Search Views


Browse Archives

Views

Here Comes the Flood

January 21, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

In the January issue of The Journal of Scholarly Publishing, Lindsay Waters, an executive editor at Harvard University Press, tries to imagine a world in which "the well-wrought, slowly gestated essay" has replaced the monograph as the gold standard for scholarship in the humanities.

Some of his argument seems familiar. For one thing, Waters tried out an earlier version as a keynote address to the Council of Editors of Learned Journals when they met at MLA in 2007, where I heard it. For another thing, one idea in it came from me: the daydream of a world in which people would be penalized for publishing too much and too early in their careers. This is among the most cherished of my crackpot ideas. By now Waters has doubtless been subjected to some variation of it at lunch, probably more than once.

Of course there would be occasions when some wunderkind had so many ideas that brisk and frequent publication became a matter of urgent necessity. But that would be rare. A strictly enforced set of proscriptions would add excitement to things. Picking up a book or journal, you would know that it had involved some risk. Scholars might begin to publish pseudonymously, if they felt it was absolutely urgent to get a piece of research out. The spirit of adventure would probably be good for people's prose as well.

Well, someone has to draw up the floor plans for utopia. I found the page proofs of Waters's article while trying to clear my desktop before the start of the new administration. (Emphasis on "trying.") The title of the essay is "Slow Writing; or, Getting Off the Book Standard: What Can Journal Editors Do?" Another version ran as a Views piece here at Inside Higher Ed last year -- and if you missed it, as I did at the time, I'd recommend a look.

The alternative to utopia is not pretty, but a lot more probable.

The fundamental problem with the approach that Waters takes in his essay -- and in his little book Enemies of Promise: Publishing, Perishing, and the Eclipse of Scholarship (University of Chicago Press, 2004) -- is that it overlooks the essentially compulsive nature of the human urge to produce and accumulate garbage. Waters seems to assume that the production of badly written monographs is an unfortunate failing of the system that could be fixed if different standards were adopted. But this is wrong.

The system works just fine. Unreadable works are unreadable precisely because nobody was ever supposed to read them in the first place. Communication is not the point; accumulation is. The producer of text accumulates credit for publication, while the glory of an ambitious research collection is that it is complete, whether or not any given work is used. The beauty of e-publishing is that it reduces the amount of physical space required to store all the unread material.

As it happens, all of this was predicted almost 50 years ago by Hal Draper, a figure best known (at least among people who know this kind of thing) for numerous definitive works in the field of Marxology. Draper also translated literary works by Goethe and Heinrich Heine, and wrote a widely circulated book about the Free Speech Movement in Berkeley. I've heard that when the Sixties catchphrase "Don't trust anyone over the age of thirty" first caught on in Berkeley, people sometimes added "except for Hal Draper."

Draper's day job was as an acquisitions librarian at the University of California at Berkeley. His experience inspired him to write a short story called "MS Fnd in a Lbry," first published in The Magazine of Science Fiction and Fantasy in 1961 and currently available online.

The anthropologist from Andromeda who narrates this piece of library-science fiction reconstructs the efforts of civilization to handle the accumulation of books generated as it spread throughout the galaxy. Libraries the size of a solar system were not enough to handle the human urge to churn out books. After billions of years of accumulation, a technological breakthrough allowed all of the material to be stored, in subatomic format, in a single drawer. Not to give too much away, but it isn't always easy to remember where you filed things.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Here Comes the Flood

  • Posted by mkt on January 21, 2009 at 7:15am EST
  • "His experience inspired him to write a short story called “MS Fnd in a Lbry,” "

    Nice! And with his reference to 'Ariadnology', he may've been the first person to talk about "the web" -- in 1961!

  • publish or perish
  • Posted by tom abeles , editor at on the horizon on January 21, 2009 at 11:55am EST
  • As an editor of a journal focusing on the area of futures in general and education as a major area, the ideas and concerns in this piece and that of Lindsay Waters and others cited are on target.

    The "game" is not just amongst the academics but also the publishers. Create sufficient presence to get submissions gives a high rejection to acceptance ratio and creates the appearance of quality. Get sufficient "hits" in the citation indexes then raises the publication in the ranks. Both increase subscriptions and downloads from protected sites.

    This parallels the academic ritual of publish/perish, a variance of the old Indian game of counting coup or scalps.

    With the rise in FLOSS or the free online journals where there is almost unlimited storage, globally, there are more ways to get ideas out to be "heard" and responded to. Web 2.x changes the nature of idea sharing.

    In the US, the continuing attrition of tenured positions as well as the lag time between the idea and its appearance in scholarly journals changes the nature of the "game".

    Well crafted ideas in a well written piece take on a different color in a journal from that on the net, just as a leather covered book has a different purpose than the content presented on the web or in a paperback book, no matter how well glued.

    In the US, the tenured academic is becoming an endangered species. And, the brick-spaced habitat may also be shrinking. Both are products of an invasive Web 2.x, growing and mutating. The journal, like flowers dependent on bees, may also be endangered, at least in its current embodiment. It too may need to adapt to a changing environment. It has been said that there are over 20,000 academic journals. Expect a shrinkage in journal genetic material in the near future.

  • too much publishing?
  • Posted by LM on January 21, 2009 at 11:55am EST
  • The solution is easy: require all to teach many classes with many students. Try 3 * 25 for instance, changing the preparations regularly. Promotion and raises linked to teaching evaluations. No time to research...

  • Slash and burn
  • Posted by Jim Reische at University of Michigan on January 21, 2009 at 1:01pm EST
  • I have a method for dealing with the deluge: I just burn off the top 3' or so of accumulated paper in my office once every six months. It allows light to get through to the decaying material in the understory, helping new ideas to germinate while replenishing a layer of nutrient-rich, ashy fertilizer...

    Scott's right on the mark, as usual. But I don't know that I would attribute the problem to an acquisitive turn in human nature, or even an impulse to generate trash (although each of us ultimately speaks from the platform of his or her own particular illness...). From where I sit, as an expatriate of academia and a one-time university press editor, it looks like nothing so much as a profoundly neurotic declarative urge. We've all met the boorish graduate student or professor who, in response to a simple inquiry about the weather, launches into a 25-minute excursus on their latest research. Let the interrogator beware.

    This tendency may in part be cultural: in the absence of critical thought, academia is too ready to believe that any idea is worth at least mentioning. Or it may be psychological: a sort of twitchy egoism that reacts to every external stimulus with an assertion of self. I don't pretend to understand the reasons, but I know the syndrome when I see it, and I've absolutely seen it time after time in meetings and manuscripts. People just can't stop talking... or writing.

    So, Scott, maybe it's time we create a new field of "Silence Studies"? Silence being as invisible to academics today as whiteness was before David Roediger and co.?

    Then again, that would just lead to a new deluge of books, essays, conferences, and general speechifying.

    Sometimes it's better simply not to say anything at all.

  • Require busy work?
  • Posted by Faculty Person on January 21, 2009 at 1:05pm EST
  • LM: what you are proposing sounds like busy work. Let's just keep them artificially busy.

    I don't disagree that increasing the amount of teaching faculty do at some places or that good teachers are valuable (as it happens I work at a teaching school -- 4 course load, three preps) but not just as make work.

  • It's not ego...
  • Posted by Deborah on January 22, 2009 at 7:40am EST
  • It's an oversaturated job market in which job applicants are weeded out based on number of publications, because it's not as if a hiring committee is going to sit down and read any of them. It's a tenure process in which the 'standards' (defined as number of publications) keep going up to impossible levels. I'd be perfectly happy to sit on one article, revising it until it sparkles, but I would also like to have a job so I do what the job requires.