, but last week one of those long-lasting, spiral bulbs flashed on over my head and I pulled that big mess o'pages out of the drawer and got to work.
The bad news is I have no remaining electronic files of it that I can access so I'm rewriting from a print copy.
The good news is that this makes it so much easier to leave out big chunks of dreck. It had good bones, and now they are visible.
I know I'm not really answering the question of the day, but since I can now so easily see the horror of what I once considered a polished ms, I think I would pay lots of attention to any editor's suggestions. And I would not refuse any of them without a darn good reason.
Oh, also another question for those of you who have gotten The Letter. Is it just filled with what the editor thinks needs to change or are there positive things in it too? Sounds like a stupid question, I know, but I'd really love to know what to expect when I (hopefully) get to that stage. Plus I think I'd cry in a corner if my (hopefully one day) future letter was all crit.
Nathan-
As usual, spot-on. Except that line about the homicidal bald eagle…I mean, if I'm brilliant enough to concoct a homicidal bald eagle…I dunno…I think I'd kinda want to keep that. (sigh)
I remember my revision e-mail after the editors involved enthused over my novel and said, "Oh, yeah, this won't need much work AT ALL!" 11 pages and one loooong Labor Day weekend later…
It was a better book. I know it, and they know it. And I've found that a really good editor will catch every single one of those places where I'm thinking, "Yeah, well, yanno, it's good enough"–when all the time I KNOW it's not "good enough," I'm just lazy enough to tell myself "it'll pass." Every single one of those spots, they nailed me on. Every single one of them, I sweat blood over. Every single one of them was better once they forced me to do my BEST work rather than just work that I'd perceived as "okay" and "good enough."
My two cents,
Janny
word verification= "henolar." I think that's the name of the homicidal bald eagle…
Gordon,
Just because William Faulkner said it doesn't mean he's right. And it sure doesn't mean he's right in regards to everyone else. That's one approach, one opinion. And it's dangerous to confuse the notion of great writing and great editing. They're different things and don't always go together. Both depend on a deep understanding of story… but one is primarialy creative and the other primarily analytical.
Ink – in your editorial past, have you been on the other side, issuing editorial letters? I imagine a variety of editors take different approaches, but do you think it common that editors will suggest deep edits (pulling whole paragraphs, changing character traits, rearranging material) for all their book deals, or just the ones they think have the potential to drive big sales (i.e. NYTimes bestseller material, however they may judge that).
Or maybe Nathan could weigh in on this? Do you find all your clients get the same editorial "attention" or does it vary?
Gordon – cool! I completely agree.
🙂
Very true, and thank-you for the suggestions. I hope that when my first reasoned rejection rolls around, I'll be prepared…. after the horrific hissy fit….
How do I respond to criticism? Very carefully.
Honestly, lately I've been working on not taking criticism personally. I try to be in a calm and detatched state of mind when receiving the ctiticism in the first place. And then I mentally quarantine that criticism until I'm ready to deal with it.
That's not to say that the monsters don't rear their head — the automatic raging mother-instinct ("Don't you DARE criticize my baby!") comes to mind — but I'm of the belief that if there's something wrong with my manuscript, then somewhere in my subconscious, I already know. So really, part of learning to deal with it is, for me, learning to listen to myself. Perhaps the painful rage comes from the fact that another person is able to see straight through to that part of me, when I can't see it myself.
I especially love #5. I've already figured that out about myself and learned I need to step back from the advice for a couple days before re-reading it.
Gordon,
Okay, I agree with that more than your previous comment, but I wouldn't go so far as to say agents shouldn't be mucking about with that stuff. Yes, some agents are probably more deal brokers than editors, but many will be great editors – for many that's probably part of what drew them to the job. Heck, many agents are former editors from major or minor publishers. And why wouldn't an agent see a great manuscript that has a couple problems that might hamper its selling but that the agent thinks they can help the writer correct? It's the same thing the editor will do before putting it before the public. If they have the skills they have the skills – and I'm guessing that many of them do.
And it's still up to the writer to determine the course of action, what suggestions to take or not to take. The agents editorial comments should speak for themself. If they're spot on and will help you make the manuscript better, great. If they don't, then don't take them. I don't think you can fault an agent for offering editorial suggestions… it's the writer's task to sort and evaluate such comments, and apply where needed. It's up to the writer not to take bad advice.