Editor changes his mind about submission

[Myword]

 I was asked to write a book review for a journal and agreed, knowing it would not be published soon. After receiving it, the editor says that it will not be published for several
years. It is only 2 pages of an interesting new book. He says it is off topic for the next few years of the journal. I would not have reviewed it if I knew this. I suspect that in a few years it will be delayed again or even forgotten. He suggested that I  may submit the review to another journal. (Last year he rejected an article I submitted off hand.) I feel this is a soft rejection.
I wonder whether there's another reason for delaying it. Unsatisfied with my review? Is this common? Happen to you?

[youllneverwalkalone]

I was asked to write a book review for a journal and agreed, knowing it would not be published soon. After receiving it, the editor says that it will not be published for several
years. It is only 2 pages of an interesting new book. He says it is off topic for the next few years of the journal. I would not have reviewed it if I knew this. I suspect that in a few years it will be delayed again or even forgotten. He suggested that I  may submit the review to another journal. (Last year he rejected an article I submitted off hand.) I feel this is a soft rejection.
I wonder whether there's another reason for delaying it. Unsatisfied with my review? Is this common? Happen to you?

So, the same editor who solicited the review is now telling you it will take years for it to be published? That seems very unprofessional. Also, publishing a book review long after the publication of a the book in question does not make sense either.

I suspect the editor is unhappy with the content of the review but doesn't have the balls to say it outright. I would write them, point out you only did this because the ask, and demand that they find a solution. 

[Wahoo Redux]

Thank them. Politely withdraw. Send it somewhere else.  Don't work with this editor again.

[Hegemony]

Eh, you've already gone through hassle with this — don't make it any more hassle. That would require you to write letters to other editors, etc.. Let this editor publish it years from now. Most publications wait for years anyway. And book reviews count for almost nothing on your CV, so you lose almost nothing by not getting it out right away. It is annoying, but just move on and work on the next thing.

[traductio]

I was asked to write a book review for a journal and agreed, knowing it would not be published soon. After receiving it, the editor says that it will not be published for several
years. It is only 2 pages of an interesting new book. He says it is off topic for the next few years of the journal. I would not have reviewed it if I knew this. I suspect that in a few years it will be delayed again or even forgotten. He suggested that I  may submit the review to another journal. (Last year he rejected an article I submitted off hand.) I feel this is a soft rejection.
I wonder whether there's another reason for delaying it. Unsatisfied with my review? Is this common? Happen to you?

Are you dealing with the book review editor, who answers in turn to the editor-in-chief? I'm a book review editor, and that's how things work for me. Occasionally the editor-in-chief and I aren't on the same page, but he has the general view of the issues coming up, and I don't.

Perhaps that's what happened?

[jerseyjay]

Was there anything controversial about your review? Did you dismiss a book by a renown scholar? Write a particularly hostile review? I am curious if there is some underlying reason the editor did not like your review.

That said, it probably doesn't matter. My impulse would be to keep a copy of the review you sent, but then let the editor do what he will with it. As have been mentioned, book reviews don't really count for much of anything on a CV, so you are only really out time. I would probably just write this off as a loss--except your presumably got a free book out of it. Maybe the time you spent reading and thinking about the book could be applied to one of your own research projects.

I would only do anything if I thought that the book were so important, or my thoughts about the book were so important, that it would be worthwhile to find another venue to publish the review.

Only once have I gone to the editor in chief about a book review. This was for a journal I had published in several times and had a decent relationship with the editor. I wrote a book review, and the book review editor not only changed my writing style (making it more pompous), but also changed a basic argument of the review. All without having read the book in question. The editor agreed to change my argument back as it had been (I didn't push the style questions.)

Once I wrote to the  book review editor of a journal asking to do a book review, and then the book arrived at my school. I wrote a review and the journal editor had not idea what it was.

Once I arranged with the editor of a journal to do a book review, got the book sent to me, and then when I tried to arrange with the book review editor she never replied to my emails, so I just let it go.

There have been a few times when I turn in a book review it isn't run for several issues.

To be honest, I see book reviews as a way to get a free book, read something I want to read anyway, keep my name out there as an expert on a question. I put them on my CV, but I actually think having too many book reviews (except for longer ones) rather than having too few might raise red flags.

So in summary, I would just let it go.

 

[delsur]

To be honest, I see book reviews as a way to get a free book, read something I want to read anyway, keep my name out there as an expert on a question. I put them on my CV,

So in summary, I would just let it go.

My position too.

[Myword]

I did not not write anything controversial. I summarized the author's ideas in a positive way though I disagreed. The author himself  (not well known)said that he changed his mind totally and disavows the whole book.) Could that be why the editor is delaying it?  I suspect that  it will not be published...and forgotten. Or this is a soft turn down, empty offer.
I worked a lot on it and I don't have a c.v. any more because I am not looking for a job or promotion. So it is for my pride( and of course for the author.) The editor didn't read the review carefully, judging from the comments, nor did he know much about the book. I don't think there's an editor in chief.
 
   Such frustration I have had in recent years trying to publish. It is only for my pride and doing meaningful, hopefully, significant work.

[youllneverwalkalone]

I did not not write anything controversial. I summarized the author's ideas in a positive way though I disagreed. The author himself  (not well known)said that he changed his mind totally and disavows the whole book.) Could that be why the editor is delaying it?

I think you should ask that. Also ask them why they solicited a paper they had no intention of publishing.