I think there's a tendency among readers of books to underestimate the value of a good editor. I know for many years I had no idea that books even needed to be edited. And then for a while being reviled at the thought that someone might dare to touch my words. 

But now I realize the value of having someone review your work and saying, "hey, that thing you're obviously in love with, it's okay to be in love with it, but no one else is really going to care that much, so cut it short, okay?" or "what the hell that doesn't make any sense?" or "TOOT TOOT hello I am the QE2 and I am going TOOT TOOT through your plot holes."

I'd like to think that as one's experience as an artistic creator progresses, one is able to look at one's own work with more objectivity and to easily accept the input of others. But then I'd also like to think that creating art should be about making what I want, not what anyone else wants, so fuck objectivity. Which put together have that great push/pull dynamic of any great chaotic system.

In conclusion, yay art and yay collaborators.

MORE
8/27 '14 4 Comments
I've acted as an editor for my partners Will & Gloria. I will never do it again for Will; it is too mutually adversarial. Gloria accepts my feedback and is nice about it :) More recently, I've started working with the editor in my studio, Alice Wilkes, who I've invited to this site. It's definitely easier to be the editor than the edited! I'm trying to learn grace and humility.
I find it takes two different mindsets to create vs. to edit. So like when I'm doing photography I take a bunch of photos and am very careful about making them, but don't spend a lot of time judging because I'm in the zone. But the next day I put on that critical hat and then can pick and choose.
It is interesting that we expect editors for written works but in film we're supposed to accept the auteur theory.
But film is almost impossible to do alone, so it's a natural for collaboration. Or am I missing your point?