> But I guess my real point is, why is editing generally considered good for book authors but bad for movie directors? It's a fun question to ponder.

Interesting post. Like you, I've generally considered editors for books to be good things, but then again I've always gotten the impression they work more *with* the author rather than after him. But I'm not in a position to know this.

I wonder if this ties in with a point I made at the end of my previous post, namely that what sells a good book is a good story with good characters, and what used to sell a movie is a good story with good characters, but what sells a movie today is explosions and women and nothing too mentally challenging. But authors and directors are still (or should be) interested in delivering a good story with good characters. The point being, authors and book editors have more of their goals in common with each other than do studio editors and directors.