Read on Twitter
🧵 For anyone working on a book, I thought I would pass along the questions I provided reviewers for a manuscript workshop. Some might be self-evident, but they generated a lot of constructive feedback, and several were not on my mind when I began writing in graduate school.
On structure: How does the manuscript read as a book? What do you make of the narrative arc? Do the chapters logically build upon one another? Would you make any changes to the order of them? Is the use of themes, as an organizing principle, successful?
On writing style: What are your thoughts on the authorial voice? Is it accessible? Authoritative? Engaging? Is there too much signposting or summarizing? Upon completing a chapter, did you wish to keep reading? What was the strongest chapter and why?
On readership: Who is the book’s audience? Would the manuscript be of interest to students? Scholars? General readers? In what courses could you see it assigned? Is the manuscript well positioned in relation to broader fields of study? Does it traverse disciplinary boundaries?
On contributions: What are the manuscript’s main interventions? Are they original? Compelling? Coherent? Timely? What is the central argument? Is it sustained throughout the study? After turning the final page, what are your takeaways?
On revisions and next steps: What do you believe are the most pressing changes to be made to the manuscript before submitting it to a publisher? What does the story stand to gain from these changes? To where would you submit this book project for publication? Why there?
Wishing all of you the best of luck with your books-to-be. Happy writing! #WritingCommmunity #AcademicTwitter 📚
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
