OK, so sue me, but this makes me think of "Katie," if only because in one of "Katie's" RYS posts she bragged about how her committee told her that her dissertation was already good enough to be a book, which is how she had always known that she was a star.But on a serious note, the article does point to a fairly pervasive problem with the way that advisors and committees handle grad students and their dissertations. I've always tried to be honest, sometimes brutally so (I know, real fucking surprise there, right?) when I've been on a committee. And, of course, I'm always straight with my advisees. But when I'm not the lead advisor, I have often found that my brutal but honest advice gets drowned out by the colleagues who want to be all fucking positive. I hate those fuckers, and I hope that someday they get hit by a bus with "you're doing a GREAT JOB crossing the street" written on the front of it.
One thing the article doesn't address is the fact that English (the author is an English proffie) and History are almost the only disciplines left for which a book is still the central exhibit of the tenure file. Indeed, in some fields a book can be seen as a black mark, or pointless in comparison to journal articles. He also doesn't address the fact that at lots of English and History departments, including where he teaches, one can now substitute a certain number of refereed articles for a book. Still, I like Cassuto's columns. His advice is generally thoughtful and solid.
And for all you grad students and junior proffies out there, go buy the book he mentions. It is an invaluable tool, which I highly recommend.
Anyway, here's the fucking flava:
My last column centered on the new difficulties that graduate students face in turning their dissertations into books. Some readers responded that plenty of dissertations shouldn't be revised into books in the first place. Indeed.
and here's the fucking link.
Did I get it right this time?
Also, because you touch yourself at night.
ReplyDeleteYep my dissertation sucks.
ReplyDeleteThe parts that got bites for publication were the ones my committee asked me to cut.
I did attempt a book-like project instead of a dissertation, and I think it was a mistake. I'd recommend people write a dissertation that looks like one, squawks like one, and poops like one. Write some articles from it. Then write a book if you have to. Everybody will be happier.
What wasn't mentioned in the article was the fact that University presses are hurting and dying. They can't put out as many titles as they used to. Digital publishing would be a viable alternative, but it may or may not count towards tenure. I can only imagine that it adds to publishers' frustration when there are many good projects that could be developed into books out of the hundreds they receive--but only a few make the cut.
He did mention the state of university presses in his previous column, which is linked to in the first paragraph.
ReplyDeleteYour comment also brings to mind something else he left out, which is that there is a tension between articles and a book project. So if you carve your dissertation chapters into articles, then you are often foreclosing the possibility of a book. Publishers look askance at a project if they think too much of it has already appeared in journals. This is a tough balance to strike, especially under pressure to publish.
So the future is "disserta-blogs" or "disserta-Kindles"? If so, it's going to suck when Professor X's dissertation is wiped out when the hard drive on the server crashes, or some future war features EMP bombs and the US internet is fried by the Chinese, or whatever other dire computer situation people can think of occurs.
ReplyDeleteI cut mine in half and turned it into a short book. It still took a hell of a lot of work. As for the reviews, five favorable, one "meh" and one unfavorable.
ReplyDeleteBut yeah, I've read dissertations that were not books-in-waiting, but, at best, an article waiting to be distilled from all the text and published.
"But on a serious note, the article does point to a fairly pervasive problem with the way that advisors and committees handle grad students and their dissertations. I've always tried to be honest, sometimes brutally so (I know, real fucking surprise there, right?) when I've been on a committee. And, of course, I'm always straight with my advisees. But when I'm not the lead advisor, I have often found that my brutal but honest advice gets drowned out by the colleagues who want to be all fucking positive. I hate those fuckers, and I hope that someday they get hit by a bus with "you're doing a GREAT JOB crossing the street" written on the front of it."
ReplyDeleteHere, here! Don't lower your standards, tell those GREAT JOB losers "up yours!"