Aside from developing a good disseration topic, one of the most difficult problems young philosophers encounter is getting published. Now, I'm far from a star in this area, but to the extent that I've had some success and have talked to other people who have had more success than I've had, I think I've learned a few important lessons. Since they're just my own impressions, I'll present them as suggestions.
Suggestion#1: submit, submit, submit
It's often asked when you should submit to journals. Of course, it's generally not a very good idea to send out incredibly sloppy work -- but every person I've known who has been successful sends out a lot of work for review. And I've found that it has worked in my own case. About a year out of grad school (in my first job), I asked two people I went to grad school who had been very successful publishing exactly how they did it. They both said: "send stuff out, the more the better." I followed their advice and now, two years later, I've published several things. Even if you send stuff out that isn't fantastic, (A) you can still work on the paper while it's out, (B) you may get very useful comments if the piece is rejected, and (C) you might just receive a nice surprise: an acceptance or revise-and-resubmit with just the kinds of comments you need to make it a much better piece. Finally, this process can actually help you figure out which of your ideas to give up on (a good way to cut your losses). There are at least four papers I sent out a bunch of times (which I thought were rather good) that I learned, through the review process, were pretty much garbage. If I hadn't sent them out, I might still be wasting time on them.
Suggestion#2: have faith in yourself
In my experience, success in publishing is partly a result of confidence and trust in oneself. As a graduate student, it is easy to become accustomed to judging yourself in terms of others' opinions of your work (specifically, your professors and dissertation supervisors). I've found, in my own case, that learning my way out of this perspective has been perhaps the most important thing in terms of reserach production, enjoyment, and success. Look, the simple fact is this: no matter how good your work is, someone (indeed, many people probably!) will think it is utter garbage. If you don't believe me, try reading RM Hare's review of A Theory of Justice -- particularly the part where Hare says Rawls' work isn't very important and shouldn't receive much attention. Trust yourself. Do work that you find interesting. Get feedback from others, by all means, but trust your instincts. They've gotten you this far.
Suggestion#3: seek feedback, but not too much of it -- and don't be a perfectionist
Like some other people, I tend to work in almost complete isolation. I rarely show anyone my work until I present it at conferences or publish it. I'm terrible at seeking out help, always have been by nature. But, it's crucial to get help one way or another. This is why I send stuff I'm working on to just about every conference that I can get my hands on. Other people will point out the parts of your work that isn't "there" yet. It will help you move towards publication. At the same time, though, don't "over-feedback" yourself. If you give your work to too many people -- or people who can find something wrong with just about anything -- it can be paralyzing. You'll never solve every problem. Almost every "famous" paper in the literature has serious problems. As Steve Jobs said, "Real artists ship." No work is perfect. Ship it, imperfections and all.
Comments