vita brevis est, under consideration is longus ...

One thing that surprised me about being a graduate student is how long it takes to hear back about anything, be it an article you submit, be it a fellowship application, be it once you're on the job market, etc. You might recall a blog entry that I wrote eons ago about a fellowship application due on February 15th. It's not like there's a point in my history that I can point to as the crushing defeat in which I discovered I did not get the scholarship, because I still haven't heard anything. In fact, there is still the glimmer of hope ... out there, there is $20,000 that no one has contacted me about to say it is not mine ...

Well, back in August, a journal had a contest for best graduate student paper submission, which would include an award, money, and publication. Now, to make it clear, I did not win. In fact, I kind of forgot about it around month four. Occasionally I would think, "My advisor is telling me I need to have an article in circulation, but it's still in that contest." To be honest, this thought of its limbo status was kind of comforting, because it meant I could excuse myself for not working on it anymore.

Well, five months after I sent my newborn article out into a hostile world (I named my firstborn "Harry"), I got an email saying I did not win the article contest, but would I like to have the article considered for regular publication? So of course I responded yes, and another four and a half months passed. Again, I forgot about the article, until I got the editor's reply: "We are willing to accept your essay for publication if you revise it according to the suggestions found in the two reports. though the readers do not perfectly concur, they both offer helpful guidance for revision." Yes!!!!!! It has only taken ten months to be told that I might someday be accepted!!!!!!

Still, there are some problems. It is, of course, difficult to know how to revise an article on which the two readers "do not perfectly concur"; it would have been cool if the editors judged this as confirmation of my ability deftly to navigate between two opposing extremes, but no such luck. Another problem is that the reader comments often say things like, "the author Leopold could say more about X," which is all true, and which an earlier draft did in fact say something about, until I had to delete it to stay within their word limit: in order to make room for the new, i.e. previously old, things, I'll have to severely amputate poor baby Harry. Another daunting feature of the revision process is that my reader comments are dang smart. This poses a problem insofar as I must actually understand their criticisms/objections, but sometimes they are so nuanced I'm not sure that I can.

I also have to admit that this conditional acceptance is rather scary. First, there is the concern that, despite being conditionally "accepted," if I fail to "fix" my article enough, it will get turned down, and then I will feel rather silly, and by silly, I mean sad and pathetic. Second (and this is perhaps a strange response) there is the fear that it will actually be in print: there it will be, portable, able to be hung up on a wall and have a big bullseye drawn on it. What if people discover some unconscionable error, such as that I listed an incorrect place of publication in my bibliography? It seems so much easier when it was in article limbo and I could just presume a reader would catch any mistakes before publication. I should remark that despite the general tone of this entry, I am very happy, and I am more than willing to hack off Harry's various limbs if it means a published article and hopefully (next year) a job.