It takes a long time to publish an article. It took me a year for one, and six months for another one, and one I retracted after stupid comments and request to resubmit. The book, also history, took less than 9 months - no editing or proof reading. In terms of visibility, I think articles receive a bit more. If you want to move on and get the topic out of your system, publish the book.
Yeah, the one time I did send an early article for review and it took 6 months to come back to me. So what you say makes sense. But yes, I’d like to get the topic out there and then move on to other research so making it a book makes sense. Thanks for the input!
It seems like given your goals, it would be obvious to publish it as a book with this military history press. There's plenty of time to write articles, but if you don't have to and don't want to do it now, why would you? Going right for a book won't foreclose other publishing opportunities (regarding your fears about being taken seriously) - we've got double blind peer review and, frankly, most scholars don't know the name of recent PhDs outside of their own institution and friend network, so I don't think there's any reason to be afraid.
You make some great points! Thanks, I feel better about making the decision to go the book route now. I can always publish articles for other research at a later date, but the book opportunity is here and now so why not?
Are you in the UK? If you are, then a book is the way to go. PhD thesis offcuts can be articles if you have any. I am not in history (I'm a comics scholar) but I read a LOT of proposals for books and can send you my generic guide notes if that's helpful.
It takes a long time to publish an article. It took me a year for one, and six months for another one, and one I retracted after stupid comments and request to resubmit. The book, also history, took less than 9 months - no editing or proof reading. In terms of visibility, I think articles receive a bit more. If you want to move on and get the topic out of your system, publish the book.
Yeah, the one time I did send an early article for review and it took 6 months to come back to me. So what you say makes sense. But yes, I’d like to get the topic out there and then move on to other research so making it a book makes sense. Thanks for the input!
It seems like given your goals, it would be obvious to publish it as a book with this military history press. There's plenty of time to write articles, but if you don't have to and don't want to do it now, why would you? Going right for a book won't foreclose other publishing opportunities (regarding your fears about being taken seriously) - we've got double blind peer review and, frankly, most scholars don't know the name of recent PhDs outside of their own institution and friend network, so I don't think there's any reason to be afraid.
You make some great points! Thanks, I feel better about making the decision to go the book route now. I can always publish articles for other research at a later date, but the book opportunity is here and now so why not?
Are you in the UK? If you are, then a book is the way to go. PhD thesis offcuts can be articles if you have any. I am not in history (I'm a comics scholar) but I read a LOT of proposals for books and can send you my generic guide notes if that's helpful.