Category Archives: Books

20 September 2012

The Evolution of a Book, Pt. 8: Working with Your Copy Editor

By Mark R. Cheathem

(Previous entries in this series: Pts. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7.)

Another extremely important relationship that you’ll have as you see your book manuscript through to publication is the one with the copy editor. Much of the previous advice I’ve given about referees and editors applies to copy editors as well, but let me expound on this relationship a bit.

All of the copy editors with whom I’ve worked were thorough and pleasant. In fact, they struck me as eternal optimists, as in “These errors can be fixed, and your book will be great.” I’m not sure how I would handle a surly, pessimistic copy editor, and I pity you if you’ve had one.

At the publishers I’ve worked with, copy editors were freelance hires. Sometime after the submission and review of the manuscript in-house, the editor sends it out to the copy editor, who reviews it for errors of style, formatting, citation, and substance. In history, they work with the latest edition of the Chicago Manual of Style and the press’ style sheet of preference. How they juggle and reconcile the two is beyond me, and I’m usually a detail person.

Once the copy editor is finished, s/he will send you electronic and/or paper copies of the manuscript with his/her edits. The author’s responsibility is to go through the edits, indicate acceptance of changes, explain why changes are not necessary, and answer any questions the copy editor had about the manuscript. It is a tedious process that requires substantial time and concentration. For the AJ bio, I spent the better part of three days on this job, but this was my fourth time with a book manuscript. Plan on spending more time if it’s your first experience.

Copy editors are very reasonable people. If there are edits with which you disagree, and they don’t violate the press’ style sheet, they’ll usually agree to your suggestions. But don’t be unreasonable, and for heaven’s sake, don’t boss them around. Also understand that copy editors have their own editing quirks at times. Sometimes the quirks make things better, sometimes they don’t, but remember that they just read through 300+ pages of your own quirky ideas about commas, hyphens, and complete citations.

Once you’ve made the changes, either on paper or via the word-processing program of the copy editor’s choice, you’ll send the manuscript back to the copy editor, who will ready the manuscript for the press. At that point, any major changes to your manuscript will need to be done, since the next stage, page proofs, only allows minor changes and corrections of egregious errors.

Let me close with one final thought about copy editors. They are the last reader before your book is published. As someone who likely is not an expert in your field, they have an eye for whether the book will be able to reach a broader audience. For that reason, listen carefully to any substantive recommendations that they make about content.

Part 9 is here.

1 comment | posted in Books, Writing advice

30 August 2012

Free Polk Biography and Battle of New Orleans Study

By Mark R. Cheathem

Update: All four books have been claimed.

I have four free books I’ll send to the first person who wants them. Send me an e-mail (jacksonianamerica at gmail dot com) or a tweet (@markcheathem).

The first is volume 2 of the Sellers biography of James K. Polk. It’s a softcover book, and the interior is unchanged from the original edition I have on my shelf.

The second is a three-volume National Park Service study of the Chalmette battlefield and national park.

Leave a comment | posted in Battle of New Orleans, Books, James K. Polk

6 August 2012

Review of Stephens and Giberson, The Anointed: Evangelical Truth in a Secular Age

By Mark R. Cheathem

I finished off my summer reading about fundamentalist/evangelical Christianity with The Anointed. Co-authors Randall Stephens and Karl Giberson address six main topics about modern evangelical Christianity in the United States: creationism, nationalistic history, psychology, apocalyptic thought, cultural parallelism, and the loose-knit network of leaders and followers that adhere to modern American evangelicalism.

Several of the chapters focus on one representative evangelical leader to discuss the topic at hand. For example, in the chapter on nationalistic history, David Barton serves as the representative figure for Stephens and Giberson to explore the interpretations of U.S. history that emphasize the exclusivity of the nation’s Christian heritage. The chapter on creationism focuses on Ken Ham, the founder of Answers in Genesis and the Creation Museum. Not surprisingly, James Dobson and Hal Lindsey draw much of the authors’ attention in the chapters on psychology and apocalyptic thought, respectively. In a refreshing change of pace, an “every man” serves as the thread of continuity for the chapter looking at the creation of a separate and parallel Christian culture in the United States, one that encompasses education and consumerism, among other things. The final chapter pulls together the first five through its discussion of the influential role played Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and Oral Roberts, in creating modern evangelicalism.

One of the strengths of the book is the authors’ inclusion of Christian voices that combine faith and intellect honestly. For example, Barton’s skewed and disingenuous interpretation of U.S. history is balanced by that of Mark Noll, an evangelical and well-respected historian. Francis Collins, an evangelical Christian who heads the National Institutes of Health, presents a Christian perspective on faith and science that exposes the weakness of Ham’s emphasis on young-earth creationism.

By including these voices in contrast to the more well-known faces of evangelical Christianity, Stephens and Giberson underscore their main argument: the tension between the city of God and the city of Man is one that has existed since Christianity’s inception, and speaking to it requires intellectual honesty of the sort one often does not find among the most vocal evangelical Christian leaders.

For me personally, all of the leading evangelical figures present in this book were part of my formative years, both physically and spiritually. In my pre-college fundamentalist years, most of them, such as Dobson, were considered liberal compromisers because they attempted to engage the secular world instead of living separately. As I grew older and moved into evangelicalism, many of them became part of my mainstream thinking. Now, I don’t view any of them as authoritative.

As cliché as it sounds, The Anointed forced me to look into the mirror of my past and helped me understand how the same group of people could mean so many different things to me at different stages of my life. If for no other reason, I’m glad I read it for that.

4 comments | posted in Books, Evangelical Christianity

26 July 2012

Review of Himes, The Sword of the Lord: The Roots of Fundamentalism in an American Family

By Mark R. Cheathem

I’ll be honest–I didn’t expect much from this biography of influential fundamentalist preacher and writer John R. Rice. Knowing that the author, Andrew Himes, was Rice’s grandson left me prepared for hagiography and hero worship. I was pleasantly surprised to be proven wrong.

The Sword of the Lord examines the life and times of John R. Rice. Himes opens the biography by discussing his rebellion against his family’s fundamentalist faith, a theme that he interweaves throughout the rest of the book.

The first section of the book that details the Rice family’s arrival in North America is a bit slow. The story picks up as the Rices move west. In antebellum Missouri, they establish themselves as slave owners. During the Civil War, they moved to Texas, where John R. Rice was born in 1895. Himes traces his grandfather’s salvation experience, development into a revival preacher, move to Wheaton College, and eventual settlement in Murfreesboro, Tennessee. Along the way, Rice became one of the leading fundamentalist voices via his writings (What Must I Do to be Saved? and Bobbed Hair, Bossy Wives, and Women Preachers being two of the most well known) and his publication, The Sword of the Lord.

At various times, Rice was friends with J. Frank Norris, Mordecai Ham, Bob Jones, Sr., Bob Jones, Jr., Billy Graham, and Jerry Falwell. His significance was in helping push Graham into “‘new evangelicalism’” (p. 244) by joining with others in separating from the up-and-coming revivalist. This principle of separation, which is one of the hallmarks of traditional American fundamentalism, helped pave the way for more politically engaged fundamentalists, such as Falwell, who moved away from traditional fundamentalism. Toward the end of his life, Rice tried unsuccessfully to push fundamentalists of his ilk back toward Graham, Falwell, and new evangelicalism. He was thwarted in part by Curtis Hutson, the man he appointed to succeed him at The Sword of the Lord, seen here being carried in on a throne for Curtis Hutson Day:

I appreciated Himes’ honesty about himself and his grandfather. He’s particularly critical of Rice’s friendship with, and support of, fundamentalist members of the Klan, including his own father and J. Frank Norris. He also doesn’t shy away from Rice’s racially segregationist views, which were (and, to some extent, still are) common in fundamentalist Baptist circles.

I learned a lot about American fundamentalism from this biography. Its has its flaws–it needed a heavier editorial hand to prevent some obvious mistakes and repetition, and the index is seriously lacking. Overall, though, it deserves a read if you want to learn more about “‘the 20th Century’s Mightiest Pen’” (229).

In case you’re interested, my personal connection to Rice is the Bill Rice Ranch in Murfreesboro, where I spent time as a child and a teenager at revivals and conferences. (Bill Rice was John R. Rice’s half-brother.) As a child, I also frequently read (and had read to me) Elizabeth Rice Handford’s Those Kids in Proverbsville.

Leave a comment | posted in Andrew Himes, Books, Fundamentalist Christianity, John R. Rice

23 July 2012

The Evolution of a Book, Pt. 7: Working with Your Editor(s)

By Mark R. Cheathem

What I imagine a book editor’s office looks like

(See also parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 of this series)

The most important relationship you will have as you look to publish is the one with your press’ acquisitions editor. For both of my books with LSU Press, I’ve worked with Rand Dotson.  Rand is a good editor for several reasons, but two stand out to me. The first is that he has a history Ph.D., which means he understands the challenges of the book projects undertaken by historians. The second is that he is succinct and direct in his correspondence.

A second important editorial contact that you might have is with a book series editor. I’ve had the honor of having both LSU Press books published in the Southern Biography Series. Bertram Wyatt-Brown was the editor for Old Hickory’s Nephew; the main title, in fact, was his suggestion. Bert was also editor when my proposal for the Jackson biography was contracted, but he retired in 2009, succeeded by Andrew Burstein. Both Bert and Andy wrote helpful editorial reports that made the manuscripts stronger.

My advice for working with editors is simple:

  1. Heed their advice. They are experienced editors and/or senior scholars, and you ignore them at your peril.
  2. Treat them with respect. Editors are your advocates with the press board, and they want you to succeed. Missing deadlines without permission, ignoring their suggestions, and acting as if you know more than they do are surefire ways to sabotage what could (and should) be a productive relationship for you both.
  3. Communicate. If you encounters problems while writing a manuscript or during the production process, talk to your editor. S/he can intervene in problematic situations that ease your mind and can explain why you can’t emboss your book cover with 24-karat gold.

Part 8 is here.

2 comments | posted in Books, Writing advice

9 July 2012

Revisiting Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter

By Mark R. Cheathem

Remember when I said I didn’t really get the Abe Lincoln/vampire mash-up novel and movie? After reading W. Scott Poole’s article in the HuffPo, I’m rethinking my opinion.

Poole makes the following argument:

If you’ve read the novel, you know it’s a dark rendering of America’s secret history, the idea that dark powers have moved through the structures of American culture since the beginning. These evil powers, which in 1860 wanted a nation of their own, see human enslavement as a way to feed their appetites.

In my early discussions with my students, this was actually one aspect of the book that troubled me a bit. Didn’t this equation of vampire conspiracies and slavery serve to undermine the struggle to move slavery to the center of the American narrative, especially in discussions about the meaning of the civil war? Fictionalizing it seemed to deal with a serious subject in a silly way.

My students helped me to see it a little differently. On some level, the elements of the fantastic in the novel point to deep, if hard to bear, truths about America. Grahame-Smith actually ties the great vampire plot to notions of “the Slave Power” in American life, an image employed by the abolitionist movement to describe how southern political influence, even over the Founding Documents, had left the republic twisted by inhuman bondage.

Moreover, its not that horror narratives of various kinds haven’t always been a part of the story of slavery. Slaves in the colonial era created a complex folklore about the southern master class, worrying that slave traders were cannibals. My research uncovered at least one case in Louisiana which newly imported slaves became convinced that the masters were witches and vampires (after watching them drink red wine).

These tales of terror illuminate rather than obscure important truths. Slavery did represent a kind of dark magic in which legal fictions transmogrified the bodies of human beings into property. The institution of slavery did become a kind of cannibalism, swallowing millions from the African continent, digesting them in the rice and cotton fields in the relentless pursuit of wealth that characterized the alleged southern “aristocrats.”

Using Poole’s argument, then, I could write an AJ: Alien Slayer novel that uses aliens as a substitute for the Second Bank of the U.S. This would fit with Jackson’s argument that the Bank was under the control of foreigners (or aliens, using the contemporary term for immigrants).*

If only I had the imagination to pull it off, then Hollywood might be my next stop.

* I’m not being sarcastic–I actually think this idea might work.

4 comments | posted in Abraham Lincoln, Andrew Jackson, Books

25 June 2012

Review of Balmer, Mine Eyes Have Seen the Glory: A Journey into the Evangelical Subculture in America

By Mark R. Cheathem

As part of my summer reading, I determined to pick up Randall Balmer’s Mine Eyes Have Seen the Glory. I first became acquainted with Balmer after seeing him in the God in America series on PBS. During one of his moments discussing the emergence of the evangelical movement, he mentioned that he grew up in a fundamentalist family. I found that interesting because, let’s face it, most fundamentalist Christians don’t embrace traditional academia.

Mine Eyes Have Seen the Glory is part historical examination, part sociological study [1]. Balmer traveled across the United States observing and interviewing various individuals and groups in an attempt to provide an “ethnographic study” demonstrating the “variations within a subculture generally regarded as monolithic” (7). He focused on “popular evangelicalism,” avoiding, for the most part, the big names in American evangelicalism, such as Billy Graham and Jerry Falwell. His travels took him to Dallas Theological Seminary and Word of Life Fellowship, produced meetings with self-proclaimed prophets and charismatic Episcopalians, and introduced him to Christians working in film, music, and television.

The chapters that resonated the most with me were the ones that spoke to my own background in fundamentalist Christianity. For example, the chapter on movie director Don Thompson reminded me of childhood Saturday nights spent at Highland Park Baptist Church watching the Thief in the Night series that he directed. (It was also timely because of the conspiracy theories course I taught this past spring, in which I referenced Thompson’s movies in our discussion of fundamentalist Christian apocalyptic thought.) I also enjoyed the last chapter on contemporary Christian music, which focused on one of my favorite bands, Jars of Clay.

I am not an historian of religion, but I hope that if Balmer puts out another edition, he will consider the following suggestions, two of which center on the fundamentalist aspects that I think get lost in discussions about American evangelicalism:

  1. The Christian school/homeschooling movements. As best as I can tell, both movements originated in the 1970s as a response to the supposed hedonism of the “drugs, sex, and rock’n'roll” decade of the 1960s. From kindergarten through high school graduation, I attended schools that used either Accelerated Christian Education or Pensacola Christian College’s A Beka curricula. That might have skewed my perception of how important the pre-collegiate Christian school was/is, as might have hearing stories from our older homeschooling friends about the battles in the 1980s to pursue that form of education.
  2. On a related note, I think a chapter on fundamentalist institutions of higher education, such as Bob Jones University (BJU), Tennessee Temple University (TTU), and Hyles Anderson College (HAC), would be especially pertinent today. BJU has experienced numerous controversies recently, from the controversy over its opposition to interracial relationships to this year’s expulsion of senior Chris Peterman, officially for accumulating too many demerits but realistically for organizing a protest against Chuck Phelps’ membership on the university board of trustees. (You can read more about the controversy involving Phelps and accusations that he protected a child rapist here and here.) The following that Jack Hyles obtained despite accusations of marital infidelity and other improprieties and allegations against his son, David, speak to the cultish behavior of some areas of Christian fundamentalism [2]. TTU’s transition from a fundamentalist “bulwark of the faith” into a “belittler of the faith,” as one alum put it, by rejoining the Southern Baptist Convention Great Commission Baptists brings into sharp relief the shrinking voice that old-time fundamentalists find in today’s United States.
  3. The uncomfortable relationship between fundamentalists and the LDS church is a particularly timely topic that, depending on the outcome of this year’s presidential election, may have lasting resonance. I don’t think it unfair to say that most fundamentalists and evangelicals reject Mormonism as Christian and believe it is a cult. A chapter on this relationship would be useful for examining how mainstream American Protestantism has rejected claims to the faith  by others who call themselves Christians. (Balmer, in fact, starts his introduction with an anecdote about his childhood attempt to convert a Catholic to real Christianity. The parallels, to me, are intriguing.)

Parts of the book show their age if one is looking for contemporary commentary, but the earlier editions are nevertheless important for capturing the evangelical movement as it has evolved. I enjoyed Balmer’s perspective and identify with his conclusion that just because he has left the fundamentalism of his youth doesn’t mean that he has rejected his faith in God.

[1] The first edition appeared in the late 1980s. I read the third edition, published in 2000. (The fourth edition, from 2006, includes two new chapters on Thomas Kinkade and Rick Warren.)

[2] To add to Jack Hyles’ legacy, his son-in-law, Jack Schaap, is now pastor of Hyles’ former church and spouts some of the weirdest theological nonsense I’ve ever heard . . . and I’ve heard a lot. UPDATED (7/31/12): Schaap was dismissed from his pastorate for allegedly having an improper relationship with a young woman in his Hammond, Indiana, church.

3 comments | posted in Books, Fundamentalist Christianity, Randall Balmer

29 May 2012

The Evolution of a Book, Part 6: Editing the Manuscript

By Mark R. Cheathem

(The rest of this series is available at the following links: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, and Part 5.)

I’ll address the official copy-editing process in a later post. Today’s topic is the editing that takes place before submission to your acquisitions editor.

There are two types of editing while you’re writing. The first is your own, and like the writing process itself, this is a personal choice. Some like to edit each day, and some after a chapter is completed. There may even be those who wait until most of the manuscript is finished before editing.

My own personal preference is to edit once a chapter is completed. That stopping point gives me the chance to consider the cohesiveness of the chapter, its flow with the previous chapter, and its tie-in to the main arguments of the entire book. That’s not to say that I don’t edit grammar, sentence structure, etc., as I go along. I’m not a “throw-it-all-on-paper” writer. I like to write in complete sentences and paragraphs instead of sentence fragments and outlines that I fill in later. Footnotes are a bit different. I include author(s), short title, and page numbers while writing and fill in the complete bibliographical information later, usually at the end of the chapter.

The second type of editing is, hopefully, the kind you’ll get from colleagues who read part or all of your manuscript. This step seems like an obvious one, but I can’t stress it enough: Someone besides you needs to read the entire manuscript before it gets to your press editor. You can satisfy part of this recommendation through conference papers, but you need to go beyond that stage.

Finding colleagues to read your manuscript can be intimidating. What if they decline? What if they accept and tell you that your manuscript is off-base and needs a complete overhaul? What if, what if, what if . . . you can’t let that question stop you. Ask colleagues whose advice you trust and who you think will give you a fair and honest assessment. It is much better to have them point out egregious mistakes or wrong-headed arguments than to have an outside reader for the press or, once the book  is published, a reviewer do so. Remember that readers will attribute all of the book’s errors to the author.

For the Jackson biography, I asked John Marszalek, John Belohlavek, and Marsha Mullin to read the entire manuscript. Marszalek was my dissertation advisor, and I completely trust his advice about writing. Belohlavek has written extensively in the Jacksonian field. Both Johns have also written biographies, which proved helpful. Mullin was my go-to person for the nitty-gritty Jackson details, such as genealogy. All three did more than I had in mind for them, of course. They complemented one another well and had suggestions about content and argumentation that overlapped, which helped me identify the manuscript’s major problems. If three people make the same recommendation, then they are probably on to something!

If it takes a village to raise a child, then it takes a community to write a book.

Part 7 is here.

Leave a comment | posted in Andrew Jackson, Books, Writing advice

14 May 2012

Summer 2012 Reading

By Mark R. Cheathem

Several years ago, I set the goal of using the summer months to read either canonical southern literature or a new area of history outside of the Early Republic period. Between research projects and major life changes, I haven’t done a great job of achieving my objective, but I’ve tackled William Faulkner, Flannery O’Connor, Walker Percy, and Eudora Welty, as well as conspiracy theories and colonial America.

This summer, I’m determined to focus on two sets of writings: some of Robert Penn Warren’s major works and the history of American fundamentalist Christianity. I started Warren’s All the King’s Men once but never finished it. David Blight’s American Oracle, which focuses in part on Warren’s Civil War writings, reminded me that I needed to revisit the Fugitive’s work. As for Christian fundamentalism, I’ve become more interested recently in understanding my religious roots. So, I’ve got Randall Balmer’s Mine Eyes Have Seen the Glory, Randall Stephens and Karl Giberson’s’ The Anointed, and Andrew Himes’ The Sword of the Lord in my to-read stack.

2 comments | posted in Books, Fundamentalist Christianity, Religion

23 April 2012

Footnotes, Chapter Endnotes, or Book Endnotes?

By Mark R. Cheathem

 Which do you prefer?

Just to make sure we’re on the same page (pun intended), footnotes are citations at the bottom of pages; chapter endnotes are citations at the end of each chapter; and book endnotes are citations compiled at the end of the book, usually prior to the bibliography.

Personally, I love footnotes. Being able to glance down at the bottom of the page I’m reading to check a source or read an explanation for an argument is convenient.

I’m not particularly fond of either type of endnotes. The one advantage of chapter endnotes over book endnotes is that they are easier when it comes to photocopying–you don’t have to photocopy a chapter, then flip to the end of the book to find the relevant pages in the book endnotes.

Publishers seem to be moving toward book endnotes. I’m not sure if book endnotes are easier to handle in terms of production or if they make the book shorter and thus cheaper in price. Maybe someone in the industry can enlighten me.

Poll result update (27 April 2012): Footnotes, 20 votes; chapter endnotes, 2; book endnotes, 0.

5 comments | posted in Books

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 838 other followers