Revision Dilemma

So, just got the outside reader's report back from a journal in which I really want to publish. Their verdict? The first three sections -- brilliant!  The final section -- well, let's just say it ranged from "meh" to outright dislike. So they strongly recommended I cut it.

Thing is, I'm really attached to that final section, and I think it truly adds something substantive to my main argument. So now I"m pondering what to do. 

Options:
  1.  Say "Hell no!" and take my article elsewhere.
    1. This, of course, isn't  that viable an option. The article has been in circulation for almost four years due to various mishaps (none of them mine), and it's time to get things over with. Plus, I really do like the journal, Tolkien Studies, that's interested in it. After all, where else should a Tolkienist publish? And also! You can't discount the opinion of all four of their scholarly readers, including the editors, who were resolutely "meh" about the section on the chopping block.
  2. Say, grudgingly, "Yeah, I'll cut it, but maybe it can be reframed as an appendix to the main article?"
    1. This one, admittedly, seems a little desperate. . . . although I did use an appendix to good effect in my Mythlore article about Tolkien and his nomination of EM Forster for the 1954 Nobel prize. However, it's hard to describe my moment of eureka when I discovered the political / economic situation that surrounded the making of Peter Jackson's An Unexpected Journey, which directly concerns globalization, in an article about globalization. Frankly, I'm still a little surprised that so many different readers over the years have been unanimous about disliking that final section.
  3. Or, finally, just cut the damn thing, referring to that relevant political / economic situation only in a few lines (possibly the conclusion), and maybe publishing the excised section as a "note" somewhere else . . . Mythlore does those, I think, or maybe Journal of Tolkien Research or even Fafnir.
What to do, what to do. Of course, laying out my options like this kinda makes the decision obvious, but I'll have to do some more serious hand-wringing, methinks, before finally pulling the trigger.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Genre Fantasy Bestsellers through 1990

Image
I've been studying Keith Justice's Bestseller Index , which compiles information from two separate bestseller lists -- New York Times Book Review and Publishers Weekly -- up through 1990, and the results are ridiculously fascinating. For instance, you wanna take a stab at which SFF author has the most individual books appear on a bestseller list? No, it ain't Heinlein, Clark, Herbert, or Asimov. It's not even Terry Brooks or David Eddings. No, the answer is Piers Anthony . And even if you somehow pulled that name out of thin air, I guarantee you'll never guess how truly dominate Anthony was. Up through 1990, Anthony had more than double than number of distinct bestsellers than the next most frequent bestseller, Anne McCaffrey. Whereas Anthony had an astounding  22 different books appear on a bestseller list, McCaffrey had "only" 9.** Now, caveats. These numbers need to be taken with one (or two) grains of salt. For instance, although Anthony had 22 two dis
Read more

Thoughts upon Reading Tolkien's New & Expanded LETTERS

So, I'm reading through the newly expanded version of Tolkien's Letters. One thing I hadn't properly realized is that these letters were part of Carpenter's original manuscript back in 1981, but Carpenter had to cut them due to cost. Turns out that Carpenter had a pretty keen eye on what could bear cutting -- most of this new stuff isn't terribly interesting, but I discovered a few nuggets. VINDICATED!! (Me, sorta) Naturally, whenever you read new primary material, your first instinct is to check to see if anything contradicts something you've said in print ... especially biographically. Well, I've made three big "biographical" claims, and here's my sigh of relief: Concerning my claim that, in 1954, Tolkien and colleagues contrived to create CS Lewis's academic chair at Cambridge in exchange for them nominating EM Forster for the Nobel Prize. Nothing in  Letters  supports or contradicts this. In my recent article for  Notes & Queries ,
Read more

Uncovering CS Lewis's First Religious Poem

 So, with my article's official acceptance by the journal English Text Construction , it's time to let the cat out of the bag. Using a combination of metrical analysis and biography, I've ascertained with near perfect certainty the first religious poem C. S. Lewis poem ever wrote .... a short poem, "Sweet Desire," that scholars have never previously paid any attention to. This poem is firmly datable to early 1930, probably January or February is my guess, and given the poem's subject matter, it's clearly talking about CSL's fears and intellectual trepidation about becoming a theist and abandoning atheism for good. It's basically Lewis's version of Caedmon's Hymn . The full metrical details will have to await my article, but one interesting caveat on my claims to firstness. In my peer reviewer's commentary, they recommended I contact a CSL scholar named  Charlie W. Starr, who's been working on Lewis's handwriting for quite a lon
Read more