[ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 94, Issue 3

mail at durrelllibrarycorfu.org mail at durrelllibrarycorfu.org
Wed Feb 4 01:27:14 PST 2015


I might add to the discussion below that it is certainly true that some publishers approach conference organisers seeking an edited conference papers. The publishers with whom I am currently associated , Cambridge Scholars Publishing (not to be confused with CUP!!) do precisely this, which is how the Durrell School of Corfu came to have three volumes of its proceedings published which would otherwise most likely not have seen the light of day: 1) Creativity Madness and Civilisation (edited by myself), 2) The Literatures of War (co-edited by myself and Eve Patten) and 3) The Ionian ISlands, Aspects of their History and Culture (edited by Anthony Hirst and Patrick Sammon).
I myself have published my most recent book with them (The Disappointed Bridge: Ireland and the Post-Colonial World) and in 2017 they will also publish my next major work, 'Why we Enjoy Popular Literature: case studies in reading and viewing', which is inspired by LD's essay 'The Minor Mythologies'. My reason for publishing with CSP is the same as many other authors': the fact that many of the'major' academic publishers are deaf (or blind) to the merits of proposals unless those proposals fit in with their current editorial policy (aka fashion). Many colleagues have experienced this rejection - the book may have merit, but if it doesn't suit a publisher's (frequently changeable) editorial fashion, it's declined. 
Richard Pine
Durrell Library of Corfu
-----Original Message----- 
From: ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca [mailto:ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca]
Sent: Tuesday, February 3, 2015 03:00 PM
To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
Subject: ILDS Digest, Vol 94, Issue 3

Send ILDS mailing list submissions to	ilds at lists.uvic.caTo subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit	https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ildsor, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to	ilds-request at lists.uvic.caYou can reach the person managing the list at	ilds-owner at lists.uvic.caWhen replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specificthan "Re: Contents of ILDS digest..."Today's Topics: 1. Re: Editing (James Gifford) 2. Re: Editing (Bruce Redwine) 3. Re: Editing (James Gifford)----------------------------------------------------------------------Message: 1Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 14:42:45 -0800From: James Gifford To: ilds at lists.uvic.caSubject: Re: [ilds] EditingMessage-ID: <54CFFD65.7090903 at gmail.com>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowedHi Bruce,I can comment on this from a few perspectives.First, there are presses that largely "process manuscripts" as you say, rather than editor or nurture them, but even in that there are divisions. Some push for a large number of acquisitions and "prey" on junior scholars who may not be familiar with the process -- after a conference nowadays, there will often follow emails from publishers asking for the papers and/or a book. The same for announcements of MA thesis or PhD dissertation defenses.Edwin Mellen sued a librarian and McMaster University (which, btw, has a lovely set of Durrell mss. and tss.) when it was described as predatory. My understanding is that this suit was later dropped -- Edwin Mellen publishes more than 300 new books each year.http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/edwin-mellen-press-drops-lawsuit-against-university-librarian/42647This isn't simply a matter of cutting the expensive editorial staff. It can also reflect the market to which a press is oriented and consequently the kind of product is strives to create. Those driven exclusively to the library market tend to have higher prices and less editing since the impulse is to get on a shelf, not to be taken off that shelf again... Textbooks might have more investment, but likely not by subject matter experts at the press.That said, even inside some of the best publishers, there can often be "tiers" of service. I edit the annual "American Literature post-1900" chapter of Oxford UP's /Year's Work in English Studies/, for which we have thorough copy editing, two levels of paid editorial reading, and paid contributors. The project is professionally indexed by OUP (authors are not invited to do this themselves) and it really is a "luxury" product in today's age of academic publishing. However, I don't think it would be realistic to say all journals or books have the same level of support inside the same press.One of the reasons I went with U Alberta Press for the /Personal Modernisms/ and /From the Elephant's Back/ books is the level of editorial support and the quality of their design work (entirely aside from knowing and liking the staff at the press). They also produce books at reasonable prices, all things considered, so they're actually meant to *sell* (a rarity for today's academic publishing).My own university's press, FDU Press, which has published much Durrell materials, was through Associated University Presses and is now with Rowman & Littlefield, which means distribution and a good deal of production is external (also keeps down costs for the university but puts it a bit more toward the library market). The quality there is in-house editing and the peer-review integrity, but the internal layout and design is fairly fixed for each title.For your Wiley-Blackwell example, it's classified as a textbook, so apart from copy editing, I'd guess they left facts and dates to the translator! Worth noting, it's also a print on demand title, which is increasingly common for Wiley, Oxford, and Cambridge for their back stock (and has been the case for U California P for quite a while now).A few dozen or more books go across my desk every year for /Year's Work/ reviews, and the range of production and editorial standards is remarkable.All best,JamesOn 2015-02-02 11:27 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote:> James,>> A brief comment on the sorry state of book editing, which has some> relevance to Durrell himself, who notoriously hated to proof his own> work. (It might be interesting to explore why he felt that way.) I> know for a fact that some publishers (apparently Edwin Mellen Press is> one of them) have essentially done away with an editorial staff and> simply ?process manuscript? with little or no attention to the product.> Diboll?s book looks like a prime example of this trend. Why? It> saves money by cutting staff. Here?s one egregious example of such> folly. The well-known French Egyptologist B?atrix Midant-Reynes wrote a> respected book on Egyptian prehistory. Ian Shaw translated it as /The> Prehistory of Egypt: From the First Egyptians to the First Pharaohs/> (1992). It was published by Blackwell in Oxford, a reputable publisher.> The first sentence of Midant-Reynes?s introduction reads, ?In 1922,> when Jean-Fran?ois Champollion announced the decipherment of> hieroglyphics with his famous ?letter to Monsieur Dacier? . . .? Only> off by a hundred years! Any respectable editor should have caught the> typo, but apparently there aren?t any at Blackwell?s editorial offices.>> Bruce>>> _______________________________________________> ILDS mailing list> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds>------------------------------Message: 2Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2015 08:29:18 -0800From: Bruce Redwine To: james.d.gifford at gmail.com, ilds at lists.uvic.caCc: Bruce Redwine Subject: Re: [ilds] EditingMessage-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252James, thanks for the insights into the world of academic publishing. Please announce the publication of your edition of ?From the Elephant?s Back.?Best,Bruce> On Feb 2, 2015, at 2:42 PM, James Gifford  wrote:> > Hi Bruce,> > I can comment on this from a few perspectives.> > First, there are presses that largely "process manuscripts" as you say, rather than editor or nurture them, but even in that there are divisions. Some push for a large number of acquisitions and "prey" on junior scholars who may not be familiar with the process -- after a conference nowadays, there will often follow emails from publishers asking for the papers and/or a book. The same for announcements of MA thesis or PhD dissertation defenses.> > Edwin Mellen sued a librarian and McMaster University (which, btw, has a lovely set of Durrell mss. and tss.) when it was described as predatory. My understanding is that this suit was later dropped -- Edwin Mellen publishes more than 300 new books each year.> > http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/edwin-mellen-press-drops-lawsuit-against-university-librarian/42647> > This isn't simply a matter of cutting the expensive editorial staff. It can also reflect the market to which a press is oriented and consequently the kind of product is strives to create. Those driven exclusively to the library market tend to have higher prices and less editing since the impulse is to get on a shelf, not to be taken off that shelf again... Textbooks might have more investment, but likely not by subject matter experts at the press.> > That said, even inside some of the best publishers, there can often be "tiers" of service. I edit the annual "American Literature post-1900" chapter of Oxford UP's /Year's Work in English Studies/, for which we have thorough copy editing, two levels of paid editorial reading, and paid contributors. The project is professionally indexed by OUP (authors are not invited to do this themselves) and it really is a "luxury" product in today's age of academic publishing. However, I don't think it would be realistic to say all journals or books have the same level of support inside the same press.> > One of the reasons I went with U Alberta Press for the /Personal Modernisms/ and /From the Elephant's Back/ books is the level of editorial support and the quality of their design work (entirely aside from knowing and liking the staff at the press). They also produce books at reasonable prices, all things considered, so they're actually meant to *sell* (a rarity for today's academic publishing).> > My own university's press, FDU Press, which has published much Durrell materials, was through Associated University Presses and is now with Rowman & Littlefield, which means distribution and a good deal of production is external (also keeps down costs for the university but puts it a bit more toward the library market). The quality there is in-house editing and the peer-review integrity, but the internal layout and design is fairly fixed for each title.> > For your Wiley-Blackwell example, it's classified as a textbook, so apart from copy editing, I'd guess they left facts and dates to the translator! Worth noting, it's also a print on demand title, which is increasingly common for Wiley, Oxford, and Cambridge for their back stock (and has been the case for U California P for quite a while now).> > A few dozen or more books go across my desk every year for /Year's Work/ reviews, and the range of production and editorial standards is remarkable.> > All best,> James> > On 2015-02-02 11:27 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote:>> James,>> >> A brief comment on the sorry state of book editing, which has some>> relevance to Durrell himself, who notoriously hated to proof his own>> work. (It might be interesting to explore why he felt that way.) I>> know for a fact that some publishers (apparently Edwin Mellen Press is>> one of them) have essentially done away with an editorial staff and>> simply ?process manuscript? with little or no attention to the product.>> Diboll?s book looks like a prime example of this trend. Why? It>> saves money by cutting staff. Here?s one egregious example of such>> folly. The well-known French Egyptologist B?atrix Midant-Reynes wrote a>> respected book on Egyptian prehistory. Ian Shaw translated it as /The>> Prehistory of Egypt: From the First Egyptians to the First Pharaohs/>> (1992). It was published by Blackwell in Oxford, a reputable publisher.>> The first sentence of Midant-Reynes?s introduction reads, ?In 1922,>> when Jean-Fran?ois Champollion announced the decipherment of>> hieroglyphics with his famous ?letter to Monsieur Dacier? . . .? Only>> off by a hundred years! Any respectable editor should have caught the>> typo, but apparently there aren?t any at Blackwell?s editorial offices.>> >> Bruce>> >> >> _______________________________________________>> ILDS mailing list>> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca>> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds>> > _______________________________________________> ILDS mailing list> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds------------------------------Message: 3Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2015 10:46:30 -0800From: James Gifford To: ilds at lists.uvic.caSubject: Re: [ilds] EditingMessage-ID: <54D11786.90001 at gmail.com>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowedHi Bruce,As you'll see when the book comes out, this was Peter Baldwin's baby (elephant) -- and Dumbo certainly had a multi-year gestation with several complications. Peter's contributed an excellent Preface that opens the volume, and I accept responsibility for the ears or any other defects: http://wsupress.wayne.edu/books/detail/elephants-backHappily, the press is using the cover image for their catalogue this year as well.All best,JamesOn 2015-02-03 8:29 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote:> James, thanks for the insights into the world of academic publishing. Please announce the publication of your edition of ?From the Elephant?s Back.?>> Best,>> Bruce>>>>> On Feb 2, 2015, at 2:42 PM, James Gifford  wrote:>>>> Hi Bruce,>>>> I can comment on this from a few perspectives.>>>> First, there are presses that largely "process manuscripts" as you say, rather than editor or nurture them, but even in that there are divisions. Some push for a large number of acquisitions and "prey" on junior scholars who may not be familiar with the process -- after a conference nowadays, there will often follow emails from publishers asking for the papers and/or a book. The same for announcements of MA thesis or PhD dissertation defenses.>>>> Edwin Mellen sued a librarian and McMaster University (which, btw, has a lovely set of Durrell mss. and tss.) when it was described as predatory. My understanding is that this suit was later dropped -- Edwin Mellen publishes more than 300 new books each year.>>>> http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/edwin-mellen-press-drops-lawsuit-against-university-librarian/42647>>>> This isn't simply a matter of cutting the expensive editorial staff. It can also reflect the market to which a press is oriented and consequently the kind of product is strives to create. Those driven exclusively to the library market tend to have higher prices and less editing since the impulse is to get on a shelf, not to be taken off that shelf again... Textbooks might have more investment, but likely not by subject matter experts at the press.>>>> That said, even inside some of the best publishers, there can often be "tiers" of service. I edit the annual "American Literature post-1900" chapter of Oxford UP's /Year's Work in English Studies/, for which we have thorough copy editing, two levels of paid editorial reading, and paid contributors. The project is professionally indexed by OUP (authors are not invited to do this themselves) and it really is a "luxury" product in today's age of academic publishing. However, I don't think it would be realistic to say all journals or books have the same level of support inside the same press.>>>> One of the reasons I went with U Alberta Press for the /Personal Modernisms/ and /From the Elephant's Back/ books is the level of editorial support and the quality of their design work (entirely aside from knowing and liking the staff at the press). They also produce books at reasonable prices, all things considered, so they're actually meant to *sell* (a rarity for today's academic publishing).>>>> My own university's press, FDU Press, which has published much Durrell materials, was through Associated University Presses and is now with Rowman & Littlefield, which means distribution and a good deal of production is external (also keeps down costs for the university but puts it a bit more toward the library market). The quality there is in-house editing and the peer-review integrity, but the internal layout and design is fairly fixed for each title.>>>> For your Wiley-Blackwell example, it's classified as a textbook, so apart from copy editing, I'd guess they left facts and dates to the translator! Worth noting, it's also a print on demand title, which is increasingly common for Wiley, Oxford, and Cambridge for their back stock (and has been the case for U California P for quite a while now).>>>> A few dozen or more books go across my desk every year for /Year's Work/ reviews, and the range of production and editorial standards is remarkable.>>>> All best,>> James>>>> On 2015-02-02 11:27 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote:>>> James,>>>>>> A brief comment on the sorry state of book editing, which has some>>> relevance to Durrell himself, who notoriously hated to proof his own>>> work. (It might be interesting to explore why he felt that way.) I>>> know for a fact that some publishers (apparently Edwin Mellen Press is>>> one of them) have essentially done away with an editorial staff and>>> simply ?process manuscript? with little or no attention to the product.>>> Diboll?s book looks like a prime example of this trend. Why? It>>> saves money by cutting staff. Here?s one egregious example of such>>> folly. The well-known French Egyptologist B?atrix Midant-Reynes wrote a>>> respected book on Egyptian prehistory. Ian Shaw translated it as /The>>> Prehistory of Egypt: From the First Egyptians to the First Pharaohs/>>> (1992). It was published by Blackwell in Oxford, a reputable publisher.>>> The first sentence of Midant-Reynes?s introduction reads, ?In 1922,>>> when Jean-Fran?ois Champollion announced the decipherment of>>> hieroglyphics with his famous ?letter to Monsieur Dacier? . . .? Only>>> off by a hundred years! Any respectable editor should have caught the>>> typo, but apparently there aren?t any at Blackwell?s editorial offices.>>>>>> Bruce>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________>>> ILDS mailing list>>> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca>>> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds>>>>> _______________________________________________>> ILDS mailing list>> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca>> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds>>> _______________________________________________> ILDS mailing list> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds>------------------------------Subject: Digest Footer_______________________________________________ILDS mailing listILDS at lists.uvic.cahttps://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds------------------------------End of ILDS Digest, Vol 94, Issue 3***********************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20150204/ff8c8e34/attachment.html>


More information about the ILDS mailing list