If we know what we're talking about, can we review books without a PhD?
May 27, 2008 8:24 PM Subscribe
Will academic journals generally publish book reviews written by people who are not academics, but who have applicable experience and knowledge?
I am interested in determining whether some journals might publish book reviews by people who, while not academics, nonetheless have knowledge and experience with a certain subject area. Possible collaborators would have masters' or professional degrees. Can we just contact individual journals to see if they'd be willing to share a list of books for review/find out their policy on the credentials of reviewers, or would that be a waste of time?
Of course we would only focus on specific publications and/or subject areas (in the social sciences) where we have knowledge and experience through our own work experience. It's not like we'd be trying anything or everything that comes along.
I am interested in determining whether some journals might publish book reviews by people who, while not academics, nonetheless have knowledge and experience with a certain subject area. Possible collaborators would have masters' or professional degrees. Can we just contact individual journals to see if they'd be willing to share a list of books for review/find out their policy on the credentials of reviewers, or would that be a waste of time?
Of course we would only focus on specific publications and/or subject areas (in the social sciences) where we have knowledge and experience through our own work experience. It's not like we'd be trying anything or everything that comes along.
A good place to start might be Publisher's Weekly or Kirkus Reviews. Writing short, concise book reviews will give you a chance to beef up your resume. You should also consider online journals. They often have a larger readership than print journals and are good way to start getting your work published. Build your portfolio.
posted by HotPatatta at 8:45 PM on May 27, 2008
posted by HotPatatta at 8:45 PM on May 27, 2008
PhD students do this all the time, and they don't have PhDs. I wouldn't expect to see actual money, though, the usual fee is you keep the book you're reviewing. The last one I did, the book cost 90 Euros.
posted by Wolof at 10:46 PM on May 27, 2008
posted by Wolof at 10:46 PM on May 27, 2008
can we review books without a PhD?
Well, many book reviews that I see are done by relatively young PhD students who (I guess) are trying to fill out their CV a bit in a fairly easy way. I think most people who aren't in that position would prefer to be writing articles than book reviews (reviews are certainly extremely low on my list of Things I Need To Do In My Academic Career), so there may actually be some demand for people to write them. What seems more important than credentials is not just knowing what you're talking about but having a sense of the culture and history of the field (or subfield), and being able to address the book from that perspective.
posted by advil at 12:31 AM on May 28, 2008
Well, many book reviews that I see are done by relatively young PhD students who (I guess) are trying to fill out their CV a bit in a fairly easy way. I think most people who aren't in that position would prefer to be writing articles than book reviews (reviews are certainly extremely low on my list of Things I Need To Do In My Academic Career), so there may actually be some demand for people to write them. What seems more important than credentials is not just knowing what you're talking about but having a sense of the culture and history of the field (or subfield), and being able to address the book from that perspective.
posted by advil at 12:31 AM on May 28, 2008
I'd suggest you begin by reading and commenting on galley proofs from publishers. I've been doing this for finance books (capital markets, not general economics) for perhaps ten years, and have since been approached to review published books by academic journals.
Other bonuses: you get a copy of the finished book, as well as your name in the list of acknowledgments.
And, (somehow this is very important to me) you get the gratification of helping to craft an actual book! So I'd say go for it - what do you have to lose other than your time crafting some letters / emails to publishers?
posted by Mutant at 4:08 AM on May 28, 2008
Other bonuses: you get a copy of the finished book, as well as your name in the list of acknowledgments.
And, (somehow this is very important to me) you get the gratification of helping to craft an actual book! So I'd say go for it - what do you have to lose other than your time crafting some letters / emails to publishers?
posted by Mutant at 4:08 AM on May 28, 2008
Response by poster: Thanks for everyone's comments, especially Miko and Mutant. Very helpful in shaping my thinking...
posted by midatlanticwanderer at 5:09 AM on May 28, 2008
posted by midatlanticwanderer at 5:09 AM on May 28, 2008
« Older Trying to find a laptop that doesn't suck | What song is playing the Pineapple Express trailer... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
The big hitch here is not the credential exactly, but whether you know the historiography. If you aren't familiar with what's gone before and where the new book fits within the scholarly history of the field, it's a tripping block. So if that isn't a strong suit you might want to spend some time reading around the topic and asking a good reference librarian for some help. The downside to this is that time spent doing your own research cuts deeply into any income you had hoped to make from reviews. If you're doing it to build your CV or profile or just for personal satisfaction, though, that doesn't matter.
posted by Miko at 8:41 PM on May 27, 2008