Pulling a chapter at the proofs stage?

[wanderer]

Thanks all for your responses. I remember some of you from my grad school days many years ago--ruralguy, spork, and I think hegemony.

I think maybe I'll make one more stab at my one sentence author's note and see if they can accept a little more agency in it. I will also add that some have encouraged me to pull the article, which is true. I also wrote to my advisor and will see what he says. In the end, this may also become its own article, writing about the challenges of this for scholarship.

[Hibush]

Withdrawing the chapter is capitulating to those who use terminology you feel is wrong. Why do that? Then you perspective is completely suppressed.

Stand your ground and make the case that your statement on the terminology is necessary for academic rigor.

[wanderer]

It's a little frustrating because basically the only leverage I have at this stage are (1) trying to pull the chapter, or (2) going above the editors to the press. It's also very possible they'd just publish my chapter (they have the publication agreement for it) or steamroll the press.

[Hibush]

It's a little frustrating because basically the only leverage I have at this stage are (1) trying to pull the chapter, or (2) going above the editors to the press. It's also very possible they'd just publish my chapter (they have the publication agreement for it) or steamroll the press.

Given the brevity of the editor's response, it sounds as if the conversation has barely begun. You are not at the end. 

The editor and you have a mutual goal of publishing a good chapter and book.

Would it be possible to telephone the editor to ask for a more complete explanation? You may find additional considerations that you had not included. Then you can also ask how the editor will address the considerations that concern you. In the worst case, the editor does not budge, at least you know a bit more.

[mamselle]

Someone once said to me, "Don't get on a negative power trip."

I think they meant, don't go down the slope of assumptions that start with the idea that you have no power and no agency and the only way out is down so you might as well self-immolate to begin with (to mix destructive metaphors).

I don't have enough experience from my own perspective, but I've worked for people who did things like turn all the reviewer's objections around by the end of the week, and saw their piece out before the rival lab on the other coast.

So it might be worth it to stay in the game longer--you can't talk anymore to someone you've hung up on.

M.

[wanderer]

Part of the challenge is the timeline on this is so short. So it went:
1. Get proofs and respond (10 days ago). We were given one week to correct proofs.
2. Offered short author's note (8 days ago)
3. Editors only accept first 10 words of author's note
4. Talk to one of the editors on phone (he was pretty sympathetic, but he doesn't seem to be the one making the decision). At this point, we realized there is space for a longer footnote and it wouldn't affect proofs much. (7 days ago)
5. Write footnote and submit with corrected proofs (3 days ago)
6. Footnote rejected, and as we only have a week with the proofs, he's pushing for a quick response on the really short (10 words) editor's note (3 days ago)

If I still had a month to work this out, it would be a different situation, but I kind of have the feeling this is going to be finalized early this week. From their end, they're putting together two big projects in the next week or two, so I can see how it seems like a minor detail.

"Pick up the phone" is good advice I've gotten in the past here. We're probably all a little more stuck in our heads in this year and less face:face. I do feel like one of the editors understands me, but I think he's kind of the underling to Big Name.

I'm hoping they'll accept the slightly punchier note and this may really be an anecdote I use in future work on this subject. I'll follow up with how it works out.

On my end it's also been a reminder that part of my job is a commitment to this topic. It's great to no longer be junior, where I would definitely have to "go along to get along." Lately I've been using that new expression "AITA" and it helps me here also. As an editor, I would definitely offer more flex, but the senior editor may be thin skinned on this. Thank you all again for letting me think out loud here.