I received the second edit from the editor I've been working with on "The Wood and the Brass". He is really fast.

He has made a few edits that has caused me to contemplate some writerly issues.

One thing he has reworked is some of my style. He also has changed what is a fairly important plot point, in my mind.

Now, this isn't that big of a deal. I think that we have different ideas about what the story is about, and that's okay. He's the editor and he knows what he's trying to do with his anthology.

But it's got me wondering, for the future. When a writer and an editor disagree on things like style and plot, at what point (especially a new writer, since I would expect an established one might actually carry some weight) does the writer dig in their heels and stand by their work? At what point do they trust the editor and follow the editor's advice? Is the "integrity" of the work more important, or is the publication credit and beer money, or dinner money, or utility money for the month...

I think the answers here are fairly personal and depend on the circumstances, but still --

What do you think?