How to go about submitting book proposals?

In our new "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

How does one go about submitting a book proposal?

I have heard various tales: folks who got in touch with editors with just a brief paragraph pitch, to garner interest, and then waited to see if the editor wanted more, and then sent more; folks who didn't seek a publisher until a full manuscript draft was written; some who submitted a 10 page or so synopsis + a chapter; and so on.

In general I'd really like to know how people have gone about the early stages of book publication.

Good question! We've discussed book proposals before, but it would be great to hear from readers with experience in getting proposals accepted.

I've had three proposals accepted. In my experience, most publishers have clear directions for submitting proposals on their website, often with forms they want you to fill out on the book's substance, competitors, etc. In none of the cases did I have a full manuscript written first. While I've heard that some people go that route, if it were me I'd worry about putting all the work into a full manuscript without a contract in hand.

What do other readers think? Any helpful tips or experiences to share?

Comments

[author]

I have had contracts for three monographs. The books are all in print now. For the first book, I approach a publisher with a 10 page proposal, and they agreed to read a draft of 1/3 of the book. It was not what they were looking to produce, as they press undergoing changes, but the editor recommended another press (one that is generally ranked higher by philosophers in my sub-field). I approached that publisher with a 10 page proposal (following their template), and they expressed interest in seeing the WHOLE manuscript. After the whole manuscript went through review and revisions, I was issued a contract. The second book also required revisions before I got a contract. But with the third book, I was able to get a contract on the basis of a proposal and a few chapters. Caution is in order. A very respect senior colleague (who is now dead) told me a book contract is worth nothing. If you read the terms you will realize they can sink the project at any time. So I would not put much stock in getting a contract up front. But I also would not embark on a book project without a clear idea and a sabbatical.

[Elizabeth]

My first book I had a proposal and three sample chapters available. I emailed the editors and sent the materials to those who were interested. I was offered contracts by two without the full manuscript.

[Michel]

For the first, I got a contract based on a few sample chapters. For the next two, I had complete manuscripts first.

I prefer to have a complete manuscript. It makes it easier to estimate the time required, and there's a lot less/no stress about deadlines, extensions, etc.

[Assistant prof]

I've done one solo book and one edited book. Both times began with reaching out by email to the editor. I told them about the book in a few sentences and asked if they'd like to hear more. Eventually they asked for a proposal. I sent it and took things from there.

I'm on the young side, so I didn't submit the proposal for my solo book until it was fully written. After the proposal, the editor wanted to send out a full book for review. But more senior folks might just need a proposal and a few draft chapters.

I guess you probably know this, but The Book Proposal Book by Laura Portwood-Stacer is amazing.

[The Real SLAC Prof]

Seconding the point about book contracts based on a proposal being meaningless for authors. I guess some authors get a psychological boost from having contract in hand or maybe some people find the proposal writing process helpful in itself, but the press is going to wait for a final, complete manuscript before making a final decision.

As far as I can tell, the main beneficiaries of advance book contracts in academia are the presses since they end up getting a right of first refusal.