You can edit art as much as you can make modifications to anything you have. You can buy a guitar and change it to be what you want it to be if that's what you want. You can modify your kitchen sink if you want. You can buy a book and write another version for yourself if you want. You can buy a house and make changes to the architecture if you want.
Art is not some golden calf to be worshipped. Art is just art. You either get entertained by examining it or you don't. And if you don't, why not change it into something else if you want to do so. It's not as if the original piece is now gone
Of course you don't get to sell your version or claim this new version is the original, but for your own entertainment purposes it's ok to do whatever you want with it.
That's not what people are suggesting when they say someone should re-edit the show.
There is a difference between producing something new out of affection, and changing art you don't like. Warhol's soup cans and portraits, for example, are not at all comparable to someone re-editing Twin Peaks because it moves too slow.
Your metaphors don't work. A guitar is made to be tuned to the user's specifications. A house is meant to be customized. So is a kitchen sink. They are made to be altered.
Your book one is close, but misses the mark because someone is creating something that way. They can add anything they want and fully transform that book, making it original. This is what fan fiction does. Although the intention is questionable.
Re-editing this season, you can't film new scenes or different shots with Miguel Ferrer or Catherine Coulson or any of the actors. You can't hire Badalamenti to create new music or use Peter Deming for the cinematography. There is no creative transformation going on with that kind of fan edit. It's "I know your art better than you". It's circumventing Lynch/Frost's intention.
The only way a fan should alter Twin Peaks is creating a new piece from it. Shooting a fan film, writing fan fiction, painting a shot from the show, or even editing footage in a collage to highlight a certain aspect, these are all great things. These are all bringing new perspectives to the work. They come from a place of affection. Those are things Lynch/Frost can appreciate.
Looking at the season with dissatisfaction and deciding that you can do better is disrespectful. Do you think Lynch/Frost would look at a fan edit, made with the idea that the fan knows Twin Peaks better, as complimentary?
The best response to not liking a piece of art is using the aesthetics you like about that original piece and make something new. It's far better criticism and will be met with a better reception.
I'm not against a fan edit that wants to explore an aspect of the show. Such as one focusing solely on Cooper's perspective or the silent film version of Twin Peaks. These would be interesting ways to examine Cooper's journey or the visual nature of Twin Peaks and Lynch. But that is very different than the idea of doing better than Lynch.
And sure the original still exists, but that's not fair to the art. It's all digital now a days. We can have copies of everything, including this mythical fan edit. And without discretion someone who never saw Twin Peaks might see this first. I have absolutely seen people recommend a fan edit over the original. Someone doing that will never have had the experienece Lynch/Frost intended. Even if they go back and watch the original.
But this is all my opinion on what art is and means to me. It's not like I can stop anyone from making that fan edit. I just want to discourage it as much as possible. There's far more brilliant works waiting out there to be created.