next »

[prof2be]

I couldn't find any previous posts so hope the fora might suggest best practice in this situation.  I reviewed a book on basketweaving in my home country, asked because of my nationality by a basketweaving journal editor I am friendly with, and because the author is not a scholar but someone the editor knows from his own basketweaving work.  I knew this was a favor, but at the same time the book was terrible, full of personal anecdotes and name dropping of basketweavers significant to the author but not having a national impact.  In my review I suggested the book was a good first step in chronicling basketweaving in this country, but pointed out it was not terribly comprehensive.

The author has now contacted me pointing out what he must feel are errors in my review - I cited some statistics on population as context and he is questioning the stats.  He wasn't really making many points, just trying to show off a bit, quoting passages from his book on the national influence of certain basketweavers, and pointing out specific baskets exported from our country which I was already aware of.  I waited a week and thanked him for his message, revealed the source of my statistics, and suggested that having observed national basketweaving from a particular city, I had not discerned any national influence from the work by the so-called groundbreaking basketweavers he discusses.  He replied within an hour insisting this city was not a measure of national basketweaving - I never suggested it was, just that this city would be a place where any ripple effect of groundbreaking basketweaving would be felt.  He also continued to list baskets from our country, as if I needed to be educated on the subject.

The author is not a scholar and he would have financed the publication of the book himself.  I don't want to be rude or unkind, but I was also very unimpressed with his work and with a PhD in basketweaving nearly in hand, I already know about the exported baskets he keeps mentioning.  I was going to send him a second message agreeing that my hometown is not a measure of national basketweaving, but is rather a regional centre for basketweaving where any national influence would be seen.  Is that fair?  Is there anything else I should or shouldn't say?  I don't want to prolong this correspondence, and I don't want to write anything that would cause the author to report back to his friend the journal editor (who I hope will publish more of my work in future).

[sugaree]

Thank you for the email - after that your initial response should have ended. You made it worse by starting a pissing match with this author. Just as you think s/he is being obnoxious or showing off by "schooling" you, you are (perhaps inadvertently?) doing the same thing right back at 'em. Back away slowly - do not engage further.

If you feel you must respond to this second email, a simple "thank you for your thoughts" is sufficient. Ignore anything else.

[seniorscholar]

Stop the correspondence now, with no explanation.

[polly_mer]

I agree with the others.  You did your review.  The author objects to your expertise.  You disengage instead of playing "I know you are, but what am I?"

Save your energies for discussions on basketweaving that will be productive as you exchange ideas with scholars.

[larryc]

Disengage.

[bluezebracat]

If this person is so offended, they should contact the editor and ask to write a rebuttal. Why are they contacting you?  What do they hope to achieve?

[untenured]

Dear Author,

Thank you for your correspondence.  Basketweaving is certainly an important field and worthy of studied examination of the issues involved.  No doubt your work will have an impact on the relevant geographic and social impacts that basketweaving provides.

I appreciate your interest in my book review.  Scholarly dialogue is an essential part of academia, and book reviews are part of that exchange.  My thoughts on your book are essentially in that review.  So while I will not be replying to any further correspondence about your book, I welcome you to refer to my book review for any further questions about my thoughts on the text.

Thanks for your contact and I look forward to reading your future publications.

Best,

prof2be

[bwwm1]

If this person is so offended, they should contact the editor and ask to write a rebuttal. Why are they contacting you?  What do they hope to achieve?

I agree. If the author believes the review was seriously flawed, then contacting the journal editor and offering to write a response to the review is the best course of action. Your work is finished at this point.

[infopri]

This is one reason (of many) that reviews are usually at least blind, if not double-blind.

Write once more with a polite, professional message designed to disengage (refer the author to the editor), then ignore any future correspondence on these issues.

[larryc]

This is one reason (of many) that reviews are usually at least blind, if not double-blind.

I think we are talking about a published book review, rather than a manuscript peer review.

[infopri]

This is one reason (of many) that reviews are usually at least blind, if not double-blind.

I think we are talking about a published book review, rather than a manuscript peer review.

<channeling Emily Latella>

Oh.  That's different.  Never mind.

[prof2be]

Just wanted to say thanks for all the responses, I haven't replied to the last e-mail and if there's a next time, I'll remind myself I don't need to engage.

[infopri]

if there's a next time, I'll remind myself I don't need to engage.

I need to remember that more often here on the fora.