Hi writers! I hope you are doing well this week.
So in the last episode I talked about some of the reasons why transforming your dissertation into a book is an emotionally complex process.
It’s possible you’ve outgrown your topic and need to find ways to reconnect to your original sources of inspiration to keep going.
You also need to bid farewell to your earlier grad student self and move forward into the next stage of your intellectual journey as an expert, and I gave you a little exercise you could do to move this process along.
Today’s episode is going to be all about practical application.
I’m going to give some really useful and specific tips and tricks that will help you revise your dissertation into a book.
What’s the Difference Between a Dissertation and a Book?
So the first thing I want to say is that a lot of people, myself included, think that they wrote their dissertation like a book. I mean, the manuscript is really long, right?
Maybe it’s 250 or even 300 pages, and there are different thematic chapters, plus an introduction, and a conclusion.
You might be asking, how is this not a book??
Well, the first thing that any editor will tell you is that there are some major differences between the two.
This is why you should never turn your dissertation in for review without doing some major rethinking of the whole thing.
Let me tell you what these differences are and how you can approach them in your own work.
I’m going to borrow some ideas from another book coach named Amy Benson Brown, who recently published a great academic journal article on this topic called “The Stages of Revising a Dissertation into a Book.”
Brown argues that the three things you need to figure out so that your dissertation can become a book are 1) scope, 2) voice, and 3) through-line.
So even though these things are very much intertwined in a well-written and cohesive book manuscript, let’s talk about each of them separately
First, scope refers to “the breadth and depth of your subject matter.”
Dissertations are usually fairly narrow in scope because they’re written to prove to your very small committee of readers that you’re an expert worthy of being granted your doctorate.
By contrast, when it comes to your book your audience already assumes you’re an expert. Instead, the point of the book is to stake a real claim and make a broader contribution.
This means you need to widen the scope of what you’re talking about.
This might require you to gather more data and add one or two new chapters.
By the time you get around to revising your dissertation, usually a few years have lapsed between then and your original data collection.
I think it’s a great idea to add more cases and more analysis to widen the scope if it’s really necessary.
I just caution you to not collect so much new data that you are overwhelmed by it or now find yourself with two different projects.
Be strategic with your time and have a very clear data collection plan that includes specific reasons for collecting new data.
But don’t fall into the trap of thinking that more data will necessarily lead to a better study.
Another set of common advice is to spend a good chunk of time revising your introduction and cutting way down on your literature review and theory sections.
Most dissertations use many pages to point out all the problems with other peoples’ studies before stating your contribution.
Your book, on the other hand, should put your own contribution front and center.
This leads into the next area of revision known as voice. This is the tone with which you write that shows you are unmistakably an authority on your topic.
In his famous guide From Dissertation to Book, author William Germano distinguishes between the “dissertation voice” and the “book voice.”
The dissertation voice uses your data to support the ideas of others, whereas the book uses others’ ideas to support your own original thoughts about the phenomenon you’re studying.
And even though you have probably been told you need to start writing with more authority, it’s deceptively easy to fall back into old patterns of leaning on other peoples’ ideas.
Back when I was working on my first book, I joined numerous different writing groups with other first-time authors where we shared our work-in-progress with one another.
And even though in my head I felt like I was owning my expertise, one of the most frequent comments I got was to come right out and state my contribution more clearly.
It took me time to recognize that I was trying to hide behind the work of more established scholars.
And if we go back to the previous episode about the legacies of grad school, it’s not surprising that junior scholars would feel hesitant to come right out and stake their claim with confidence.
For me, remaining hidden behind other peoples’ ideas made me feel safer and less likely to be judged.
But if you do this, you’re forsaking the opportunity you have for your book to truly establish you as a world-leading expert in your field.
And this is something that marginalized scholars need to do more of!
So if you’ve internalized a demeaning, negative voice that tells you your work doesn’t matter, I’d like you to consider that the person who is actually judging you the most is YOU.
It might sound harsh, but it’s actually empowering because you’re the one person who has control over your thoughts.
You have the choice in every moment to think more positively about yourself and your writing.
The other issue when it comes to establishing your “book voice” is finding ways to envision yourself in conversation with your ideal audience members.
I covered this topic in-depth on Episode #4 of this podcast, so go listen to that episode if you want to hear more.
But basically, write your book for your biggest fans rather than your critics.
And ruthlessly cut out all the unnecessary jargon you may have used to impress your dissertation committee.
Your word choices matter a huge amount because they include or exclude readers.
Years ago, I read a book that used the word “interpellate” in the very last sentence of the conclusion.
I was annoyed, not only because I didn’t know what the word meant (and honestly, I still don’t), but because this author could have used so many other simpler ways to convey the same exact thing.
Think about your book being read by your grandmother or an 18-year-old freshman in their first college class.
And write in such a way that they will understand the story you are telling and why it matters.
The third area you’ll need to work on when you revise the diss into a book is the through-line.
Amy Benson Brown defines this as “a set of themes that connect the arguments of chapters so that they build on one another to form a larger sustained argument.”
It’s basically the narrative arc that makes your book one coherent project rather than a bunch of unrelated articles.
I often tell my clients that writing a book is like knitting a quilt.
You work on each separate piece but keep them somewhat loose until you’re ready to tighten everything up to create one beautiful, interwoven piece.
To put it simply, you likely need an overarching argument of your book that is bigger and has larger reaching implications than what you argued in your dissertation.
Think about the bigger consequences for cases that are unrelated to your own. Is there a concept or process you observed that you can coin a term for?
For example, in my second book on American-born Chinese workers in China, I coined the term “strategic in-betweenness” to sum up the ways my respondents used their own ethnic ambiguity for personal advantage.
This term became the cornerstone of my book’s argument and is also applicable to myriad groups and situations that have nothing to do with Chinese Americans or China.
Furthermore, your separate chapters also need smaller arguments that help bolster the larger argument.
One great piece of advice I’ve heard is to write your larger argument on a post it note and put it on your computer.
Underneath, put a separate post-it note that states the argument of the chapter you’re working on.
Then continually read these over as you’re working to help you stay focused with your writing.
And what do you do if your arguments change? That’s okay! It’s just like knitting a quilt.
If you make a mistake or want to put in a new pattern, you can unravel some of it without throwing the whole thing out.
Just know that with books, everything is in a state of flux until it’s not.
So take a deep breath and remind yourself that you don’t need to have everything figured out yet.
Just like everything else you’ve ever accomplished or any major obstacle you’ve overcome in your life, you will figure it out as you go!
So, to sum up, expanding your scope, developing your book voice, and establishing the through-line of your manuscript are the three main things you need to do when revising your dissertation.
Don’t Submit Too Soon!
Please do not jump the gun and try to submit your materials to presses for review before you’ve done these things PLUS received enough feedback that you are confident you’re moving in the right direction.
Let me share a cautionary tale with you.
Not too long ago I was asked to review a partial book manuscript for a university press.
Just know that I accept these assignments absolutely wanting to love what I’m reading!
However, right off the bat something was off when I saw that the author hadn’t even bothered to replace the word “dissertation” with “book” in her sample chapters!
Clearly, she hadn’t been advised well on this issue, so I definitely don’t fault this person entirely.
But, to me this small but critical change just seemed like a common sensical thing to do. So there was already one strike against this manuscript from the get-go.
On top of that, because the author didn’t revise any of her original writing, her book was extremely narrow in scope.
The research questions were super-duper specific to her small academic subfield, as were the gaps the book was trying to address.
The research topic could—and should—have been fascinating.
I honestly believe that books on any topic can be truly captivating depending on how they’re written.
Unfortunately, because of the limited scope and the fact that she hadn’t developed a confident book voice, I wasn’t convinced that a broader audience would care enough to invest their time, energy, and money in reading 200+ pages of this as a book.
And so I recommended that she not receive a contract.
Now what should this author have done?
Well, I would have recommended that she take at least several months away from the diss to do some soul searching about the kind of book she wanted to write, how she wanted to write it, and for whom she was writing.
And I would have had several different people read it before sending it out for review. These could have been some combination of her advisors, peers, and regular lay people.
If this junior scholar had done any of the things I’ve just talked about, there’s a much, much higher chance that she would have been granted a book contract.
So I hope this episode has helped you think through some of the steps that are needed to revise your dissertation into a book.
Of course, there’s a lot more to know.
If you’re looking for more intensive help, check out the “Work with Me” page to learn more about my six-month private coaching program where I walk you through the different steps it takes to finish your manuscript and get it published while still having a life you enjoy.
Talk to you again soon!