Shorter Monograph series

[Ancient Fellow]

I am wrapping up a second book project that is shorter than a typical monograph. I have a question for the forum regarding the new series of shorter monographs. The general parameters are available on the websites, and I attach them here for those who haven't seen them:

Cambridge University Press: Cambridge Elements. 20-30k words. Ebook or paperback.
Stanford University Press: Stanford Briefs. 20-40k words. Ebook or paperback.
Routledge Focus. 20-50k words. Ebook or hardcover.
Palgrave MacMillan: Palgrave Pivots. 25-50k words. Ebook or hardcover.

All claim to be just as peer-reviewed as their full-size monographs, and to be available within roughly three months after final acceptance.

My questions are these:

1. Has anyone published with these new series and what was your experience?
2. Has anyone experienced anything regarding their value for tenure at your institution, or been told anything definitive regarding such?
3. Do any of the above series support/allow for photographs?
4. Are there other similar series in the academic publishing world?

[dr_codex]

Oxford has the "A Very Short Introduction" series (35,000 words). Not everything in this series was originally published in this format.

[traductio]

My next book (due out in spring) is 45k words, so it falls in those ranges. Rather than target presses with specific series, though, I just sent out conventional proposals (this is my third single-author book) and was upfront about the word count. This worked out well -- I wanted a publisher that published in open-access e-book format (or PDF with CC-BY license) as well as paper, and Athabasca University Press took the manuscript. Not everyone was open to the more experimental aspects of the book, but AUP was willing to take the risk. (Fingers crossed, but I should get the proofs next week.)

No idea what value the book will have for my eventual application to full (I already have tenure), but it won't be the only thing I'm hanging my hat on. I expect to have another more conventional monograph by that point, so this short one will be icing on the cake.

As for the publishers you listed, I'd avoid Palgrave, as their Pivot series, despite publishing some high quality books, is ridiculously expensive.

[Ancient Fellow]

Thanks for your input dr_codex and Traductio,

As these are new series, perhaps the minimal responses indicate that I'm asking the wrong question. Let's try, what other presses have forums members published a short monograph with, and of what length?

Thanks!

[Ancient Fellow]

Your forbearance please as I try to sort out what is best to do with my project.

I'm talking about a short monograph in the humanities (History / Classics). After reflection the last couple of weeks, I can add some material which will add value, but it feels like it's close to a natural length and too much more would be unwieldy padding. It is currently at 35k words, so I'm guessing possibly 40-45k when completed.

Some follow-up questions soliciting your experiences:

• How long was the shortest monograph you have published and who published it?


• How long is the shortest monograph you recommend to others? I know that academics used to publish shorter books a century ago, so let's make this the last quarter-century.


• For those of you whose projects produced large articles instead, were there positive reasons you went that route?

[Ancient Fellow]

My thanks to those who offered advice. As it happens, new material came to light which pushed the monograph to 57k words, and it was published by a university press. My author copies arrived today, which means a glass of wine for Mrs. Ancient Fellow and myself!

[mamselle]

Good for you--glad it worked out well!

I don't know enough to do more than guess, but I wonder if the reason for the light responses was also that most folks here who are doing books have to have them for tenure or promotion, and (as in traductio's case) a longer piece would seem to be more assured, whereas the shorter format might be too dicey?

Since you didn't say whether your book was for T or P, it might have been harder to comment; more brainstorming seems to happen around scenario-casting for those endeavors rather than more general evaluations.

I'm interested in the short-format idea since a couple of projects I have in mind for after-I-finish-the-ones-I'm-doing-now might be in that range (I already think I know where I'd send at least one of them, however).

I'm not in the T/P market, though, so, as an independent scholar in a couple of tiny humanities sub-fields that sometimes don't see much serious work published in the space of 5-10 years, that might be worth knowing more about.

However, it also all changes so quickly that by the time I get around to my next round of pieces, it could all be different again.

So, I guess I'm interested in hearing whether anyone else has any suggestions on this topic with those ideas in mind.

M.     

[Parasaurolophus]

I read an Element back in 2020, and it was amazing. Easily the best academic thing I'd read all year. On (3), the author included some of his own illustrations, so I imagine that photographs would be fine, so long as the permissions checked out.

[Ancient Fellow]

I wonder if the reason for the light responses was also that most folks here who are doing books have to have them for tenure or promotion, and (as in traductio's case) a longer piece would seem to be more assured, whereas the shorter format might be too dicey?

You are probably right about that. In principle, though, I agree with you and P. and think there are projects that are entirely worthy of a book regardless of length.  Worthy of tenure? Yes, on a case-by-case basis.

[jerseyjay]

I have used Oxford's Very Short Introduction in some of my classes, to give a short overview of a complicated topic (World War I, the American Revolution) that students need to know something about without getting into all the details. I also have read them for subjects that I am curious about but not going to do specialized research (e.g., the Mongols). I have also suggested them for students who are going to sit teacher licensing exams and need to have some basic knowledge about something without being experts. (For example, in my state, to become a history teacher you need to pass an exam that includes questions in history, economics, political science, and sociology. I have suggested students read the books on Macro and Micro economics before taking the exam, since history students here don't need to take econ classes.)

My sense, however, is that authors are already published in their field, often having written more specialized monographs. These books seem to be more synthetic, and to me would seem more difficult than writing a longer, more specialized monograph. I don't think I would try to write one until I was no longer worried about tenure.

I doubt they would count for tenure at an R1. At my school--an open admissions public university--they might, so long as they were peer reviewed and were addition to other publications. They may count for promotion, so long as there are other aspects (significant service or teaching, or other publications).

[euro_trash]

following...

I've got a colleague who published a book with Palgrave Pivot and it was well received. They are great at getting peer reviewed material out quick, though they're a bit pricey