next »

[547brier]

I have spent the last hour searching the fora to see if my specific question has been asked, and nothing came up.  I would appreciate any help that you all could offer.

I am a TT humanities prof at a R1 university.  I am in my fourth year and in the midst of my pre-tenure review.  I have devoted the last three years to revising my dissertation into a book, and am now in the process of seeking a contract.  The top-tier university presses in my field have turned it down, but I do have interest from a second-tier university press, and a highly regarded non-university press, which has published many of the leading books in my particular sub-specialty.

After my initial email inquiry, second-tier university requested the entire manuscript and let me know that they are in the process of securing readers.  However, they did not ask for exclusivity.

After reviewing my proposal and two chapters, non-university press asked for names of readers that they could contact to get a sense of the market for my book.  They haven’t asked for the whole manuscript yet.

I am wondering what the etiquette is here.  Those whom I have asked about this seem to think that as long as I am forthcoming with both parties about the fact that the other is interested and sending it out for reader reports, there is no conflict of interest.  But in searching previous peripherally-related threads on the forum, it seems that people have implied that as soon as your whole manuscript is requested, you are giving that press exclusivity rights. 

Given my tenure timing, I need to get a contract ASAP, and thus obviously want both presses to move forward with the process.  But I don’t want to tick anyone off.  As long as I am honest, it should be kosher, right?

Any advice would be very much appreciated.  Thanks!

[hiddendragon]

Thanks for asking this question.  I am in the same boat as you--about to send out my manuscript.  From what I'm told, you should be open about it with both presses.  If the first press you've already submitted to wants exclusivity, they will demand it.  It's also my understanding that presses often demand exclusivity because they invest in paying reviewers.  They don't want to invest money on a project and then have you pull out because someone else gives you a better offer.  I believe the second press will not invest if you're open with them.

My situation is a bit different than yours.  I am also pressed for tenure review in a couple of years as well.  BUT, I have one press who's already offered me a contract based upon just my dissertation.  I'm going to send my manuscript to a higher tiered press.  If all goes well, I'll go with that press.  If not, I'll come back quickly to this current offer and sign the contract.

Not to hijack this thread, but my question is, are reviewers given a deadline or do they just get to take their time with book manuscripts?  My experience with journal publications has not been positive--too long.  Reviewers seemed to have infinite freedom in taking their sweet time.  I would hate for a press to hold my book manuscript for 10 months without a response like my current article at a journal.  I hope the book manuscript review is quicker.

[seniorscholar]

To hiddendragon's question: reviewers are given a "deadline" but it's almost never less than two months, and they will generally give the reader longer if asked. Reading and commenting on a manuscript takes serious time, and a good press wants a good reading, with reasonable suggestions for making the manuscript better. I'll admit that anything that comes to me after mid-October will not be returned until sometime in January or, if I'm on a search committee that year, more like February.

[hiddendragon]

Thanks, seniorscholar.  I'm fine with anything below 9 months.  I'd be so happy if I turned my manuscript in by Jan. 2012 and got an answer by next Sept. because then I can still squeeze in plan B if plan A did not work.  I currently have an article at a journal that's going on 11 months of review.  I'm just dreading that if it takes this long for a 45 page article, what kind of time frame nightmare will it be for a 450pp manuscript?

To hiddendragon's question: reviewers are given a "deadline" but it's almost never less than two months, and they will generally give the reader longer if asked. Reading and commenting on a manuscript takes serious time, and a good press wants a good reading, with reasonable suggestions for making the manuscript better. I'll admit that anything that comes to me after mid-October will not be returned until sometime in January or, if I'm on a search committee that year, more like February.

[bwwm1]

Thanks, seniorscholar.  I'm fine with anything below 9 months.  I'd be so happy if I turned my manuscript in by Jan. 2012 and got an answer by next Sept. because then I can still squeeze in plan B if plan A did not work.  I currently have an article at a journal that's going on 11 months of review.  I'm just dreading that if it takes this long for a 45 page article, what kind of time frame nightmare will it be for a 450pp manuscript?

To hiddendragon's question: reviewers are given a "deadline" but it's almost never less than two months, and they will generally give the reader longer if asked. Reading and commenting on a manuscript takes serious time, and a good press wants a good reading, with reasonable suggestions for making the manuscript better. I'll admit that anything that comes to me after mid-October will not be returned until sometime in January or, if I'm on a search committee that year, more like February.

The fastest thing I've ever had reviewed was my book manuscript. Three reviewers did it in a little over a month during the summer. Every journal article ever submitted went much longer than that.

[aristotelian]

I am wondering what the etiquette is here.  Those whom I have asked about this seem to think that as long as I am forthcoming with both parties about the fact that the other is interested and sending it out for reader reports, there is no conflict of interest.  But in searching previous peripherally-related threads on the forum, it seems that people have implied that as soon as your whole manuscript is requested, you are giving that press exclusivity rights. 

I would say that in most cases, once you submit the full manuscript, the press is probably under the assumption that it now has right of first refusal. After all, they are going to ask a couple of trusted senior scholars to take up a good chunk of their time.

That said, there is no harm in telling the acquisitions editor of the first press that they are your top choice, but another press is interested in a simultaneous review, and, in the interest of time, you would like to give the second press a chance to review the book in case it doesn't work out with the university press.

So, the forum is probably correct, but it still can't hurt to ask.

[onewaystreet]

In terms of the timing question, there does seem to be an enormous amount of variance, which I suppose is true of most things in academia -- I've definitely heard horror stories from colleagues of external reviewers taking forever to read through book manuscripts (yes, over 9 months), but I also was just told by my acquisitions editor to expect a response from my first book's readers in about 4 weeks' time.  Because I'm a pessimistic/paranoid person by nature, I'm concerned that this fast turnaround time may be a bad thing for my book's chances -- will the reviewers resent being given such a close deadline by the editor?  Will they read my book more hastily or with less interest because they're squeezing it in between finals and the holidays?  I know it does me no good to think this way, but yet I do.

[seniorscholar]

And in response to the other part of the initial question: when a press wants the names of two or three appropriate people to contact to find out if there's a market for the book, the press is not really investing any time and money. (These phone calls or e-mails are fairly common in the non-academic publishers of academic books: they're a time and money saver for the press -- don't require paying the respondent, and inform the editor whether it's worth investing the money for a reading of the manuscript.) So you can -- if you want -- certainly answer that request. (The questions the press generally ask are: "Are there competing books?" "Is there any potential for classroom work?" and "Do you believe scholars in your field would either buy the book or insist that their library order it?")

On the other hand, these can move very fast: if everyone answers promptly (and why not -- get the e-mail out of the inbox quickly), you might get a request to send the manuscript in one or two weeks. And THEN you would be in the ethical dilemma; you'd need to tell the university press editor, and ask if they accept multiple submissions.

Once -- only once -- when I was on the board of my university press we were called for an "emergency meeting" because the manuscript on a hot new topic that we were due to consider at the regular meeting (six weeks later) was also being read by Better University Press, but ours might have a chance of it if a contract were offered quickly. (The other press, as I recall, published the book -- but I certainly doubt if we would ever again have considered a manuscript by that author, though s/he was in one of the fields in which we have a quite reputable series.) Indeed, since I remember the manuscript's title (though not the author's name), I may be curious enough to look up the author's name in the library catalogue and see what else s/he has published and where . . .