Categories
Uncategorized

Marshall Brown on academic publishing

On Thursday, Nov. 19, 2020 the Eighteenth- and Nineteenth-Century Graduate Research Cluster hosted a panel on academic publishing. Marshall Brown, one of our panelists, who has decades of experience on the editing side of publishing as well as extensive publications of his own, was kind enough to write up his responses to the questions. Here they are:

• Knowing that the publishing process comes with a certain amount of rejection, how do you manage your expectations for your article submissions? Do you have a process for handling being rejected—or receiving a particularly nasty reader’s report?

——————-Journal readers do it as volunteer work, pressed for time, not always with the right kind of expertise, and as fallible as the rest of us.  A bad report can sometimes be hostile, but mostly it’s just bad luck or inexperience on the reader’s or editor’s part.  If the comments don’t make sense or there aren’t any comments, thank the editor (if you can bear it), and send it elsewhere.  If it happens three times, take a deep breath, do more reading, and rethink it.  I had an essay rejected three times two years ago and followed my own advice. 

The editor is a person.  So is/are the reader/s.  If you have been misunderstood, occasionally you can explain that to the editor and ask for a second chance.  Or (if it seems compatible with the report) ask if the editor would be willing to consider a rewrite, explaining how you would do it.  That has sometimes worked at MLQ.

What is the etiquette for getting feedback, especially from one’s professors, on drafts of articles?

——————–No problem from the journal’s perspective.  And, as Jesse said at the event, your faculty mentors are among your friends.  Of course we ask our friends for input all the time.  Others above us have done it for us, many times, and we return the favor down (as well as sideways and up).  I had 22 letters in my tenure file; I have never forgotten that.

• I submitted an article. How long should I wait before I send a follow-up email?

——————-I suggest 2 months, unless the journal website says something different.  “Could you let me know the status of my submission?”  Sending an inquiry is not pestering.  Sometimes it helps.  Claire said 3 months.  It might depend partly on your schedule.  Journals and presses can be infernally slow.  The worst case I heard about was a colleague in my first job who had an essay turned down after 18 months.  The journal was Notes and Queries.  The essay was a 2-page note.

• They told me to revise and resubmit my article. What next?

——————–Revise and resubmit, like they say.  You have a 50% chance of acceptance.  Do read the editor’s message carefully.  Sometimes what sounds like a rejection is actually meant to be R&R.  The R&R form wording from PMLA used to begin something like this: “I am sorry to inform you that your essay has not been accepted.”  If you aren’t sure how to interpret the response, write and ask.  Do this promptly, while everything is fresh in the editor’s or reader’s mind.  You may need to use your judgment in interpreting reports.  One ubiquitous vice of reports is “a bit.”  (Jesse has been guilty of this one, but never again, once he has been publicly shamed.)  Readers don’t want to be too harsh, so they may write, “the essay is a bit too long,” when they really mean it should be cut by a third.

When you resubmit, include a detailed accounting of your revisions, including explanations where you differed from the reports, as is always your right.  Indeed, I always think it looks better if you aren’t merely subservient.  

• What are some risks/scams that graduate students should watch out for?

———————The risk that I’ve seen students fall prey to is committing an essay to an uncertain book publication idea.  The book has to be assembled, pitched to one press after another, waiting for reports at several stages.  It can take years.  These can be excellent opportunities if they are already slated for publication or if you have sufficient confidence that the collection editor will get it done, but they can also be traps for the unwary.

• How do you use conferences to support your writing and publishing process?

——————–I use them especially for initial stages of developing an idea.  I always practice delivering them out loud at home several times.  Listening to myself read is very illuminating about the flow. As I practice reading, I often find myself filling in gaps extempore.  This are places to expand as you write.  Sometimes at the session there are helpful questions, sometimes good contacts.

• Do you pay much attention to what’s trendy in academic work or do you think that’s not worth considering given potential long timelines for publishing articles?

———————You care about acceptance, not about publication.  Once it’s accepted, it goes on your CV, no matter how long the publication delay, over which you have no control.  As for trendiness; often trends are led by smart, original minds finding new opportunities.  Don’t shy away from them.  Still, over the decades, I have always felt that you’re usually best off doing what interests you the most.  I make an exception are areas that are truly on the wane.  A field where there is no demand is unpromising.  My experience does include some bad times and some difficult situations; the golden age of the humanities was over by horizon.  But the times are worse now.

• How do I choose a journal?

——————1) See if you can get any advice about whether it’s well run.  Some journals (PMLA!) can be very slow.  2) Then, choose a journal that publishes essays like yours.  If it has published essays that you cite, that’s generally a good sign.  3) If your topic is specialized, you stand a somewhat better chance of a well-informed reading from a specialized journal, such as one devoted to your author.  4) I think a CV looks more impressive if it starts with a good enough placement and moves up the line.

• When (in my education/career) should I start trying to get articles published?

——————The right kind of publication opens some doors; it can even close others.  Community colleges are not looking for publishing scholars.  If you wind up never publishing, that doesn’t make you a worse person (and vice versa), just different.  But the process is slow; if you want credentials on your CV, you need to start at least a year before you want acceptance to show up, and preferably two years.

• How much revision/polishing should I do on an article before I submit it?

——————1) As much as you can, without losing time.  If it’s going to sit for an extended period, then better on their desktop than on yours.  Do take the time to proofread very carefully and to recheck quotes.  It’ll make no difference with 90% of readers, but it will hurt you sometimes, so it’s a small amount of time well spent.  2) Do make sure that a dissertation chapter has been cut to size, has an introduction that makes it free-standing, and doesn’t refer to itself as a chapter.  If the opening sentence reads as if it’s the next step in a continuing discussion, it may get much less serious attention.  3) I have repeatedly had to spend two months doing additional primary and secondary reading after I thought an essay was ready (and following three rejections), to spruce up the framing and the annotations.  A slogan that I find often valid is that an excellent seminar paper or dissertation chapter shows you to be an expert on its topic, whereas a strong essay presents you as an expert in the field.  For instance, show that you have read widely in your author’s output, not just the work you are focusing on.  4) Do check the journal’s website for their specs, observe them, and if you’re in any way out of compliance, note that in your cover message and promise to work on it on the rebound.  Currently, I have an essay in hand that’s longer than the journal I’m thinking of asks for.  But I looked at what they’ve published, and it’s often longer than their spec, so I’ll mention that in the cover message.  5) My generic advice at MLQ is a 9,000 word limit.  If the essay is a reading of one or two texts, then really 7,500 is usually better.  6) A GOOD TITLE IS A BIG HELP.  It’s a selling point, draws readers, and can help you develop your ideas.  My essays have often begun with their titles.  You can look through the titles on my CV.  There are good ones and bad ones.  You’ll see the difference.  My worst title was The Gothic Text.  That book isn’t really unified, and I couldn’t come up with a better title.  No one reads that book.  7) I have writing advice posted at faculty.washington.edu/mbrown/writing.pdf.  It’s just one guy’s feelings, not gospel.  But it’s free, and you are welcome to poach from it.

• How does one go about writing and publishing book reviews? Do they have to be solicited?

——————–I consider unsolicited requests to review books.  I doubt that I’m alone in that.  If the book looks appropriate for the journal, I ask to see a writing sample.  I have sometimes commissioned reviews on that basis.  I like to find reasons to give early-career scholars opportunities.  I trust that most editors feel that way.  We have all been starters and know something of what it’s like.

Please don’t use “a bit,” or any comparable expression, in your review.  That’s a personal plea, not professional advice.

• Any other words of wisdom?

——————–“There is no system.  There are only people.”  See my responses to the first question and to the last before this one.

Categories
Uncategorized

Academic publishing panel (11/19 on Zoom)

Click here to view Marshall Brown’s answers to the questions posed at the panel.

Click here to view Douglas Ishii’s follow-up responses.

Join us for a faculty and grad-student panel on academic publishing on Thursday, November 19 at 4:30pm PST on Zoom.

Academic publishing can be daunting and baffling, especially to graduate students who are expected to publish but who do not know how to go about it. A panel of faculty and graduate students in English will talk about their experiences with academic publishing and answer your burning questions!

Panelists:

  • Marshall Brown
  • Jesse Oak Taylor
  • Douglas Ishii
  • Claire Barwise
  • Alex McCauley
  • Matt Poland

Zoom registration required: https://washington.zoom.us/meeting/register/tJwrduqupjIqHNWozanzGRV1yzBjlxgVWZTE

The panel will be facilitated by Laura Griffith. Please direct any questions to her: lgriff2@uw.edu.

Categories
Uncategorized

Victorian Ghost Stories reading group (10/30)

Join us on Friday, October 30 at 4pm PDT on Zoom for a Halloween reading group! We will be discussing two Victorian ghost stories:
“The Old Nurse’s Story” by Elizabeth Gaskell
“Thurnley Abbey” by Perceval Landon

Registration required: https://washington.zoom.us/meeting/register/tJ0sc-qhrTMiGdWsWL5bgwObq9V6M4kxtxss

Questions? Contact Laura Griffith at lgriff2@uw.edu

Benjamin West, The witch of Endor conjures up the ghost of Samuel


Categories
Uncategorized

Anti-racism & Victorian Studies (9/24 on Zoom)

Join us on Thursday, Sept. 24 at 4pm on Zoom for a discussion about anti-racism anchored by essays from the forthcoming Victorian Studies special issue, Critical Race Theory and the Present of Victorian Studies (ed. Ronjaunee Chatterjee, Alicia Mireles Christoff, Amy R. Wong). Read a version of the editors’ introduction that has already generated lots of discussion in the LA Review of Books.

Contacts:

  • RSVP: Laura Griffith (lgriff2 at uw dot edu) to receive the Zoom meeting link
  • Readings: Matt Poland (mjpoland at uw dot edu) for access to pdfs of the readings.

Readings:

Several authors included in the special issue have generously shared advance copies of their essays with us. Thank you to them!!

  • Zarena Aslami, “Buffer Zones: Notes on Afghanistan, Race, and Empire”
  • Ryan D. Fong, “The Stories Outside the African Farm: Indigeneity, Orality, and Unsettling the Victorian”
  • Jane Hu, “Orientalism, Redux”
  • Olivia Loksing Moy, “Reading in the Aftermath: An Asian American Jane Eyre
  • Joseph M. Pierce and Manu Samriti Chander, “Cousin Theory: Brown Kinship and the Nineteenth-Century Domestic Novel”

As always, read as much or as little as you can!

Please do not distribute or cite the readings without permission from the author.

Categories
Uncategorized

Quarterly Reading Group: Darwin, Mathilde Blind, & Victorian respectability (2/20)

This quarter, our reading group will meet on Thursday, Feb. 20 at 3:30pm in the Simpson Center seminar room (CMU 202). We will focus on questions of respectability arising from Charles Darwin’s work, especially The Descent of Man, which details his theory of sexual selection, and how they manifested in literature and culture. As always, our discussion will be informal and convivial: please read as much or as little as you can of these (pretty short) readings and join us for a chat and a snack.

Our readings will be:

  • Excerpt from Darwin, The Descent of Man (1871)
  • Mathilde Blind, The Ascent of Man (1889) (Prelude and parts I-IV only)
  • Gowan Dawson, excerpt from Darwin, Literature, and Victorian Respectability (2010)

Please email Matt Poland to RSVP and he’ll trade you PDFs of the readings.

Categories
Uncategorized

Devin Garofalo on nebulae and formal abstraction (1/8)

Our first talk of the new year will be presented by Dr. Devin Garofalo, who joins us from University of North Texas. A scholar of nineteenth-century poetics and environmental humanities, Devin will be sharing a talk entitled, “‘What’s a world, more or less?’: Nebular Planetarity and Formal Abstraction in Victorian Skies.” The talk will take place on Wednesday, January 8 at 3pm in Denny 359 (the Germanics Dept. seminar room). Please also join us afterwards for happy hour with the speaker at the College Inn Pub from 4:30.

Devin writes:

In “System of the Heavens” (1846), Thomas De Quincey wonders: “What’s a nebula, what’s a world, more or less?” De Quincey’s contemporaries were some of the first to identify nebulae for what they are: clouds of interstellar dust and gas, many of which consolidate over slow time into planetary systems. Of particular interest to thinkers from John Herschel to Elizabeth Barrett Browning are nebular forms, which “sho[w] how difficult it is to assign correctly the figure of an object which has no outline, but shades away insensibly on all sides.”

In their attempts to map nebulae and thereby resolve formal abstraction, Victorian astronomers resorted to figurative modes of representation. But figures, like eyes and telescopes, are prone to failure. This talk takes seriously the inadvertent work of analogical failure. It does so to explore how such failure might make visible an Earth which disfigures the liberal subject and thereby unsettles the colonial “we” of the Anthropocene; which, in Elizabeth Povinelli’s terms, “turn[s] away from certain forms of existence” and “withdraw[s]” from normative ways of knowing; which does not passively await figuration but is a co-conspirator in the project of representing our Victorian—and increasingly no-analog—present.

Categories
Uncategorized

Quarterly Reading Group: Casual racism in Victorian literature (12/5)

In the spirit of end-of-quarter conviviality, we thought we’d combine a reading group discussion with happy hour. To wit, please join us next at 4:30 next Thursday, 12/5, at the College Inn Pub, where we will discuss Carolyn Betensky’s new essay, “Casual Racism in Victorian Literature” (Victorian Literature & Culture 47.2, Winter 2019). Victorian-focused certainly, but with much to interest colleagues working in other national or linguistic contexts. By way of tantalization, here is an excerpt:


The first time a casually racist reference crops up in the Victorian texts I teach, I tell my students that the presence of slurs and stereotypes in Victorian literature reflects the prevalence of racism in Victorian society. I give them some historical context for the racism whenever possible and smile stoically. Yes, I say, that expression in the novel I’ve made you purchase and that I’m encouraging you to find fascinating is indeed racist. Let’s talk about how racist it is and why! The second time an explicitly racist reference crops up, we refer to the previous conversation. The third time it does, we look meaningfully at each other and shake our heads. The fourth time it does, we don’t even mention it. We learn, like the Victorians, to take it for granted.


Please email Matt Poland to RSVP and I’ll trade you a PDF of the essay. If you download the essay yourself, RSVP to me anyway so we know how big a table to get.
We hope you’ll join us for a chat, a drink, or some pub nachos — preferably all three.  

Categories
Uncategorized

UW 18/19 Happy Hour at VISAWUS 2019

The UW Eighteenth/Nineteenth Century Graduate Research Cluster will be hosting a happy hour to welcome VISAWUS to Seattle on Wednesday, 11/6 at 5pm at Altstadt in Pioneer Square. Here’s the address:


Altstadt Bierhalle & Brathaus

209 1st Ave S, Seattle, WA 98104


This is a 5 minute walk from the conference hotel (Marriott Courtyard Seattle Downtown/Pioneer Square). We hope this will be a chance for Seattle area Victorianists and folks who have arrived from out of town to get together and mingle before the conference kicks off. We will provide some appetizers and a few pitchers of bier!

Looking forward to seeing you there.

Categories
Uncategorized

Katherine Anderson on angry white men (10/24)

Please join the Eighteenth/Nineteenth Century Graduate Research Cluster at 4:30pm on Thursday, October 24 in Allen Library Research Commons Seminar Room Red C for a presentation by Dr. Katherine Anderson (English, Western Washington University) entitled “Angry White Men: Torture and Settler Sovereignty in Colonial Fictions of South Africa and the Pacific.”

Reception to follow in the Petersen Room (Allen Library 485).

Katherine writes:

When “The Methodical Mr. Burr of Majuru” (1895) discovers his wife on the verge of committing adultery, he acts swiftly. Mr. Burr, a fictional British trader in the Marshall Islands, follows his indigenous wife to her assignation and cuts off the head of her lover with one hand while holding her in place with the other. He then forces his wife to carry the head into town and stand on display with it, while singing the song her lover used to woo her. Ned Burr’s deliberate use of spectacular cruelty seemingly situates him far outside the bounds of a liberal British government, an anachronistic loner whose grasp at sovereignty stands in stark contrast to the humanitarian bureaucracy of a modern civilization. Yet he is not alone. Late-Victorian colonial fictions by authors such as Louis Becke (Mr. Burr’s creator), Robert Louis Stevenson, and Bertram Mitford often depict white settlers asserting their absolute sovereignty through the torture of indigenous subjectsThis paper argues that in implementing torture to quell rebellion, citizens of empire actually appropriate the state-of-emergency rhetorics originally used to justify the British state’s torture of citizen-subjects in reaction to perceived social crises. In both cases, whether perpetrated by the state or by the individual outside the law, torture serves as a means of justifiable terrorism meant to reassert British sovereign authority. By transferring the state’s rhetorics of sovereignty, emergency, and sanctioned violence onto individual citizens within the Empire, these fictions undermined state terrorism and made significant contributions to evolving definitions of citizenship and human rights at the close of the nineteenth century. 

Categories
Uncategorized

Quarterly reading group: Frankenstein (11/8)

To tie in with the Frankenreads festivities on 10/27 (details below), this 
quarter our reading group will be discussing (you guessed it) Frankenstein. We will meet on Thursday, Nov. 8 at 3:30 in Communications 218D. Note the location change from the last few meetings, though the room is still accessible through the main Simpson Center entrance.

Specifically, we will be reading the 1818 version of the novel. If you 
don’t have a copy or have a later version, the Frankenreads organization 
has provided a free PDF of Susan Wolfson’s 2007 edition: 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/wmjs37dupwudyju/1818FrankensteinTxt.pdf?dl=0

Let me know if you have trouble accessing the PDF, which is also available 
here. There is also a free Librivox audiobook available here.

As always, read as much as you have time for, and join us for free snacks 
and coffee as well as a chat about the book.