Login
In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:
I just published my first book! I would very much appreciate advice on what authors can and should do to publicize a new book. I know that my publisher will do some marketing on their end (send the book to journals for review, etc.) but is there anything more I can do on my end to increase the readership?
Good question! Aside from sharing it on social media, ensuring that journals get sent copies for book reviews, and trying to get journal symposia and the like, I'm not sure.
Do any readers have any helpful tips?
In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:
How do folks know when they have a project that's best suited for a book format, and not, say, a series of articles? And is it risky to write a book before tenure?
Fair questions, and I'm curious to hear what readers think!
I suspect that how risky it is to write a book before tenure depends a lot on the kind of institution one is at, as different departments and universities can have very different tenure standards. At a university like mine, it is not risky at all; all things being equal, publishing a book is a clear benefit. But, at R1's where one is expected publish X number of articles in top journals for tenure? That might be another story. And obviously, how helpful a book is for tenure at such an institution may depend greatly on the prestige of the publisher.
In terms of how to determine whether a project is better-suited for a book or series of articles, I don't know if there's any good formula for deciding. However, as an author of two books, my main test has been how 'self-contained' each chapter/paper is. For example, in my first book, the first chapter defends a particular method for doing moral philosophy, and the rest of the book then aims to show how fruitful that method is. So, in part, the reader is asked to judge the method itself (Chapter 1) in virtue of the latter 7 chapters--and, in turn, the plausibility of the argument in each individual latter chapter depends in part on the other chapters. Broadly the same is true of my second book, which tells a single coherent story. Given that (as their author) I wanted readers to consider each book's chapters as an integrated whole, and given that publishing them as a series of journal articles would have spread them out in different places (and probably taken many more years to do), it seemed to me to better advance my goals as their author to publish them as a book.
But these are just my thoughts. What are yours?
In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:
I have been approached by an editor who works for an academic book publisher (somewhere in the middle of ranked publishers from the blog of the guy who ranks everything) who wants to meet me at an upcoming conference we are both attending and discuss publishing the project I am working on (not dissertation project).
I was wondering two things:
1) What should I be asking/getting to know about this publisher in this meeting? I'm completely new to this process and have no clue what to even be asking this editor?
2) What are people's thoughts on middle of the road publishers? I imagine they would help my chances at a permanent job, am I wrong in that assumption?
I think this should be ok in my situation since I would like to work at a SLAC, but I'd love to know what others think?
Another reader submitted the following reply:
It sounds like you do not have a permanent position - if that is the case I think it is a bad idea to try to publish a book. I have published 3 monographs, and edited 2 volumes (and finishing a 3rd). These are long term projects that are quite unpredictable. My monographs and one of the volumes is with one of the top 2 publishers. It is unrealistic to try to complete a monograph while you are still actively on the job market. I completed my first ONLY with the help of a sabbatical - and it came out in print three years later. If you need a permanent position, then you need well placed articles in highly ranked journals.
I disagree, based on my experience both as a former job candidate and many-time search committee member at a SLAC.
First, as a job-candidate, my number of interviews and flyouts at SLACs skyrocketed my last two years on the market after I had a book under contract with Palgrave MacMillan (a mid-ranked publisher in the polls the OP refers to). Although there were other parts of my CV that had improved as well, it certainly seems like having the book under contract made a significant difference. Second, as a search committee member, it makes sense to me why. My sense is that one of the most difficult challenges that any job candidate faces is "standing out from the crowd." Something like 90+% of applicants for a job have a good enough publishing record at journals, good teaching reviews, pretty good dossier materials, etc. How is one supposed to choose? Well, if someone has a book coming out, that will stand out. Why? Because very few candidates do. It can also be attractive in that tenure and promotion committees at SLACs are likely to have people from other departments where books are the norm, not to mention administrators who books will look good to as well.
I do think there is some risk to pursuing a book while on the market. It's a ton of work, there's no guarantee the book will be accepted in the end, it could detract from other things (e.g. publishing in journals, teaching, etc.), and it may be difficult to do your very best work on it given all of the things you are balancing (and your time and resources, or lack thereof). Still, I think it can be a risk worth taking. But I'm curious to hear what other people, particularly those who have gotten books under contract or published them while on the market.
Finally, to address the OP's questions, I think mid-ranked publishers are just fine if you're looking for a job at a SLAC, and the main things you should figure out before meeting with a publisher is what kinds of books they publish and what their book proposal process is like (many publishers have specific proposal guidelines that you can download). The most important thing to do before meeting with a publisher, I think, is having a good pitch for a book project. They are going to ask you "what you're working on", but what they really mean by this is, "Pitch me a promising sounding book project." So, have that going in--and, if you're really committed to it, you might even sketch out something like a first draft of a book proposal (i.e. what each chapter will do). My sense is that the more you sound like you have a plan for the book (as opposed to merely a vague sense of what the book will be on), the more likely you will be to get them to invite you to submit a full proposal.
But these are just my thoughts. What are yours?
John Warren and his students (MPS in Publishing, George Washington University) share perspectives on attending Digital Book World 2023 and the trends and highlights relevant for scholarly publishers.
The post Guest Post — Entering a New Age of Digital Publishing: Dispatch from Digital Book World 2023 appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.
In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:
Do any readers have an inside scoop on how open access monograph publishing works? Every once in a while, a book from a university press like OUP is published Open Access. Nick Shea's (2018) Representation in Cognitive Science is one example. I assume that in such cases, the author gets a grant from somewhere to pay the press a fee to make the book open access. How much are such fees? And are there particular places to go looking for that kind of funding? I know there are also recent efforts to create all-OA monograph publishing venues (in philosophy of science, there's the new BSPS Open). What other such ventures are out there?
Good questions. I seem to recall hearing that in some places (particular parts of Europe?), people are expected (required?) to publish their research open-access. Is this right? I'm not entire sure how much it costs to publish an academic book open-access (though I seem to recall it definitely being on the order of several thousand dollars), but my sense is that people who publish open-access stuff tend to have dedicated research budgets that they can use to pay for it. Am I right about this? And what about all-OA monograph publishing venues? Here, I know very little.
It would be great to hear from readers who are in the know. Anyone have the inside scoop on this stuff? It would be great to hear some details!
FreshRSS 