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, you'll still 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 distin
Read more

A Look at Charles R. Saunders and "Sword & Soul"

Image
So, I've been reading lately about Charles R. Saunders, the black author of sword-and-sorcery fiction, and man .... poor guy. If there's been ever a case of someone being born about 30 years too soon, it's Saunders. Usually, when people mention about black S&S authors, they mean Samuel R. Delany. This makes sense. As a queer, Marxist deconstructionist, Delany established his street cred first by writing SF before wading into the "gutters" (ahem) of S&S fantasy. (Sidenote: are there any black fantasy writers except maybe Jemisin who didn't first establish their street cred by writing SF?). Although I personally never much cared for Delany's  writing style or Nevèrÿon books , which are basically what happens when someone who holds a subgenre in contempt decides to write in that subgenre, it is true that academic critics love Delany .... especially critics who hate S&S themselves. So if they mention Saunders at all, which is rare, it's usuall
Read more

A Good Week For Publication

So, wow. The Journal of Tolkien Research has just published my article, " Harken Not to Wild Beasts: Between Rage and Eloquence in Saruman and Thrasymachus ." What astounds me is that I finished the piece only two weeks ago and already got back the peer reviews. Of course, no real reason WHY the review process has to take months, but it just usually does. Kudos to the anonymous reviewers, great praise upon them, for working so quickly. I might even more appreciative of their promptness than of their kind remarks; I barely had to do any revisions to the article. The process went so fast, in fact, that the publication barely feels real. One of the great advantages of an online open-access journal, too, is instantaneous publication. As I'm learning with the several other articles I have in circulation, the publication process generally takes even longer than the review process. Anyway, this has been a good week. I finished my review of Harry Potter essays, and the edito
Read more