I'll post my reply since I'm getting a Doctorate in English with Creative Writing...not that should give me or any one a license on authority in this subject matter, because, this is a matter of TASTE, not one of VALUE, or EFFECTIVENESS.
The editor (or should I say ghost writer), while talented, failed to keep VDs original voice intact in REWRITING (not editing) his prose. VD's prose while somewhat cliched and awkward is punchy, and geared for a specific audience in mind. The editor usurped the prose and cutesifying it--by using common tricks of craft, whcih ultimately make the prose sound much more pendantic and formulaic than VDs original prose.
This seems to be the general feel of the thread that rewrites are both verbose and insert the editors voice over VDs. A good editor, one that does their job, takes a very light hand in rewriting, working to bring out the orginal writers voice, not improve to some idyllic state in the editor's head; the editor should focus on clarity, awkwardness, and fix some of the more generalized description.
For instance: the rewrite of "He could only be described as old, usually followed by "bastard"" to "Some people called him 'as old as the hills' and others called him 'old as dust' and everyone called him an 'old bastard'." is an abhorrent overstep of editing protocal. Not only did the editor insert two worse cliches, but he did so in a formulaic jokey way. Yes there's a punch when we get "to everyone thought he was an old bastard" but it's only the result of tried-and-true fomula, some "this cliche" others "that cliche" everyone "this funny statement". Really a good editor would simply rewrite it as "He was best described when called an "old bastard"." Or "In short, he was an "old bastard"" Or some light touch like that, to try to preserve the voice of the original.
I think that the editor should not really change actual content, just improve the flow and coherence of the underlying work.
Indeed.
Any professional editor for a literary magazine or publisihing house, no matter how crappy the novel/story is, goes with the light touch. What your "editor" has done is "ghost write" which is akin, in my book, and some literary circles, to sacrilidge. Give me a soapbox, let me show the world how smart I am.