![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
...a sad commentary on the current state of my brain, forsooth. But thank goodness for
kayliemalinza who kept me in the loop!
I will say that getting an email which begins:
is pretty squeeful. Like. YAY. =D
I've heard mixed things about Cambridge Scholars Press; founded by some scholars at Cambridge, some seem to think it has semi-vanity press associations because of its name; but others seem to think it's simply a young press, trying hard to establish itself in the humanities. But... I checked out their website, and they seem respectable.
Anyway. This means I have to expand that paper, yo. *laughs* I'll just add it to the list! At this rate, I'll sleep when I'm dead.
YAY!
ETA: The abstract for the paper is here, f-locked, if you're interested. The paper's called When Worlds Continue: The Doctor's Adventures in Fandom and Metatextuality.
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
I will say that getting an email which begins:
Fellow Doctor Who scholars,
We have a book deal.
Cambridge Scholars Publishing has accepted my proposal and is in the process of generating and mailing a book contract. So — if you’ve been putting off reworking that conference manuscript, now is the time.
is pretty squeeful. Like. YAY. =D
I've heard mixed things about Cambridge Scholars Press; founded by some scholars at Cambridge, some seem to think it has semi-vanity press associations because of its name; but others seem to think it's simply a young press, trying hard to establish itself in the humanities. But... I checked out their website, and they seem respectable.
Anyway. This means I have to expand that paper, yo. *laughs* I'll just add it to the list! At this rate, I'll sleep when I'm dead.
YAY!
ETA: The abstract for the paper is here, f-locked, if you're interested. The paper's called When Worlds Continue: The Doctor's Adventures in Fandom and Metatextuality.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-27 08:04 am (UTC)Considering that the conference is notoriously uneven (John has a horror story about some poor presenter whose "psychology" paper said, basically, "video games are dumb and kids these days are lazy"), I think "semi-vanity press" is alright, especially since it's not the universal impression. Also, duuuuude. We'll be published. My dad was all like, "This takes care of Christmas next year. We'll just buy a ton of copies!" Which will be weird, frankly, because my Aunt Karen is a Who fan so she'll actually read the thing. ^^
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-27 05:03 pm (UTC)lol. I prefer your dad's response!
And hey, you gave me a shoutout on your journal! Which is how I found out about the damn thing in the first place. I suck!
Um. re: conference uneven. Yeah. There were even a few Who ones where I was like, um... okay. Aaaaand???
I finally watched the Death of Adric. *sob*
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-27 11:52 pm (UTC)"um.. okay. Aaaaand???"
I don't remember if you were at that panel or not, but the funniest thing was when one paper put forth a very shallow thesis (Cybermen = terrorists) and didn't expand on it at all, and then the next paper used that thesis as a given and used it to extrapolate various wondrous things. Basically, it did in two paragraphs what the first paper needed ten pages for. Obviously, it was funny in a sort of dark, pathetic way. :/
OMG I NOT, RITE? I've probably seen it twelve times by this point, but I still tear up. It's his faaaaaaace. :(
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-28 05:11 am (UTC)I wasn't at that one. But what about the Daleks-music-lips thing, where the guy'd obviously not seen any of the eps where we, you know, actually see the Daleks? D'you think they're invited too???
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-28 10:15 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-27 10:34 am (UTC)Any chance you can gives us a clue what your paper'll be on?
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-27 03:35 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-27 03:42 pm (UTC)Does that mean there are two DW books in the process of being written??
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-27 04:51 pm (UTC)The other book is soliciting proposals for chapters and comes from a different publisher and has had their RPF out for some time. Both Who, both academic, different sources and focii.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-27 05:11 pm (UTC)You mean CFP, but THIS IS THE BEST TYPO EVER.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-27 05:11 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-27 05:15 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-27 05:17 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-27 04:52 pm (UTC)The first, that you're referring to I think, is published by the SF journal Foundation, and the book is gonna be called The Unsilent Library (http://www.sf-foundation.org/publications/drwho.html).
This one's also a collection of articles, and it grew out of an area group for a conference done by the journal Film and History and is organized by a filmmaker/prof from Baylor University.
The really funny thing is I was planning on submitting this paper that I'd already written to the first one, but now that the second one has a home... I'm going to have to think of a new topic for that one! *laughs* woe!!
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-27 05:02 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-27 05:11 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-27 04:58 pm (UTC)As for what I'm gonna submit for the SF Journal one... no bloody idea.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-27 05:03 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-27 03:19 pm (UTC)As for it being a vanity press, I don't really agree with that. The depth of their titles, at least, suggest something beyond a small cadre of people who can't get published anywhere else. *g* And a quick google of a few of the titles that caught my eye showed that people they publish also are published by Oxford, University of Chicago, etc.
Are their rates and royalty policies consistent with a commercial publishing house?
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-27 04:53 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-27 05:11 pm (UTC)When it comes out I'll pimp it in my department and on my flist :) .
(no subject)
Date: 2009-01-27 05:16 pm (UTC)