UC Press Blog

As the new academic year kicks off, many students and scholars may be considering transforming their writing and research into a book. Whether you’re revising the dissertation or starting from scratch, here’s some common myths about publishing that Senior Editors Michelle Lipinski and Raina Polivka demystify below. 

Dissertation-to-Book Myths

I’ve written my dissertation like a book. Or, My dissertation committee member said this is publishable as-is.

My colleagues and I have never published a book that was the same as the original dissertation. It’s true that some manuscripts require more revision than others, but there is always some amount of work that goes into the reshaping of the thing. 

Here’s some sure signs that the manuscript is still sitting too closely to the dissertation: signposting/reviewing/previewing, heavy literature review, passive voice, particular jargon, footnotes that eat up the page, data and theory instead of people and events, outlines and subheads instead of fluidity.

The dissertation is in some ways a rehearsal for the book. It is a genre all its own and demonstrates mastery over a subject or field. You’re showing your committee that you know the scholarship in the discipline. There are no limitations to length in a dissertation and often the writer suppresses their own authorial voice in service to the work of others, whether it be in primary or secondary sources.

In the book, on the other hand, you’ve absorbed the scholarship and you command it to support your thesis, but sparingly. The reader of your book wants to hear what you have to say, not what others have said on the subject. The book has to be written in consideration of a wider audience and appropriate length. A book has the confidence to have a unique argument.

In short, it’s important to be prepared for the fact that the book will look very different than the dissertation. 

I need to publish this ASAP, before the research goes out of date.

On the contrary, if you’re able, take time away from the dissertation and read widely. Read novels, poetry, essays and pay attention to the craft of the written word. Pick up those books that you never got to finish during the dissertation and read like a writer. How did these authors whom you may admire structure their argument or introduce new ideas? How did they weave primary and secondary sources into their own prose? What sets their writing style apart from others? Pay attention to the parts of the book: how did these authors craft the introduction, how did they open and close chapters or transition between ideas, how did they define terms?

Test drive your material at conferences. Peer review comes in all sorts of shapes and sizes. Conferences can be a great place to get feedback about how certain arguments are developing or surface an awareness of blind spots. They also help with establishing your expertise as a scholar. Can you turn a chapter or two from the dissertation into a journal article? This helps you get mileage out of the dissertation for content that isn’t necessarily so book-focused. It can further establish your growing platform as the expert in a particular topic or field of study. And it can become a vital tool for the book as another source you can reference in your work.

In short, taking time away from the dissertation allows you to reconnect with what motivated you in the first place, and really think through the bigger picture. 

I just need to publish this thing so I can get on to the next research project.

Editors can smell dissertation fatigue from miles away. So, even if this is true, this is not something you want to say early in the process to a potential editor or publisher. We’re going to put a lot of time, effort, and resources into the project, so we need someone who is fully committed to working with us on the book, and excited to do so. Book writing and publishing is a long-term project. Taking into account the writing and review processes, it can often take 3-5 years for the first book to emerge between covers. Therefore, it’s important that your project is something that excites you, energizes you, and provides that important inspiration over the long haul.

In short, don’t just write to get published, write to be read!

Proposal Myths

To impress an editor and peer reviewers, I should write the proposal in dry, high-level academic prose with lots of fancy terms and 10-dollar words.

A proposal is a genre unto itself. It serves as an introduction to the project, to you as a writer, and also as a marketing document. It’s a helpful tool for authors to step away from their project and think about the bigger picture, like audience and readership, promotional and publicity opportunities, and how the work fits into the larger field. Just as the dissertation has a specific audience (committee and chair), so, too does the proposal. At UC Press, the proposal has three main audiences: the editor (whose interests it needs to pique); the peer reviewers (who may be assessing the proposal for the press); and the publishing staff or book team. These audiences should inform how you write the proposal—it’s a careful dance between crafting a compelling argument and backing it up with erudition.

The proposal is likely the very first piece of writing an editor will see from you, so make sure your own voice and writing style shine through. Editors are rarely experts in our particular fields—we’ve perhaps acquired a basic expertise, but we rely on peer reviewers to comment on the rigor and robustness of the argument and contribution to the field. Editors ARE expert readers, however. We know what makes for a good book. Present your work, then, as you would to an educated reader—what is exciting and new about your work, what is the story and the conflict? Avoid deficit language (like “lack”) and try to be memorable!

When asked to list competing or complimenting titles, there’s no other book out there like mine.

Editors WANT comp titles. This signals to the editor that you’re enmeshed in the field, knowledgeable about what’s out there, and that you’re part of the scholarly conversation. It doesn’t mean that your project isn’t unique, but it does mean that the editor will be able to better envision how the book will fit in the current literature. List 5-7 titles that are in conversation with your project—in terms of topic, or in terms of approach and methodology. This is especially important for interdisciplinary projects. How does your work cross the aisle, so to speak? It’s important to restrict your list to books published in the past 3-5 years and it’s okay for these titles to come from an array of publishers.

In terms of book audience, everyone will want to read my book, including a general audience. 

Be realistic about your audience. It’s better to be able to target specific readers—a known audience—than a generic “general audience.” That doesn’t mean you can’t be expansive with who you list, but it is a harder sell to assume you’re going to get scholars, students, and your general educated lay reader all in one go. Maybe, in addition to readers from a certain scholarly discipline, you’ll get policymakers, or activists, or enthusiasts for a particular topic. But often books trying to reach everyone will end up reaching no one. Part of an editor’s job is helping you to successfully reach that desired audience, so it’s best to be clear-eyed about who you’re writing for from the beginning.

I can only send out the proposal to one publisher at a time. 

So much of publishing is about long-term relationships. Because the book publishing process can take several years, it’s important to find an editor and a press that gets you and your work. That editor may then reach out to you after publication to serve as a peer reviewer or to discuss trends in the discipline. You may reach out to that editor with recommendations for promising student work or maybe with a proposal for your next book project. A relationship between an author and an editor can be years or decades long, and can be meaningful when there’s mutual connection.

In the early days, do your research and get feedback from others who have recently published with a certain editor or press. Explore press websites and catalogs, visit press booths at conferences to get a sense of what they are publishing and how they are publishing it.

You can submit to as many presses as you want to assess interest. So, pick a few that align with your work and see what kinds of feedback and conversations arise from that outreach. If a press chooses to pursue your work and signals that they would like to initiate peer review, they make request exclusive review. In this case, it’s best to withdraw your submission from the other publishers. If the press will accommodate competing offers, then let the editor know that the project is under simultaneous consideration. However you and the press proceed, it’s always best to be transparent.

Editor Myths

Talking to an editor is super scary and you have to come prepared with a 30-minute presentation! 

Editors are just people! We may be quirky, weird, nerdy, or awkward, but we’re not usually scary. We want to learn about you and your work. A casual conversation is often what we’re looking for. 

While you don’t need to have a fully polished proposal to reach out, we do recommend having a general idea, or better yet, an elevator pitch ready to share. Even if you’re not sure about how the proposed book will be organized, at least knowing what the draft thesis is, or the contribution you want to make is helpful. That means no exhaustive play by play of your chapters. Rather, let us know what makes you excited about your work and what new information it brings to the field.

Conferences can be extraordinarily busy for editors. While you’re absolutely welcome to swing by and say hello and introduce yourself, do not expect to be able to sit down with an editor without a pre-scheduled meeting. If you are ready to pitch your book idea, we recommend reaching out to editors several weeks before a conference, before their schedules book up, to see if they have availability to meet. In the preliminary email, introduce who you are, briefly summarize your project and thesis, and explain why you think that press would make a particularly good home for your work (we call this “press fit”).

As we’ve mentioned already in this blog post, publishing is all about long term relationships. Press fit is not just about what whether your work is right for a press, it’s also about whether the press is the right fit for you. So, come prepared with questions of your own. You might consider asking about the submission process, timeline to publication, marketing support, and what to expect out of that editor / author relationship.

And, if you cannot meet in-person, zoom and virtual meetings have provided an enormous amount of flexibility for conversations to occur offsite but onscreen. 

To get an editor interested, it’s all about who you know, where you got your PHD, or who your advisors are. 

While it’s true that some projects come in “recommended” by other authors or advisors—the result of cultivating these long-term relationships!—in no way would a project get approved or denied based on this. Editors often face flooded inboxes with submissions that come over the transom—that is, unsolicited. So, the question is not necessarily who you know, but how to get your project to rise to the top. 

Here are a few strategies to bring attention to you and your work: seek out opportunities to connect in person (at conferences or over zoom); lean into your own networks; be clear about press fit; and look into the potential of joining a book series. Series editors often act as ambassadors to the press and can provide helpful introductions to you and your work. 

Publisher Myth

Presses only want to publish books that sell.

Unlike commercial publishers with high profit margins where sales are king, university presses are mission-driven and success looks very different. Our purpose is to disseminate knowledge as widely and as accessibly as possible, and to support new scholarship. There is an investment across the industry in first books and many presses have created a diverse portfolio of trade, academic trade, and monograph publishing to support the more niche but still important scholarly books. Book sales and journal subscriptions help, but we are also looking at things like grants and awards, citations, and course adoptions to measure success. 

Other Myths

An advance contract is a temporary placeholder until the real contract is offered.

On the contrary, an advance contract simply means that a press is willing to commit to your project at an earlier stage—usually at the proposal stage, rather than after the manuscript is complete. If an advance contract is offered, this often means that your project will have to undergo an additional round of peer review once the manuscript is complete, but a contract offered at any stage is  firm and binding according to the contract provisions. 

The press assumes all costs to publish.

While this is technically true—presses publish books at their own expense—there are several unforeseen costs that may appear in the contract. 

It is industry standard in academic publishing that authors cover indexing costs. Your editor will be able to give you an estimate of costs based on the length and complexity of your work, but a good index can cost anywhere from $1500-$2500. Indexing occurs later in the production process, after copyediting and once page proofs have been created with set pagination. Most presses can recommend trusted indexers for you to employ.

It is also industry standard in academic publishing that authors cover all costs associated with permissions to use third-party material. This may include permissions to reproduce images, music examples, written archival material, and cover art. So be prepared to use research funds or other funding sources to help offset these costs. 

***

It's true that writing a publishable manuscript is hard work, but we hope it's also an exciting, rewarding, and supportive endeavor.