dilemma, part 2
More concerns, re: the fate of my research -
2. The two major reasons for attempting publication were a) for my C.V. and b) in order to make it available for other readers, since I believe in what it says. The first is, at least in the near term, rendered irrelevant (see pt. 1). The second would be best served by making the article available online (ideally in a format that makes the most of references and intertextuality, which would be an interesting design challenge).
3. My lack of affiliation with an institution (and my lack of PhD) almost certainly affect my chances of publication enormously. It may have mattered for the two rejections I’ve seen already, and it can only get worse as I get further from graduation. I fully understand the reasoning here, and don’t wholly quarrel with it, but it leaves us “independent scholars” in a rough spot.
4. Online availability would—for C.V. purposes—be roughly equivalent to flushing it down the toilet. I would never be able to re-submit for publication (except as part of a book).
5. Online availability would—for citation purposes—be roughly equivalent to explaining my thesis to a dude at a bar. People could read and build on it, but, lacking the ability to cite it as a credible (peer-reviewed) scholarly source, they’d be stuck ignoring or plagiarizing.
*Disclaimer: it’s not like this paper is the greatest thing since sliced Bloom (I fully believe the rejections were fair and deserved, in fact), but it is serving as a productive catalyst for this particular debate in my head. Bear with me.
