Switching out as FAFNIR's book reviews editor

 So, a prospective replacement for me at Fafnir just asked me some questions about the position, and I ended up writing a too-long email. Since I haven't posted anything in a while, I'm deciding to share here:

---------------------------------------------------------------

Hi _____,

Great to hear from you. Yeah, when I started as reviews editor, I was in the same boat -- absolutely no idea what to expect. So I don't mind talking about this at all. I'll go through a list of topics in order:

Start time.

Yes, you'd be officially reviews editor for 1_2023, and your name would appear on the front matter for that issue. However, we currently have a backlog of about six reviews for looking at, so a new editor would informally start whenever, since those are the submissions that would appear in 1_2023. In my view, best practice is staying about one issue ahead in terms of reviews ready to go. This means that there's never a last-minute scramble for content, or that a particular issue is light on reviews. The main editors have a different process for articles, but my process has worked well for reviews, at least. A new reviews editor, however, is free to do things however they like.

TIME COMMITMENT

This one's tricky, and I couldn't quantify an "hours per week" to it. I've never found the position burdensome, but I'm also a workaholic who's extremely well-organized. My practice has always been to return reviews with feedback within 24 hours, mostly because I can, and partly because I think artificial wait times in academic publishing are killer. Some reviews take a lot of effort, though -- 2-4 drafts is the average. Probably my biggest shock when getting this position is that, like, 90% of reviews need significant revision. Even excluding non-native speakers (and Fafnir boasts a really international reach), many reviewers are either grad students or early career researchers, and they often don't understand the requirements of the review genre. There's a surprising number of basic writing issues. But I also view the position as a form of mentoring, and one of the prime benefits is meeting a lot of young new academics just at the beginnings of their careers.

So, time-wise, that's about the best I can offer. However, I'm a contingent scholar who teaches a 4-4 load and has an active research agenda, and I've honestly never felt over-burdened by the position. 

Finding Reviewers

Most often, I'll just post a message to the listservs to SFRA or, more often, IAFA. All academics should be subscribed to them, anyway, so you reach a lot of voices. It does mean that I get a lot of under-prepared reviewers who need mentoring, and I'd be particularly wary of accepting anyone who is currently in an MA (rather than a PhD) program -- some have been great, but some .... haven't. Some journals will only solicit reviews. I've done this occasionally, but only for books that nobody was picking up. For instance, I had someone to review an U of Illinois P book about J.G. Ballard, but nobody was picking it from the listservs. So I just did a standard library search for somebody who had published an article on him, and it ended up working out pretty well. 

Publishers

I've actually established enough contacts that a few publishers, like Ohio UP and Liverpool UP and Walking Tree, will simply send you updates of new titles. My old practice, though, was simply to trawl through publisher websites looking for interesting titles. I won't bother wasting time with vanity presses like Cambridge Scholars Publishing or Peter Lang, but I'll occasionally tap someone like McFarland if something's interesting, and of course most university presses are good. Trade publishers like Routledge and Palgrave have really annoyed me in recent years, and they seem like they're going downhill; it's possible that Bloomsbury Academic will soon overtake their former top spot in terms of academic trade publishers. Also, eventually you'll pick up which presses have specialties in what areas -- Kent State UP and Walking Tree are good with Tolkien content, Liverpool does SF, U of Illinois P does a Modern Masters of SF series .... you get the idea.

In the beginning, I just cold-emailed the press's publicity person. So far, I've never had anyone refuse to let us review a book, which really surprised me in the beginning; as I learned, though, reviewing is a valuable service for authors, publishers, and the field alike. 

Other than that, twitter and word of mouth are good ways to find out about new titles. Being a reviews editor is good practice for forming networks.

If you like, I'm happy to chat about anything over Zoom, too. I've really enjoyed my time as reviews editor  (although after 5 years the burnout is real, as you might imagine, and I'm grateful to be passing off the reins). The main thing to remember is that, as reviews editors, you have wide latitude about how you choose to work with reviewers; what presses you decide to work with and what titles you wish to review; and how your mission fits into academia at large. 

Cheers,

Dennis