Its also why I have put nearly 100% of my reviewing effort in reviewing potential book MSs for pre-tenure candidates since Covid started (over published book reviews and refereeing articles ) and try to be very detailed in my reports. Because this can be do or die for a junior scholar career.

Maybe! I know a lot of ppl who have had similar issues with this one. It’s often recommended to junior scholars as the ideal first book venue for my field but I always caution to be vigilant with checking on timeline and also giving yourself a longer runway than they may tell you to expect.

All of which wouldn’t have been as hard and stressful if the MS hadn’t sat for 6 months in a pile before being sent for review.

And with an editor who has been enthusiastic to start but who was giving signs of following more closely the (opinions? Clout?) of the negative, belated review over the positive one, he agreed it was better for me to start over somewhere else.

If the strongly opposing reports had come in on a reasonable timeline things may have been different. But after 11 months it as clear there was no path forward there that could ensure me a published book from a UP on the timeline I needed.

This happened to me w a major press in our field. Not the one I ended up publishing with which was very speedy & helpful. It absolutely added stress to my timeline by eliminating 11 months of possible work as it was held in non-review, then in belated review, then w strongly opposing reports.

I think they could be persuaded.

I’m kinda hoping it might be streamable by Friendsgiving

Some of the insane features of academia that people who work in it have normalized but outsiders think are nuts: a) not picking where you live, b) 6 years of probation, c) never trained in grad school to teach, get grants, administrate. d) high rate of depression & other mental health issues.

Honestly when I think back on the experience of sitting there sight reading this passage and getting to Quis Sic Loquitur I can’t help but laugh.