Re: Call for papers

Kathryn Aegis (
Wed, 3 Jun 1998 10:07:37 -0700 (PDT)

I support a peer review process for journal publication, but not for
compiled anthologies. Many anthologies contain articles that have been
previously published in journals, and thereby subjected to a review
process. But some of the most outstanding anthologies I have read
contain material that it would be awkward to impose that sort of
process on. How do you peer review a poem? A personal essay?

One of my favorite anthologies, Bi Any Other Name, began as a personal
project by two people who wanted to see certain material published that
other publications were rejecting because it was too 'radical' (sound
familiar?) The two editors saw the quality of this work when no one
else did, and the result was a groundbreaking book that did not sell
well at first but has now become the 'bible of bi-ness' and is included
in many academic curricula.

Kathryn Aegis
> From Wed Jun 3 07:21:47 1998
> X-Authentication-Warning: majordom set sender to using -f
> X-Sender:
> Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 18:28:43 -0600
> To:
> From: Borys Wrobel <>
> Subject: Re: Call for papers
> References: <>
> Sender:
> Reply-To:
> I think its a valuable idea. Id like to suggest that the editors of the
> book might consider publishing the essays in the book after first
> sumbitting them to several peer reviewers. For instance, the Max Moore's
> paper on PCR makes all sense to me, and I think a similar one should be
> included in a book like that, but it could be prudent to first send it to
> several philosophers, and whose field is epistemology at that.. Its just an
> example, I dont think anybody would find anything wrong with that
> particular paper, its just no other essay comes to my mind right now. At
> worst, such process helps just polishing the style, at best, to pinpoint
> any bugs which might be there.
> b