A really common piece of advice given to scholars when talking about their research (whether in a book proposal or other context) is to answer the "so what?" question. I kind of hate that formulation and here's why:
So many of the scholars I work with are writing abt the history & experiences of real people. Often they're people from communities that have been marginalized bc of racism, nationalism, etc. To read that scholar's book proposal and say "so what?" would be, IMO, deeply insulting
I try to force myself to find another way to get at the issue. It's not "so what?" because of course the information this scholar has uncovered and synthesized is important and matters to them and to a lot of other people too.
What I might really be trying to ask is "who is this important to and can you tell me *why* it's important to them?" Or, "how could this knowledge you've generated make a difference to the people you're writing for?"
I don't ever want my questions to imply that the work isn't important or won't make a difference. I just need the scholar to help me—a person who doesn't know what this scholar knows— understand what is really driving this work and why they think it needs to exist in the world
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Waiting on peer reviews might be the most torturous part of publishing a scholarly book. Here are a few things you should know about them to prepare yourself if you’re waiting for yours to come in right now:
Your editor may or may not frame the reviews for you. Sometimes they do, sometimes they just send them. If at all possible, try to have a phone convo with your ed abt the reviews so you can get real talk on what they think of them and what they think is most impt to address
Remember that the reviewers don’t have the final say on anything. They make recommendations, not decisions. Your response—explaining how you’ll address criticisms if there are any—goes a long way in the publication decision (which, again, is not made by the reviewers)
The title “Editor” has become central to my professional identity over the past several years but I recently took it out of my bio on here bc I think I’m in a bit of an existential shift and focusing on other ways to support academic/scholarly authors, at least for right now
I think I’ll write a newsletter soon on the differences between editing, consulting, and coaching, and what you as an author might be looking for that would lead you to one of those types of helpers
I still do editing for many of my clients. But I think I want new people to understand that I can help in other ways. My old friends on here can still call me an editor ☺️
I know people (rightly) have other things on their mind at the moment, but if you’d like to hold space for writing your scholarly book proposal this summer, my Book Proposal Accelerator will run from June 4 to July 22. Enrollment opens May 1 at courses.manuscriptworks.com
How to choose a publisher when you think your book could fit at multiple places?
One thing to think abt is the audiences you’re most keen to reach. Which press has the best reputation among the people you *most* want to read your book?
The people you care most about reaching might be people in your home field or subfield. For ex, if you’re going up for tenure & need to “make an impact” in the field of your home dept, you might decide to pick the press that looks best to yr senior colleagues. But—
Maybe you’ve written an interdisciplinary book and you’re already pretty well connected & visible in one of the fields yr intervening in. In that case maybe go for a press that has the visibility & marketing channels in the field you’re less known in but want to be respected in
It's totally normal for academic book writers to struggle w/ organizing their material into chapters that make sense and propel readers thru the book. It's tricky when yr trying to revise a diss & maybe equally tricky when yr on a 2nd book w/o a pre-existing structure in place
What isn't super compelling, structurally, is dividing the book up into 4-5 case studies & just showing how yr main argument or concept plays out in each case. Why wd a reader spend sustained time w/ yr bk if they can get the gist from just 1 chapter? Here's how to do it better:
The 4-5 case studies or research sites/objects isn't the problem. It's that each successive one should show the reader something new, something that enhances or complicates the concept or thesis introduced in the first chapter
This week’s newsletter covered some of the salient differences between scholarly publishers & trade publishers
Quick answer comes down to audiences & sales channels. Trade presses sign books they think will sell widely via retail. Schol presses less likely to stress mass appeal
There are scholarly presses that are not-for-profit (e.g. university presses) and scholarly presses that are “commercial” or for-profit.
Commercial is not synonymous with “trade”
Trade = sold to retailers at a deep discount in hopes of getting books placed on shelves and in front of a broad audience of readers.
Not-for-profit presses may decide to market some books as trade titles, if they see sales potential