How to find an academic publisher for your first book
Tenured Radical offers some great advice about approaching editors at academic presses:
I had this conversation with one of my favorite untenured colleagues the other day, and at the end of it, s/he said: "Everyone tells you how important it is to get your book out before tenure, but no one has ever given me advice on how to find a publisher before." Shocking, but true. And this is at Zenith, where people publish a fair amount. ...
Her list is very helpful. Check it out.
To that list I would add the following:
• Do not be shy about asking senior colleagues you admire and trust to introduce you and your idea to her editors (or editors she knows and who want someday to publish her). Editors trust the judgement of respected people in the field. They know their blurbs help sales. And editors like to do favor for authors they would like to publish.
• Understand that academic presses are businesses, but not very efficient ones. Even if you convince an editor that your work is brilliant and important, the editor must convince her marketing people and board of directors that the book has a clear and definable market.
• Therefore, never claim in your proposal or cover letter that your market/audience is a "general readership." There is no such thing. Delineate your field, the courses in which your book might appear (very important), and professional or interest groups beyond the academy that might take a liking to your work. Be realistic.
• If you are writing regionally, publish regionally -- i.e. if you have written about Western Native American history, the first places you should go are the University of Oklahoma Press and the University of Nebraska Press.
• Expect rejection. Everyone knows there are too many books chasing too few buyers and the price of production only justifies books that can sell more than 5,000 copies. Of course, too much rejection can mean career death for an academic. But them's the breaks.
• Meet editors at conferences. They love to hear quick, clean, effective pitches from authors who are excited about their projects. When the editors are sitting at tables full of books, you can get a sense of whether your project would fit the trajectory of the list.
• Start early, but be patient. If you have just started a tenure track job, do not expect to have a real book in your hands by third-year review. But do plan to have a contract and many pages ready to show your department by third-year-review. Many academic books can take four years from contract to book.
• No dissertation is ready to be a book. If you are rewriting your diss for publication, wipe your committee from your mind. Write for your colleagues and students instead.
• Course assignments matter. That's how academic presses justify many of their titles. Tailor the writing and length to course-usable standards.
• Write short. Most academic publishers want their books (especiallly first books) to be shorter than 250 pages when published. More than 250 pages, the price of the book goes up.
• Talk to librarians early and often. They know which books are likely to get picked up by their peers. They know which presses do good work.
• Do not expect reviews beyond the scholarly journals. Do not expect scholarly journal review within a year of publication.
• Double dip. Get as much of your work out in journal form as possible. That way, if something goes wrong on the way to book publication, you can demonstrate that your work has passed muster.
• Read your publishing contract carefully. Cross out the "options clause" pledging your next book to the press. Be a free agent.
Oh, one more:
• A first -book author should not aim for the academic press pantheon (Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, U of Chicago, California, Yale, etc.). These presses carry huge lists every season and do not treat books by first authors with care or interest. Instead, aim for the smaller university pressses that treat their authors with care and dignity and are deeply appreciative or honored to have those books (Rutgers, NYU, Minnesota, Columbia, Stanford, Oklahoma, Georgia, North Carolina, Penn State, UMass, etc.). A good editor is far more important to a young scholar than the brand name of the publisher. A quality book from a smaller press can have a much bigger effect on the field than a sloppy book remaindered by a big press. If your first book is a success, then consider Oxford.
There is much more. Please post specific questions in the comments.
Comments
Thanks for posting this!
Posted by: michaelzimmer
|
May 26, 2007 06:51 PM
Very interesting post. I especially liked your advice to "wipe your committee from your mind. Write for your colleagues and students instead." It seems to me that a lot of people underestimate the importance of the genre shift that is at hand when going from diss to book.
As I am someone who is still in the approach to his dissertation, I am also noticing that a lot of my colleagues who are currently in the thick of dissertation-writing seem to error on the side of trying to make their dissertation into "everything." That is, in their anticipation that this project will become the basis for their future first-book project, they try to write the dissertation is if is their book. And I've seen more than one project get bogged down the attempt to write the diss as if it were the book. . . . And even when they "make it through," they seem to sometimes be so sick of the project that the process of transitioning it into a book gets foreshortened, and the final book is less thought-through than it otherwise might have been. But maybe this is just particular to what I'm seeing.
Posted by: groo
|
May 27, 2007 02:33 PM
Siva, this is EXCELLENT advice, much of which I gave to young scholars during my years as a university press editor.
One quibble: it's an overstatement to say that "the price of production only justifies books that can sell more than 5,000 copies." Very few university press books sell that well, even those published by the "pantheon." Expecting rejection is probably a good idea, but your readers should also recognize that the market for scholarly books is limited. Every editor you know could give you a list of the excellent, award-winning titles they acquired that sold fewer than 2000 copies. It's not that the publishers don't know what they're doing -- too many of them report similar sales levels for comparable titles. It's that the number of people and institutions willing to *buy* books (as opposed to reading and citing them) is pretty small.
Posted by: Monica McCormick
|
May 29, 2007 03:10 PM