next »

[supersecret]

I think I am intending this more as a "manuscript revisers support thread" than anything else, but we'll see what happens.

I am currently revising my book manuscript, which includes a lot of contextualizing and also adding some brand new material.  There are also a lot of "minor" suggestions made by my reviewers.  Things are going well so far, and I should make my summer deadline, but I have hit a few roadblocks that are more frustrating than anything else.  I am not asking for solutions to these problems, just inviting comments or additional frustrations about the revision process.

1.) Readers comments that seem very minor, such as "add a footnote addressing X" are actually quite substantial and require a lot of additional reading.

2.) Things that I agreed to wholeheartedly in my response to the readers reports are actually proving problematic in some places--making the writing seem awkward and the ideas seem scattered.

3.) Staying focused is hard.  I find myself trying to take into account multiple comments at once.

4.) Procrastination: there are some changes that I know need to be done but that I dread making.  So I find myself researching things that are not immediately relevant or putting it off in other ways.  (Starting this thread, for example).

5.) Fear:I have a contract, but I keep thinking that I will somehow blow it and that when I turn in my revisions they will not meet with the reader's approval.  (This is my first book, so I kind of can't believe that it actually got accepted).

[bubbagump]

I could have written this exact same post. Except for the detailed reviewers comments, i.e. "add a footnote..." I didn't get much but some vague and general comments about contextualizing. It seems like they want a completely different manuscript. Thus, I haven't made much progress myself.

To keep track of comments, I created a list, you could do a spreadsheet if there are too many. I had a manuscript feedback session as a postdoc and have even more comments to address. Some I'll ignore, but some are helpful.

This is also my first book manuscript and from what I'm experiencing and what I've been told, you don't have to make every single change recommended. But you do need to address why you chose not to.

I'm still struggling and you seem to be making good progress.

You might get more responses in the other thread re: manuscript writers...something or other. But then again, it's already quite lengthy and individual posts can get lost. I'm also interested in hearing how others manage to deal with reviewers comments, especially when they are so vague, general, and create a substantial amount of additional work.

[oldchestnut]

I'm right there with you, supersecret -- or, more accurately, I'm just a little behind you, since I kept having questions through the whole submitting proposals/submitting manuscript/responding to readers reports process that I found you had just asked the fora a month or two before me!  But now I too am working on the final round of revisions (mine are due in just over a month) and am having many of the same issues and doubts.  The hardest thing for me is adding in a paragraph or sentence here or there that my readers asked for and making it flow smoothly with what was written already.  And I'm just OBSESSING over my opening paragraph, which I want to be so perfect and engaging and brilliant!  I think I've spent more time on that one paragraph than on my entire fourth chapter.  The good/bad thing about getting to this point in the process, from what I've heard and from what I'm discovering, is that it finally is just up to you.  You've gotten others' comments, but at this point it's up to you to figure out what really will make your book the best it can be.  I could be wrong, but I think it's pretty rare for someone's book to be rejected after it's been approved by the faculty board and after the readers' suggestions have been taken seriously in the final revisions.  That's what I'm telling myself, anyway!

[seniorscholar]

Remember that your goal is "the best you can do now" rather than "perfection" -- a higher standard than the dissertation (where the goal was "finished") but still not overpowering. If the press is (I hope) one that still uses actual English-speaking copy editors, rather than techies elsewhere who do what's essentially coding for publication while pausing a time or two to substitute a word that makes no sense whatever, the copy editor will be responsible for improving "smooth flow" and such matters, as well as getting rid of the new sentence that you wrote which, you realize three months later, is identical to an old sentence you had already written in a different chapter . . .

True story in that last clause, though it was in my sixth book, not my first. All praise to sharp copy editors.

[sugaree]

A word of encouragement that addresses concerns about responding to many different reviewer comments:

I am currently in the final production stages for my first book (yay!) and it's certainly been a long process. The initial reviews I received were mixed - one was great and recommended immediate publication, another was more lukewarm (still positive, but suggesting some significant revisions before publishing). I responded with a revised manuscript and a cover letter explaining what I did/did not do. I did not address all of the lukewarm reviewer's comments because some of them took the book too far afield (in my opinion) from what I was doing. The manuscript got sent back to lukewarm reviewer (I did not know the editor was planning to do this!), but it all worked out fine. This reviewer further commented about the changes and how they had improved the manuscript and was now recommending publication. S/he did not comment at all about a few points raised in the initial review that I did not address.

So, my point is that if you have constructive reviews and an advance contract the editor has already lobbied hard for your book. It is a remote possibility that things could fall through and you'll have to start over somewhere else, but the press has already invested a lot of time and effort in your project and they want to publish it. Keeping that in mind helped me move forward and not get overwhelmingly paralyzed. Also, keeping in mind that, ultimately, it's my book and not the book the reviewers would write also helped. Good luck!

[oldchestnut]

I know that last post was meant to be comforting, but instead it made me a little more nervous!  I thought that after I'd gotten the thumbs up from the UP's faculty board and signed off on a contract, I was past the stage where the manuscript could be sent back out for a second round of external review.  Does this happen often?? 

[supersecret]

That's what's happening with mine.  The press gave me a contract that is provisional on my doing certain revisions.  Then they send it out to one more reviewer (my editor said they would try to get one of the original reviewers).  That's part of the reason for #5).Fear in my original post.

My editor made it sound like this is standard protocol, but I would be interested to hear more from others who have already gone through the process.

[bwwm1]

I think it depends on what revisions were requested. In my case they offered me the contract after peer review and they sent it the book into production as soon as I sent the manuscript to them. It only went to peer review once. But my contract was not provisional on doing any revisions.

[sugaree]

I know that last post was meant to be comforting, but instead it made me a little more nervous!  I thought that after I'd gotten the thumbs up from the UP's faculty board and signed off on a contract, I was past the stage where the manuscript could be sent back out for a second round of external review.  Does this happen often?? 

I'm sorry Oldchestnut, I truly didn't mean to make you (or anyone else currently engaged in this process) more nervous! I think the 2nd round of reviews is becoming more commonplace now in these tight budgetary times, but it is absolutely not a required step in the process. But keep in mind if you do encounter a second round of reviews, the reviewer will see how you've addressed things (they've got their original comments, comments from other reviewers and your response) and unless they can come up with a strongly compelling reason (as in, you did not address any of their critiques), they are unlikely to ignore the fact that other reviewers have recommended publication and that the faculty board has awarded an advanced contract. It is rare that your manuscript, having passed all of these other hurdles, would be rejected on the basis of a single reviewer's second round of comments.

I made the comment because it was an unexpected step in the process that also made me nervous when I was going through it. But it all turned out okay - that's the moral to take away from my experience (N=1, I know).

[oldchestnut]

Sorry to be insinuating so many of my own questions into your thread, supersecret, but I don't have tons of good mentoring in my current situation and this is my first book as well.  My editor never used the term "advance contract" with me, though there is a clause in the contract (which I was told was standard) saying something to the effect of "if the final manuscript is unacceptable to the publisher in content, this agreement may be terminated."  But both of my external reviews unequivocally recommended publication and asked for only minor revisions to the intro.  In this case, is there still a good chance that the thing will have to go out for review again?  Or is it really just a crapshoot at this point?

[supersecret]

No problem Oldchestnut, that's the sort of stuff that I started this thread for.  My contract is similar to yours and does not explicitly mention sending it out for re-review.  My editor, though, mentioned it in an e-mail.  After I asked for clarification, I understood that it meant getting sent out again.

In my case, my revisions entail, among other things, about 25 pages of brand new material--basically adding a conclusion. While I would of course prefer to not have to wait through the review process again, it makes sense that the press would want to do this.  If a press calls itself "peer review," then all of the material should be peer reviewed, I would think.  Of course I don't know, but it sounds like in your case it would be less likely to get sent out again.  As someone else said above, it probably varies from press to press also.

I suppose its something you could ask your editor about.  If not now, then at least when you submit the final manuscript.