What Do Fiction Developmental Editors Disagree About?
- Andrew Hodges
- Jan 12
- 7 min read
Updated: Nov 9
The marketplace for editorial services can be really confusing, especially to new authors. There’s a lot of bad writing and editing advice out there.
Book editors having different views on topics like prologues, chapter titles, acceptable dialogue tags, and adverb use.
But fiction developmental editing has a substantial subjective component, too.
Proofreaders will agree on whether a typo needs to be corrected, but who’s to say your dual timeline novel should be completely rewritten with a single timeline, or whether your four points of view should be revised down to two?
If you send the same novel to three decent developmental editors, you’ll receive three different edits. Even if those editors follow the same underlying principles, what they notice, and the suggestions they make, will be different.
Jaime Dill of Polish and Pitch sums up developmental editing’s subjective quality as follows:
We each go on a different journey for education and training, and even if we have a lot of those details in common, there are still variations of technique between genres, age ranges, and publishing avenues. Therefore, I think when there seems to be a disagreement, it's because there's a difference in experience and goal. Since developmental work is far more subjective than following a style guide for copy editing, there's room for unique arguments influenced by unique circumstances.
That said, some topics do pop up every now and again because fiction developmental editors take different approaches that will consistently lead to objectively different results. In this blog post, several experienced fiction developmental editors share their thoughts.
Fiction developmental editors sometimes disagree about ...
How difficult multi-POV novels are to pull off
Most developmental editors will agree that multi-POV novels are more difficult to pull off, and, as Megan Harris puts it, “less is more when it comes to point of view.” But editors differ in the extent to which they believe fewer POVs makes for a better story.
Multi-POV novels are especially common in fantasy and science fiction because they allow the writer to showcase different parts of the world the author has created. I went to the Young Adult Literature Convention in November 2024 and a Big Five editor there made that precise argument for using multiple POVs.
But as Megan says, “Too many points of view, especially if they do not tie into the story well or seem tangential, can muddy the waters and make it difficult for readers to connect with the story or even understand who is the main character or characters to focus on when reading.”
Genre also plays a role. Megan adds, “Many see romance as a genre where fewer is better, but some subsets of romance such as Why Choose romance benefit from multiple points of view. Similarly, fantasy can benefit from sharing multiple characters’ viewpoints if done in a strategic way that benefits the plot overall.”
I'm a bit more hardline here: I believe that multi-POV novels with more than three POVs almost always benefit from reducing the number of POVs.
Their popularity is likely due to the influence of TV and film on novels. When you have all those visual cues, it’s much easier to move between perspectives. But in fiction, when you introduce a new POV, you are not just putting the “camera” on another person. In fiction, you’re climbing inside their perspective and introducing a new story thread. The reader needs to care about that character, to get attached to them, to decide whether they like following them or not. I’d go so far as to say multiple POV novels are NOT a good idea for a first book.
Write that first novel from one POV and save multiple POVs for later novels. Better to tackle the nursery ski slope before the main one.
Developmental editors critical of using many POVs are not against having more than one POV. There are great reasons to do that – for instance, if one viewpoint character is withholding information from another.
And it can work very nicely in romance, including multi first person!
But getting trigger happy about introducing new viewpoint characters – especially characters whose viewpoint is just included for a single chapter – is in my opinion a really bad idea and something I see a lot of in the self-publishing and new author space. I’m with the Mythcreants team on this one, but I do believe strong storytellers can get away with it.
(Side-note: similar arguments about pulling off a villain POV apply, but that would be another blog post.)
How prescriptive to be about story structure
This point says something about your editor’s politics! Some editors believe that story structure is universal. This thesis is stated arrogantly in Save the Cat!
Prescriptive approaches are common at the excessively commercial, grifter end of the market. The reason is that it is easier to confidently sell a framework or prescriptive model than to tell an author “it depends.” I’ve noticed some authors in the indie fiction space following such models, and that’s probably because if the goal is to write quickly and produce a product that existing readers will relate to quickly, then being more prescriptive can help. I'm talking here about those indie authors who write several books a year and have a specific audience with fixed expectations, so a more prescriptive approach can work for them.
Prescriptive fiction developmental editors tell authors certain things need to happen a certain percentage into their genre fiction novel (often inspired by Save the Cat!). This is a step too far in my opinion. Sure, models such as Save the Cat! And the heroine’s journey can help genre fiction authors struggling with story structure. And if the inciting incident happens on page 250, there’s a problem. But forcing a story into a prescriptive model takes away some of the creativity necessary for it to develop organically, just like social media algorithms lead users to write similar-sounding posts.
At the other end of the spectrum, some editors will tell authors any story structure is valid and you should just follow your intuition. This approach, more popular in literary fiction, is strongly influenced by romanticism’s individualism. But to find readers, the story structure needs to be satisfying in genre fiction at least, so this advice is unlikely to lead to commercial success (if that’s the author’s goal).
What counts as fast or slow pacing
Developmental editors have different views on what counts as slow or fast pacing in a novel. This point relates most closely to Jaime’s point about each editor bringing different experiences and background to their edit. Here’s what Megan Harris has to say:
Like points of view, pacing is a subjective discussion point based on genre and execution. Thrillers, horror, and some types of romance such as mafia romance can benefit from a faster paced story, but this convention can be a point of disagreement based on the context and plot development. Developmental editors may see the pacing as “fine” to slow down at some points in a story, especially if the book is one in a series. However, another editor looking at the same chapters may have an opposing point of view and concerns that slowing the pace suddenly may lull the reader into boredom, leading them to put the book down or leave a negative review.
While there is no wrong way to recommend what changes, if any, should be made when it comes to pacing, developmental editors need to be careful in their recommendations to ensure the integrity of the plot is at the forefront of their review.
The relative importance of the writing context
Like point two, this relates to your editor’s politics. The gist is that some editors talk about story as if it’s a set of ideas and structures happening in a vacuum; others interpret story structure as relating deeply to writing context. (If you have an academic background, think structuralism versus poststructuralism.)
What this means in practice is that some editors will focus solely on the text and make judgements based on craft principles. The main bit of context they bring in will the market: tropes that are popular, whether writing in omniscient makes market sense in that genre, etc.
This can also relate to editor preferences, too. Some editors prefer to receive a text, write their report, and hand it back. Others take a more coachlike approach to developmental editing, with very detailed onboarding questionnaires and information-gathering calls.
They will chat with authors about their vision, publishing goals, etc., and adapt their feedback to this context. My sense is that developmental editors coming out of in house publishing are more likely to focus solely on the text for two reasons. First, they’ve adopted and internalized a lot of the traditional publishing conventions, and their feedback will be more geared toward that space. Second, they’ll have developed a gatekeeper mindset through working in house, which is very different to a freelance service provider mindset.
Flashbacks and backstory
To finish, Sara Sudol of WriteWay Edits has a few words to say about flashbacks and backstory, too:
Some editors insist these elements interrupt forward momentum and pull readers out of the fictive dream. I believe that, when done well, they enhance the story. It can be tricky to get that right sometimes: transitions are key, as is making sure not to overwhelm readers with too much information. In the end, I think style and preference are major factors, which is why it’s so important for authors to find an editor who understands their style.
I’ve noticed different views on this regarding YA versus adult fiction. Some YA editors argue that if doing backstory, better to do it in a big chunk with a clear transition (the first half of a chapter, for example). The reasoning is that just inserting a sentence or two of a memory or a mini-flashback might confuse younger readers.
This takes us full circle back to Jaime’s point: we all have different experiences – in genres, audiences, parts of the publishing world, etc. And that’s what makes our work and approach unique.
This underscores the importance of authors taking their time when choosing a developmental editor. They should look for someone who “gets” their text, who has all the necessary training and qualifications, and who have the right values and qualities to do a good job.
Thanks again to the guest editors featured on this blog post!
You can check out their services here:
Polish and Pitch – Jaime Dill
Write Way Edits – Sara Sudol
Have you ever disagreed strongly with suggestions your fiction developmental editor has made? What’s your take on the points mentioned above? Let me know in the comments.
Comments