table of contents

05/08/2018

Priya Nelson on academic publishing

Priya Nelson is an editor at the University of Chicago Press. She acquires books for the Press’s long-standing and distinguished lists in anthropology and history. Exchange, value, religion, urban studies, media, epistemology, social theory, and ethnographic writing are topics of special interest, though anything that uses classic themes to investigate contemporary issues tends to catch her […]

download transcript [vtt]
00:00:00.000
This is KZSU, Stanford.
00:00:03.800
Welcome to entitled opinions.
00:00:05.840
My name is Robert Harrison, and we're coming to you
00:00:08.680
from the Stanford campus.
00:00:10.000
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:00:13.000
That's right.
00:00:20.840
We're coming to you from the Stanford campus
00:00:23.320
in Stanford, California, the cutting edge of the West.
00:00:27.800
But more importantly, we're coming to you
00:00:29.800
from the inner chambers of the thing, Dosting.
00:00:34.040
The thinking thing, as Renee Descartes called it,
00:00:38.560
entitled opinions, the rest kojitans of the Stanford
00:00:41.720
campus, where many thought-provoking things take place all
00:00:45.640
around us, behind the closed doors of well-funded laboratories,
00:00:51.360
where you have humanities workshops galore,
00:00:54.640
and where ideas are in particularly high demand.
00:00:59.640
But what Martin Heidegger declared over half a century ago
00:01:03.800
still holds true today.
00:01:06.720
The most thought-provoking thing about our thought-provoking
00:01:10.080
age is that we are still not thinking.
00:01:14.880
Well, that's what we're here for, trying
00:01:17.520
to make it real compared to what.
00:01:20.760
That's a line from a song you'll hear at the end of today's
00:01:23.200
show, by the way, if you get that far.
00:01:28.040
There's a chapter in Robert Muisle's novel,
00:01:30.240
the man without qualities called a chapter that
00:01:33.960
can be skipped by anyone who does not
00:01:36.600
have a very high regard for thinking.
00:01:41.280
Well, the same applies to entitled opinions,
00:01:44.440
a radio program that can be skipped by anyone who does not
00:01:49.520
have a very high regard for thinking.
00:01:51.520
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:01:56.520
Our guitar solo is entitled to an opinion.
00:02:05.520
Some of them are.
00:02:06.520
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:02:11.520
Trying to make it real compared to what?
00:02:29.800
It looks like it looks like we're your punch and lips
00:02:32.000
into the plug, don't give in, it'll be a fly time.
00:02:34.400
I have with me in the studio a new friend and colleague,
00:02:37.980
Priya Nelson, who is an editor at the University of Chicago
00:02:42.440
Press.
00:02:43.360
She acquires books for the press's long standing,
00:02:46.960
distinguished list in anthropology and history.
00:02:50.840
Looks for books in anthropology that
00:02:52.880
combine ethnography and critique that fit particularly well
00:02:58.240
with that press's theoretically sophisticated list.
00:03:01.960
And I speak here with a certain degree of prejudice
00:03:04.560
because my last four books have been published
00:03:06.400
by the University of Chicago Press.
00:03:09.040
However, Priya was not my editor directly,
00:03:12.480
no, but I consider you a colleague.
00:03:16.080
Welcome to the show by the way, Priya.
00:03:17.560
Thank you very much, Robert.
00:03:18.680
It's great to be here.
00:03:20.080
So I was mentioning your acquisitions for the press.
00:03:23.680
And you stress that you, in the anthropological field,
00:03:27.400
you want exchange, value, religion, urban studies,
00:03:30.800
media epistemology, social theory, and ethnographic writings
00:03:35.280
that these are topics that are special interest to you.
00:03:38.560
Though anything that uses classical themes
00:03:40.440
to investigate contemporary issues tends to catch your eyes.
00:03:43.640
You state.
00:03:44.480
That's right.
00:03:45.080
It's very difficult to predict what might be of interest to you
00:03:49.400
and sometimes the most unexpected thing can catch your eye
00:03:53.280
because it's written with a certain kind of verb or clarity
00:03:56.760
and makes you see the world in a different way.
00:03:59.880
But as I read through those things, I realize
00:04:02.240
that as an author from the other side of the divide,
00:04:06.960
if you can call it a divide, I'm focused entirely
00:04:09.920
on my own little dot of preoccupation at my book,
00:04:15.200
which is the universe, the one that I'm writing,
00:04:17.640
is the only universe that I inhabit for the many years
00:04:20.960
that it takes me to write such a book.
00:04:23.520
And you, on the other hand, you come across manuscripts
00:04:27.600
and submissions on such a wide variety of topics
00:04:31.520
with all sorts of different approaches.
00:04:33.520
And you inhabit a constellation, a galaxy
00:04:37.880
of different books and projects where the authors are just
00:04:43.080
little lonely stars, as it were.
00:04:45.760
So is there an kind of excess of material
00:04:52.680
that you have to deal with?
00:04:54.040
There is, absolutely.
00:04:55.320
And I think that's one of the interesting parts of the job,
00:04:57.920
actually, because we shouldn't forget--
00:05:00.640
so I also acquire a history.
00:05:02.680
So on the anthropology side, there's
00:05:04.480
a certain ethos to the list and a certain kind of profile
00:05:08.560
and on the history side, I do a lot of history of ideas,
00:05:10.920
so that expands my universe even more.
00:05:15.600
And I think one of the interesting things
00:05:17.720
about the position is that you're exposed
00:05:19.640
to so many different kinds of projects, so many different ideas,
00:05:23.800
and trying to bring some kind of outline to the constellation
00:05:30.320
so that people do feel connected is a really exciting
00:05:33.800
part of the job, so that authors who are in conversation
00:05:37.400
with each other and might not know it
00:05:39.720
can be brought into conversation in exciting ways.
00:05:42.320
So I'm always seeking to build the network
00:05:47.160
and to make what I'm doing at Chicago
00:05:51.200
feel like a collective endeavor of a community of people
00:05:53.840
who are particularly committed to what we're doing.
00:05:56.640
So I read somewhere that you also started a series,
00:05:59.720
a book series, right?
00:06:00.880
That's right.
00:06:01.360
So I started two series, and I inherited one other.
00:06:05.000
One of them is the Silk Road series, which
00:06:08.600
focuses on transregional issues, connecting East Asia,
00:06:11.960
the Middle East and the West.
00:06:14.560
And that series is funded by the Luce Foundation,
00:06:16.760
which has a particular interest in cultivating
00:06:19.360
conversation across regions.
00:06:21.720
And the second series is called Life of Ideas,
00:06:25.400
and Darren McMahon, and Sue Marshand,
00:06:27.440
are my collaborators on that project,
00:06:29.600
and that's just getting off the ground.
00:06:31.560
So that list will be primarily European history,
00:06:35.080
but history of ideas.
00:06:36.480
And if we can bring a bit more of a global outlook
00:06:41.120
to the project, I think we can do something good
00:06:43.320
for the field.
00:06:44.640
So I'm assuming a book series is one way
00:06:47.800
to put different authors in conversation,
00:06:50.600
or create order among the chaos of stars,
00:06:53.600
and theory.
00:06:54.440
Absolutely.
00:06:55.440
You know, there's not as much chaos as you think there would be.
00:06:58.040
I mean, I think that any editor brings a certain kind of vision
00:07:02.400
to the list.
00:07:03.600
And so you find over the years that people that you've
00:07:07.240
contacted separately, without knowing
00:07:09.680
that they know each other, are in conversation already.
00:07:13.000
And that makes you feel like you're doing something that makes
00:07:15.920
sense, not just to you, but to other people.
00:07:18.840
Because otherwise, it is very dazzling.
00:07:20.880
You can this week, I'm considering a book about fantasies
00:07:25.880
of divorce and Japan, and how the need for independence
00:07:30.120
is affecting women's lives.
00:07:31.360
And meanwhile, I'm considering a book
00:07:34.080
in Austrian and intellectual history.
00:07:35.520
So there is an overwhelming amount of diversity,
00:07:40.240
but there's also some hidden coherence behind it.
00:07:45.360
And I suppose that in scholarship, which a university
00:07:48.560
presses, it's devoted to publishing books
00:07:51.120
at advanced discourses, which is really a kind of community
00:07:58.920
in print, where presumably scholars refer to other scholars,
00:08:03.240
cite them, are in an ongoing conversation.
00:08:07.080
In my case, it's a little bit less like that,
00:08:09.680
because a lot of my books are in dialogue with the dead.
00:08:14.080
Yes.
00:08:16.320
And those who have--
00:08:18.920
be it the poets or thinkers,
00:08:21.360
with whom I do imagine that one can have a kind of trans
00:08:25.320
temporal kind of ongoing converse as it were.
00:08:30.160
But yeah, so--
00:08:32.160
I think we need to do a rather poke-arris
00:08:34.920
and reception histories.
00:08:36.160
How are people using your conversation
00:08:38.240
and moving it forward in their work that would be fascinating?
00:08:41.640
Well, I wouldn't know anything about that to tell you
00:08:43.400
the truth, because believe it or not, I get all those emails about--
00:08:48.080
the academia thing where you have been cited by--
00:08:53.200
so-and-so in this journal, click here and find--
00:08:55.680
I don't even-- I think I have to subscribe or something.
00:08:58.880
Never follow up on those.
00:09:00.040
So I wouldn't know a lot about that reception.
00:09:03.560
You would probably know more than I.
00:09:05.280
So you've been with the University of Chicago Press
00:09:07.400
for seven years, since 2011.
00:09:10.920
And as you said, your anthropology and history,
00:09:15.160
what does it mean to be an editor in your position?
00:09:18.160
What is exactly the right?
00:09:19.120
Because a lot of my listeners will
00:09:20.880
be people who are writing books or have written books.
00:09:25.680
Maybe some are thinking, should they write a book or not?
00:09:31.080
There was a lot of curiosity.
00:09:32.760
There are many kinds of editors that
00:09:35.240
are pressing you here at that word editor a lot.
00:09:38.280
So there's copy editors in there,
00:09:40.320
production editors and people who are working on the nuts and bolts
00:09:43.800
behind the scenes.
00:09:45.400
Acquisition editors-- and I'm an acquisitions editor
00:09:48.600
from my fields-- have a more public-facing role.
00:09:52.840
And basically, I describe us as scouts.
00:09:56.040
So we're scouting for books that are appropriate to publish
00:09:59.000
by the press, trying to stay abreast of what's going on in a field
00:10:03.240
and publish the most exciting work that's coming out of it.
00:10:07.960
So it's a kind of position that requires a lot of reading,
00:10:15.000
short-form stuff as the ecosystem changes,
00:10:18.360
blogs, online journals.
00:10:20.360
Short-form stuff means what?
00:10:22.360
Articles and shorter.
00:10:24.760
Staying on top of what's being published in terms of other books.
00:10:28.320
And then also just trying to understand
00:10:30.400
what's happening in the contemporary moment
00:10:33.640
so that what you're publishing is meeting an audience that
00:10:36.680
is eager to read it.
00:10:38.480
So there's this adage that editors have a knowledge that's
00:10:44.480
like the Amazon.
00:10:45.320
It's three miles wide and about an inch deep.
00:10:48.120
[LAUGHTER]
00:10:50.600
Sometimes it does feel quite true.
00:10:54.320
Well, I'm curious, like many people I'm sure are,
00:10:58.560
about a University of Chicago press is one of the top presses
00:11:02.440
of not the top university press in America.
00:11:05.440
So it's like a beautiful one.
00:11:09.200
Can I be kind of user and analogy like that?
00:11:12.320
Maybe I shouldn't.
00:11:13.200
But everyone wants to introduce themselves
00:11:17.240
and see if they can interest you in their submissions.
00:11:21.560
And of course, I'm curious, what is the relationship
00:11:24.520
between scouting and discovering the kinds of talent
00:11:30.400
or authors that you want to publish?
00:11:33.000
As opposed to the daily work, I'm assuming, of rejection,
00:11:38.040
of saying, no, I'm not interested.
00:11:41.400
And so what is the dynamic between courtship and Nolle
00:11:47.480
Metanjere, which is a phrase from the New Testament,
00:11:50.960
or just don't touch me.
00:11:52.120
I don't know what you're interested.
00:11:54.360
I think it's a good analogy, actually,
00:11:56.320
because you interact with a lot of people in this role
00:12:00.040
who want to impress.
00:12:01.640
They want to be smooth and present themselves
00:12:06.080
as having all of the answers and dazzling you
00:12:09.200
with their air edition and their insight.
00:12:12.440
And I think that tires quickly--
00:12:16.520
I'm always interested in being charmed.
00:12:18.800
But I think that what feels like a discovery to me
00:12:24.080
is to find somebody who's really troubled by an idea
00:12:28.320
and feels that there's something that is sticky about the problem
00:12:32.880
and needs to be figured out.
00:12:35.360
And that means having a bit of a sense of humor
00:12:39.720
about one's own ability to have all the answers
00:12:42.680
and impress an editor.
00:12:45.720
And that, for me, is a feeling that is quite immediate.
00:12:50.200
I feel like when I have a conversation with somebody
00:12:52.880
who knows what the stakes of their question
00:12:58.000
looks like that I can feel it too.
00:13:01.680
And as an editor, you're always open
00:13:05.800
to seeing the world in a different way.
00:13:07.440
I think that's one of the great things
00:13:08.760
about the position.
00:13:09.560
It's one of the great privileges that you
00:13:13.160
are constantly learning.
00:13:14.960
And you're learning in a way that feels like a social activity.
00:13:18.160
So you're not just reading and putting content into your mind.
00:13:21.560
You're having conversations with the people who
00:13:24.960
are the blood and sweat of the idea
00:13:27.360
that they're creating.
00:13:28.880
And I always want to feel that I don't want to just be termed.
00:13:33.400
How much of your work is actually about conversations
00:13:37.240
with prospective authors as opposed to reading their submissions
00:13:42.920
and proposals and so forth?
00:13:45.400
It's both.
00:13:46.720
I very rarely get something in my email inbox
00:13:51.320
that just appears without announcement.
00:13:52.880
I mean, usually you have met the author.
00:13:56.600
I will have read something and then had a conversation with them.
00:14:00.280
And I still like having phone conversations
00:14:02.520
with prospective authors just to get a feel for this kind
00:14:05.640
of thing.
00:14:05.960
So we can talk back and forth and see
00:14:09.560
whether there is a kind of chemistry that
00:14:11.600
would be necessary for having a productive and happy
00:14:16.360
experience of publishing.
00:14:18.480
And you say that you can tell very quickly
00:14:20.320
whether there's some kind of intrigue that
00:14:23.040
is worth pursuing in a project.
00:14:25.160
And that comes from the fact that the author does not
00:14:29.280
presume to have solved the problem here she is working on,
00:14:33.840
but is working through it in a genuine manner.
00:14:36.960
I think so.
00:14:37.600
I mean, the world is complicated.
00:14:39.600
I don't know how you feel as a reader
00:14:41.840
when you're encountering a text that just
00:14:44.320
seems to perfect, to settle.
00:14:47.400
There's something a bit glib about it.
00:14:51.160
And I interact with a lot of formulaic kinds of writing
00:14:55.960
and proposals and things like that where the idea
00:14:59.640
is you want to give somebody the opportunity
00:15:02.400
to understand very quickly what you're up to.
00:15:05.200
And so the form is always very similar,
00:15:08.240
you know, 10 pages, 12 pages of a project description.
00:15:11.200
And it's easy to present a coherent hole
00:15:14.480
and make it seem just right.
00:15:16.120
But there should still be some residue of that one
00:15:25.720
into creating the idea.
00:15:28.000
What about the criterion of an argument?
00:15:30.160
Are you, some editors believe that the almost necessary
00:15:36.440
condition for a good book is that it
00:15:38.040
have an argument over the long haul of the entire book
00:15:43.200
rather than having several arguments, for example,
00:15:47.080
is that something that you consider a high criteria?
00:15:53.640
I think it depends on what kind of book we're thinking of.
00:15:58.760
On the anthropology side of my list,
00:16:01.560
most of my acquisitions are quite argument-driven.
00:16:04.760
There is a thesis.
00:16:05.760
And even if it's a complicated one,
00:16:08.160
it is a sustained kind of project throughout the book.
00:16:13.400
And that works very well for a certain kind of book.
00:16:17.920
But I also do biography, narrative history.
00:16:22.800
I work with some journalists who are publishing popular histories
00:16:27.560
or memoirs, repartage on issues of particular importance
00:16:33.280
today.
00:16:34.440
And so in those books, there's a lot more flexibility
00:16:37.240
about how argument-driven you want to be.
00:16:39.640
And sometimes telling a good story in those books
00:16:43.320
is quite enough.
00:16:44.760
How do you feel about that?
00:16:48.360
If you're directing a dissertation, for example,
00:16:50.120
will you mandate that all of your students
00:16:53.280
have a particular kind of argument that's sustained?
00:16:56.640
When it comes to dissertations, yes.
00:16:58.880
But I was told when I was a graduate student
00:17:01.400
that your dissertation should be as boring as possible
00:17:05.200
because dissertations are meant to be theses.
00:17:08.160
And if it's not boring, it's not good.
00:17:11.720
Not making a contribution.
00:17:13.280
So the first thing I tell my students
00:17:15.560
do not take me as a model of emulation by any means
00:17:19.960
because it will be disastrous for your dissertation.
00:17:24.800
A dissertation should be highly delimited,
00:17:27.000
and it really should be clarifying what its claims are
00:17:31.360
and how you're going about justifying those claims.
00:17:33.800
So yeah, I think in the dissertation writer,
00:17:37.760
I tend to urge priority to argument and evidence.
00:17:43.880
But if I'm at mentoring younger colleagues,
00:17:48.600
then it's an opposite job.
00:17:51.920
It's to deprogram them entirely from the kind of heavy
00:17:56.240
systematic emphasis that we see as graduate students
00:18:00.680
and to think of a book as something very different
00:18:03.360
from a dissertation.
00:18:04.720
I think that's great advice.
00:18:06.560
And I'm always worried when people tell me
00:18:08.960
that they're telling their students
00:18:11.160
to write their dissertation like a book
00:18:12.560
because it's not the exercise.
00:18:14.480
I know.
00:18:15.320
I was told that.
00:18:16.200
I didn't-- well, two stages.
00:18:20.160
First you get your degree.
00:18:21.560
Right.
00:18:21.760
And then you can worry about getting the book published.
00:18:24.600
Yeah.
00:18:24.600
That's a discipline and--
00:18:25.440
This is a planning and that's an essential movement,
00:18:28.680
I agree.
00:18:30.360
But I think I mentioned to you all fair
00:18:33.440
that when I published my first book with Johns Hopkins
00:18:37.400
University Press, it was a book on Dante's Vita Nolva,
00:18:42.880
very intensive probing of one work, minor work,
00:18:47.720
by a major poet.
00:18:49.520
And I'm still very fond of that book.
00:18:51.840
But when I had it in my hands for the first time
00:18:54.320
and started reading the first few pages
00:18:56.640
from the point of view of the people I was going to immediately
00:18:59.520
send it to mother, sister, good friends outside of academia,
00:19:04.480
it was a shock to me, almost a horror
00:19:07.600
that this was impenetrable and non-transitive
00:19:12.680
to people outside of a small handful of people who knew
00:19:15.040
about Dante and specialize.
00:19:17.560
And I said, I don't know if I want to write another book
00:19:21.600
that doesn't speak to a lay person who's reasonably well
00:19:26.440
educated and that might have some relevance outside
00:19:29.720
of the academic walls.
00:19:31.880
And then I veered into a very different kind of genre
00:19:35.960
because this is a question I'm going to ask you
00:19:39.840
by answering it first, personally, which is,
00:19:43.920
to whom is a book beholden or to whom is a publisher beholden?
00:19:48.040
Is it to the author or is it to the community of scholars
00:19:53.400
in the particular discipline or is it to a readership,
00:19:58.760
a wider readership in general?
00:20:02.120
I feel a sense of responsibility to a wider readership
00:20:07.120
without compromising the kind of standards of rigor that
00:20:11.640
go into knowing what you're talking about on the one hand,
00:20:15.800
but not being held hostage to the deadly genre
00:20:19.360
of what goes under the rubric of research.
00:20:22.160
Yeah, absolutely.
00:20:23.760
I mean, we have a lot of responsibilities, I think,
00:20:29.640
when we make editorial judgments.
00:20:32.160
Writing a book takes a long time.
00:20:35.200
And we really value authors like you
00:20:39.280
who have worked with the press for decades.
00:20:41.840
And we want to support authors in taking risks.
00:20:47.840
And sometimes they work and sometimes they don't.
00:20:49.920
And whenever there is a conflict between what an author needs
00:20:56.480
or wants, what peer reviewers want,
00:20:59.040
and what the reader wants, you have
00:21:01.800
to put yourself in the mind of a reader
00:21:05.840
because in an editorial role, you're effectively
00:21:09.920
a first reader.
00:21:11.360
And I think our readers do and should expect
00:21:16.200
a certain amount of comprehensibility
00:21:19.320
from the texts that we publish.
00:21:22.280
It's not easy.
00:21:23.760
Every discipline is more and more specialized.
00:21:27.920
And I think in the next decade, certainly,
00:21:33.360
as patterns of reading and scholarship and teaching change,
00:21:38.520
we have to take that question of what the reader needs
00:21:42.240
very, very seriously, because otherwise this business
00:21:45.280
will suffer from the broader cultural changes
00:21:48.760
that are putting the book in a certain amount of peril.
00:21:53.040
I have a question about different traditions
00:21:54.680
in America versus Europe, because I--
00:21:58.280
a number of my books have been translated in various languages.
00:22:01.600
And some of those European presses consider me their author.
00:22:06.080
And there's this tradition of claiming ownership
00:22:09.200
of a particular author and working closely
00:22:12.200
with the author in terms of counseling
00:22:14.600
and consultation and advising when it comes to the next book
00:22:19.480
or what other possible books in order
00:22:22.240
to make it a kind of cooperative process.
00:22:26.800
And there's a sense that you belong to their house.
00:22:31.080
Miseon de di Sienre, they say in French.
00:22:33.240
You say, "Miseon, it's my home."
00:22:36.000
Whereas I find that the tradition in America, at least,
00:22:41.160
a university presses is that there is not that sense
00:22:45.720
of unconditional allegiance to an author.
00:22:49.040
There is rather a sense that you publish books rather
00:22:53.960
than authors, and that if a particular book by a particular author
00:22:57.640
doesn't suit your purpose or the list that you will pass on that one,
00:23:03.760
what is that relationship between the particular book
00:23:07.720
and question and the author and question?
00:23:10.200
It's a great question, and I think actually what you describe
00:23:14.640
investing in an author and helping them work through ideas
00:23:19.680
and test out which ideas deserve a book form.
00:23:23.040
I think that's really exciting.
00:23:24.400
And it's one of the reasons why being an editor is addictive
00:23:28.080
because there's always something else that's coming
00:23:30.680
and a conversation that was started five years ago
00:23:34.120
with the end won't end for another five years.
00:23:36.920
And so I think most of us still consider that the ideal,
00:23:41.200
that if you have a relationship with an author,
00:23:44.120
it extends beyond the single book.
00:23:48.760
There are occasions when you have to break up,
00:23:52.960
and I think that in the tradition of New York publishing,
00:23:59.760
so in the trade houses, where there's a lot of circulation
00:24:04.120
among editors and authors, there is no loyalty.
00:24:08.360
I mean, authors are loyal to their agent
00:24:10.440
and even then can switch agents fairly easily.
00:24:15.400
And so the relationships of loyalty and trust are different.
00:24:19.120
But I find that to be one of the really exciting things
00:24:23.520
about working with somebody because when an author trusts
00:24:28.360
your judgment enough, they're willing to try something
00:24:31.440
that they haven't tried before, and they
00:24:33.440
know that if they're not succeeding, you'll tell them why.
00:24:37.000
And if they are that you'll take a risk and invest
00:24:41.560
in that author, invest actual resources from the press
00:24:45.920
and along with your time and make sure
00:24:50.160
that whatever project they've tried to accomplish
00:24:54.840
is put out with that's best of a foot forward.
00:24:58.160
What percentage of submissions get rejected?
00:25:02.000
Value?
00:25:03.160
A lot.
00:25:03.660
So this is a frightening number, but it's important to keep
00:25:07.880
in mind that editors receive three, four, five proposals
00:25:12.560
a day, many of which are not appropriate to the press
00:25:17.200
and don't fit what we're doing.
00:25:18.920
So I would say we reject 95% of what comes in.
00:25:25.360
And I can really only think of one book in the past year
00:25:29.200
that I've published without any prior knowledge of it.
00:25:34.600
So usually I will seek something.
00:25:37.920
So scouting is a much more active part of what we do
00:25:40.960
rather than making judgments on things
00:25:43.400
that we passively receive.
00:25:46.080
Well, what about the younger scholars
00:25:47.760
that you've been speaking here here at Stanford
00:25:49.480
to speak to how to turn your dissertation into a book?
00:25:52.400
So forth.
00:25:52.800
You can't go and have conversations with all the students
00:25:57.800
who are about to get a degree with a dissertation, huh?
00:26:02.320
Yeah.
00:26:02.760
So to meet new scholars first-time authors,
00:26:07.600
it's very helpful to have very strong relationships
00:26:10.720
with senior colleagues in the field.
00:26:13.560
And of course, they all want to publish their student
00:26:15.960
because their student is the most prized.
00:26:17.720
But if you can get beyond that kind of relationship
00:26:21.520
and establish an intellectual chemistry
00:26:23.920
with people in your field, then there's
00:26:27.280
possibilities for meeting people and expanding your networks,
00:26:31.120
and then creating more and more people who are invested
00:26:33.680
in what you're doing at your particular publishing house.
00:26:36.680
So I think that the collaborative aspect of it
00:26:40.160
is really important.
00:26:41.720
It's also future-proofing the list
00:26:43.760
because people who work on projects that you think
00:26:48.160
are interesting are likely to find other projects
00:26:50.600
that you also think are interesting on your behalf.
00:26:54.120
So that's a big part of it.
00:26:56.200
I have a very minority position when it comes
00:26:58.880
to my advice to graduate students and younger colleagues
00:27:02.680
publishing books for the first time, which is,
00:27:06.520
don't spend all this time writing a book proposal.
00:27:09.920
Because in my view, book proposals
00:27:12.720
are nearly worthless because you might get interest
00:27:18.480
from the publisher.
00:27:19.440
Yes, well, send us what you have when it's ready.
00:27:22.000
It looks interesting.
00:27:23.360
But basically, the process really begins
00:27:25.320
when there's a full manuscript that is on the table.
00:27:28.600
And it might as well be as close to definitive
00:27:32.120
as possible before you present it to a press,
00:27:36.720
rather than give a kind of incomplete impression
00:27:41.480
through a proposal and chapter outlines
00:27:43.760
and all that, for me, is the most boring terrible genre
00:27:47.600
of the book proposal.
00:27:48.520
Can not stand book proposals.
00:27:50.920
But perhaps I'm not advising the students properly
00:27:53.640
that it's to their advantage just to get the book
00:27:58.080
in as best shape as possible.
00:27:59.720
And then you send a letter of query saying,
00:28:02.000
I have a book manuscript ready to go.
00:28:04.280
Are you interested?
00:28:05.880
Yeah, I think the genre is useful to the extent
00:28:10.200
that it helps people think through how
00:28:12.720
to represent their project.
00:28:14.400
And that exercise can be helpful if you need
00:28:17.920
to force yourself to articulate what the stakes of your project
00:28:22.520
are and how to describe those stakes to other people.
00:28:26.400
Yes, sorry for interrupting.
00:28:28.440
Yeah.
00:28:28.920
But graduate student gets a lot of that kind of rituals
00:28:35.320
of having to describe--
00:28:37.760
they do their dissertation proposals,
00:28:39.920
and then they have their oral exam.
00:28:42.400
And then they have to-- the thesis and the defense--
00:28:44.560
so they're very well practiced in stating arguments.
00:28:48.000
But oftentimes, I find that there's
00:28:50.600
an impoverishment that takes place in the summary
00:28:55.080
compared to the actual thing itself.
00:28:57.880
And that this tight genre of self-presentation
00:29:03.160
in the few pages that the proposal works against them
00:29:06.360
rather than for them.
00:29:08.040
Yeah, so I think that I worry when people obsess over it.
00:29:13.840
You're spending six months trying to put down on paper,
00:29:16.480
something that really shouldn't take that long.
00:29:18.760
And I think it is a very generic kind of document.
00:29:24.920
And it can dead in thought and make people
00:29:29.440
feel that what they're doing is essentially
00:29:33.000
rehashing what they've already done.
00:29:37.880
But it's still a very quick tool for editors
00:29:41.960
to figure out what the book is about.
00:29:45.440
And one of the interesting experiences
00:29:47.600
of working within a press is that you see how complicated,
00:29:53.280
shaggy, fascinating manuscript gets boiled down over many months
00:29:59.600
into back cover copy.
00:30:02.680
And back cover copy is its own particular formulaic genre.
00:30:08.320
And yet, if you think about the processes
00:30:12.800
whittling down overgrown, wonderful, rich manuscript
00:30:18.920
into something that a reader has to pick up
00:30:21.520
and recognize as relevant to them,
00:30:24.080
we're constantly doing that.
00:30:25.920
That's part of the process of publishing.
00:30:28.800
Do you do that yourself or does someone else
00:30:30.960
take care of the back copy?
00:30:33.080
The kernel of what the copy is is usually produced
00:30:36.160
by the acquisitions editor.
00:30:37.360
So we will write and write and write.
00:30:41.120
And we, as editors, present projects over and over again
00:30:44.320
to different audiences.
00:30:45.360
So if we get a manuscript, we will get some kind of synopsis
00:30:50.680
from the author.
00:30:51.720
Generally, it's more dry than what we want.
00:30:54.560
And we'll try to make it a bit more interesting
00:30:57.080
and more reflective of the manuscript.
00:30:59.160
And it's potential.
00:31:00.760
And we'll take various descriptions
00:31:04.840
and share them with potential peer reviewers
00:31:07.440
who we need to set aside other projects to read for us.
00:31:10.760
We'll also present the project to our faculty board.
00:31:13.960
And they need to have a description
00:31:16.560
of what's going on in the manuscript.
00:31:18.360
And then we produce marketing copy for our colleagues
00:31:22.240
who then refine it even further.
00:31:25.000
So it's an iterative process.
00:31:26.480
It's trying to get a handle on a manuscript
00:31:29.520
in many different ways, both as somebody who's more
00:31:32.520
and is scholarly minded, as an editor,
00:31:36.120
presenting a project to a group of faculty.
00:31:38.720
And then for an audience of your colleagues
00:31:41.560
who are moving the book through the production process
00:31:47.920
and out into the world.
00:31:49.640
And marketing has to make a case for why the book is
00:31:54.320
interesting, why people should buy it, why they should teach it,
00:31:57.480
and why reviewers, especially in trade publication,
00:32:01.120
should take the book seriously and send it to somebody
00:32:04.240
like you to review an N-Y-R-B.
00:32:06.720
So that process begins with the author
00:32:11.200
representing their work to somebody who's potentially
00:32:14.200
interested.
00:32:15.120
So I agree.
00:32:15.960
I don't want people to obsess over proposals.
00:32:18.600
But if you know what your book is about,
00:32:20.920
it shouldn't be that hard to write a 300-word draft
00:32:24.200
of what will eventually appear on the back cover.
00:32:26.680
No, that's true.
00:32:28.400
But what do they get out of it if it's submitted a year
00:32:31.760
or two before they are even expecting to finish the book?
00:32:35.440
I see.
00:32:36.280
Yeah, timing.
00:32:37.640
Yeah.
00:32:38.400
I mean, what are you going to do with that?
00:32:39.960
I have younger colleagues who feel
00:32:41.880
that they really accomplished something
00:32:43.720
after six months of writing a proposal.
00:32:46.200
And I'm trying to tell them you haven't accomplished anything.
00:32:48.760
You haven't even gotten to point zero yet.
00:32:50.640
If you took those six months to work on the book,
00:32:52.600
that would have been much more useful.
00:32:54.840
Absolutely.
00:32:55.960
Yeah.
00:32:57.200
I mean, so often I do meet people just before their manuscript
00:33:01.240
is done.
00:33:01.720
So depending on timing, I meet people on campus
00:33:05.160
visits and conferences.
00:33:07.040
And sometimes it helps for a young author who is not
00:33:11.440
already in touch with an editor to send a project description
00:33:14.840
and say, do you want to meet at a conference
00:33:16.480
or something like that?
00:33:17.760
That's all good.
00:33:18.440
But again, it's a tool.
00:33:20.200
It's not a goal in itself.
00:33:22.680
So what is your advice, generally?
00:33:24.720
I mean, this is going to be the question a lot of my listeners
00:33:28.000
will want to hear a kind of formulaic answer to the people
00:33:34.080
that you spoke to yesterday, for example,
00:33:35.640
and that you speak to a lot around the country,
00:33:37.360
the younger scholars.
00:33:39.160
What are some of the main points of counsel that you offer?
00:33:43.120
There's a lot of professionalizing advice
00:33:44.960
that one could give because this is an anxious business,
00:33:48.720
especially for first-time authors, not only because it's
00:33:52.240
an unprecedented project for them to write a book,
00:33:55.520
but also there's a lot writing on it in the academic world.
00:34:00.440
And there are books about how to be professionalized
00:34:03.360
and think about redoing your table of contents
00:34:08.080
and reworking the manuscript and making it into a book.
00:34:11.440
I always, when I'm meeting a group of anxious young scholars
00:34:15.280
in person, try to get them to bracket all of their anxiety
00:34:21.040
and focus on their project and what
00:34:23.840
got them excited about it in the first place.
00:34:26.840
It's very easy to lose that spark with something
00:34:31.600
that you live with every single day and that you stress about.
00:34:34.000
And that is perhaps the key to your financial future
00:34:38.200
and your family's financial future.
00:34:41.400
And amid all of those pressures,
00:34:43.640
you can lose sight of why you think your book is interesting
00:34:47.520
in the first place.
00:34:48.920
And of course, that's the most important thing
00:34:52.480
in conveying to an editor, why they should pick up your book.
00:34:57.240
So I think reconnecting with a bit of naivete
00:35:01.640
and feeling wonder again at work
00:35:04.800
that you may be completely exhausted by as the first step.
00:35:10.360
And then editors are looking for something
00:35:14.800
reassuringly simple.
00:35:15.800
We're looking for good books on interesting subjects
00:35:19.880
that are written well.
00:35:21.600
Yeah, I wanted to ask about the quality of writing.
00:35:23.440
How important is that?
00:35:25.000
They're very, very important and more important all the time.
00:35:28.080
Have you found that it's improved over the time
00:35:32.040
you've been an editor or remain the same or gotten worse
00:35:35.320
or is it requiring a lot more copy editing
00:35:38.040
than before or on the contrary?
00:35:40.360
I think that people are coming around
00:35:41.680
to the idea that writing really does matter.
00:35:43.680
And people that I talk to are eager to learn the mechanics
00:35:50.360
and to understand the kind of work and it is work
00:35:53.880
that goes into writing better.
00:35:57.920
So I think the awareness is there.
00:36:00.280
And I think that there is a willingness to try.
00:36:05.160
I don't know that people yet have the tools
00:36:08.080
that I wish they had to focus on their language
00:36:11.640
in very specific ways and recognize
00:36:14.040
ticks and academic writing that they can smooth over quite
00:36:16.680
easily once they're aware of them.
00:36:19.080
But I'm trying.
00:36:21.520
We talk to people and many editors
00:36:24.360
that many different houses do the kind of thing
00:36:26.680
that I'm here at Stanford to do, which I just
00:36:28.840
talk about writing and revising a dissertation.
00:36:33.640
As well as meeting people.
00:36:35.520
I know that you have meetings scheduled just after our show.
00:36:40.480
Some of them with very senior colleagues of mine.
00:36:44.280
And I'm curious if-- because I heard one colleague
00:36:47.240
plugging other colleagues books and you can meet them
00:36:49.680
and what about on the diplomatic level,
00:36:53.560
you go and meet someone who has a sterling reputation
00:36:56.640
has published several books and were distinguished.
00:37:00.920
And you find that maybe the book he or she is working on
00:37:04.560
at the moment, it's just not very interesting.
00:37:06.920
And then you subsequently get a submission
00:37:08.920
because you've given some signs that maybe--
00:37:12.760
just out of even if only politeness that, yeah,
00:37:15.120
this sounds very interesting.
00:37:17.400
How do you go about turning down a submission
00:37:21.680
by a very distinguished scholar if you ever do that?
00:37:24.720
Of course, yes.
00:37:25.720
We do.
00:37:27.520
It's fraud.
00:37:28.280
It's painful.
00:37:29.120
It's difficult because I've realized over the years
00:37:33.360
that people take my encouragement very seriously.
00:37:35.720
And I will say something in conversation politely
00:37:40.400
that fascinating project.
00:37:42.400
And they will carry that with them as they're writing.
00:37:46.800
And for several years, then anticipate my reaction.
00:37:51.680
And there's a tremendous amount of transference
00:37:53.640
that happens when an after-sens a project into a publisher.
00:37:56.600
And it's very, very difficult to say no,
00:38:01.240
because there is no way that somebody cannot personalize
00:38:04.880
that kind of response.
00:38:06.680
So I try to be as careful as possible, but there's no way
00:38:12.720
around it.
00:38:13.720
It's part of the job.
00:38:14.360
And gentle declination is a skill that only the best
00:38:19.280
editors really have.
00:38:20.720
And some of my colleagues.
00:38:22.600
And I share really good decline letters.
00:38:27.240
How did you say no to that project that you were anticipating
00:38:32.600
for a while?
00:38:34.080
But this actually gets to an interesting point
00:38:37.920
about why there are non-scholarly editors in the first place,
00:38:43.320
why there are professional acquisitions editors.
00:38:46.360
So I do not have a PhD in my field.
00:38:49.880
I have an advanced degree.
00:38:50.960
And my background is an anthropology industry,
00:38:54.360
but I'm not a scholar.
00:38:56.000
And I don't have ambitions to become one or to teach
00:38:59.400
at a university.
00:39:00.880
And that independence is very important
00:39:03.320
for enabling a publishing house
00:39:06.120
to make the kind of decisions that would be even more fraught
00:39:11.160
if you have to decline a colleague.
00:39:15.720
I gather you got interested in editing.
00:39:17.360
Even as an undergraduate, you've
00:39:19.120
felt drawn to this profession.
00:39:21.480
That's--
00:39:21.840
I do.
00:39:22.280
--can you talk about that?
00:39:23.800
Because it's not that common a vocation in younger people.
00:39:29.640
Is it?
00:39:31.080
It's not.
00:39:32.400
A lot of people come through publishing--
00:39:35.520
certainly in New York, it's a much younger industry.
00:39:39.200
Editors are younger.
00:39:41.080
There's a lot more movement between fields.
00:39:42.960
People move in and out of culture industries
00:39:45.760
and New York much quicker.
00:39:47.960
In university, press publishing, it's more like a lifetime job.
00:39:52.640
Many of the editors at Chicago have been there for 30,
00:39:55.880
even 40 years.
00:39:57.400
And so I think there was a lot of romanticism
00:40:01.200
and my idea of what editing was.
00:40:05.160
And some of that has been borne out.
00:40:08.160
And there's also a lot more nitty-gritty fraught labor
00:40:13.240
that goes into publishing that I didn't quite anticipate.
00:40:18.160
But I had a chance to encounter with one of our editors,
00:40:22.080
our sociology editor, Doug Mitchell,
00:40:24.360
who has been at the press for more than 40 years.
00:40:26.840
And he had such charisma.
00:40:29.520
And he had such a lively mind.
00:40:33.080
And I thought, if there is a field that could enchant somebody
00:40:39.400
for so long, that's what I want.
00:40:42.560
I want--
00:40:43.280
You met him when you were an undergraduate in that particular world.
00:40:45.160
I think when I was at about 23, I think I just graduated.
00:40:49.640
So I did a couple of years of graduate school.
00:40:51.840
And then I came back to Chicago and Doug championed my application
00:40:56.480
to a position in our department.
00:40:58.360
But yeah, so I think this is a business that's
00:41:03.480
built on relationships and on conversations.
00:41:06.360
And so although it's not a replicable story,
00:41:11.440
you can't tell a young person who's interested in going
00:41:13.560
into publishing, well, just have a great conversation
00:41:16.520
with the net in your own and get your foot in the door.
00:41:19.320
Still, it's quite a common way in, in a certain way.
00:41:25.480
You know, I forgot to mention to our listeners,
00:41:27.280
because this is directly related to the entitled opinions
00:41:31.920
brigade, is that the former production manager before
00:41:36.480
Bithodia Moulle came on board was Dylan Montanari, who,
00:41:41.720
as a graduate student, even early on,
00:41:43.520
it was clear to me and others that he did have this calling.
00:41:48.800
Very interested in the idea of being an editor more
00:41:51.200
than being a professor, expressed it several times.
00:41:54.480
And he now is working with you at the University of Chicago.
00:41:58.040
Yes, he's--
00:41:59.880
thriving part of what I do.
00:42:01.600
And he's an essential collaborator.
00:42:04.240
So I think there's a certain dispositional affinity
00:42:08.040
between people who have broad-ranging curiosity
00:42:12.560
and love being around people who would not
00:42:16.800
skip the "Moozial Chapter."
00:42:22.200
And people seem to find their way into it.
00:42:26.320
And is it my impression correct that relations among editors
00:42:31.640
at a press generally tend to be harmonious and collegial
00:42:36.720
and non-imbatalled the way oftentimes in departments,
00:42:40.560
you have the poisonous atmospheres and spites
00:42:46.160
and rivalries and en-vis.
00:42:48.440
Perfect harmony, always.
00:42:50.000
Yes.
00:42:51.160
[LAUGHTER]
00:42:53.160
No, we do, especially at Chicago's very collaborative.
00:42:57.680
And it's great to speak across disciplines.
00:43:01.800
So at Chicago, we each have pretty independent domains.
00:43:05.160
So I work in anthropology.
00:43:07.280
And I'm a sole editor for that field.
00:43:09.080
And then I'm one of three or four editors
00:43:11.920
who work in history.
00:43:13.600
Each in our own fields.
00:43:16.160
And I find the exercise of explaining to a colleague who
00:43:20.440
might be in more conservative fields
00:43:23.280
like economics or political science,
00:43:25.800
the stuff that we're doing on the anthropology
00:43:28.120
and history side, even though it's very different in outlook
00:43:31.400
and ethos, having to have conversations
00:43:34.120
with people who are working in different kinds of fields
00:43:38.680
with different methodological commitments
00:43:40.600
and different thematic focuses.
00:43:44.080
Those conversations forces me to articulate what I'm doing
00:43:49.640
in my field and forces me to explain
00:43:52.440
to people who might not have the same methodological common
00:43:56.600
sense why what we're doing in those fields is interesting.
00:44:00.440
So there is a lot of collaboration.
00:44:02.320
We also encounter very similar problems
00:44:05.440
in peer review and author management.
00:44:08.320
So we help each other think through problems
00:44:11.480
and review whether a project is ready or not,
00:44:14.960
whether there are issues in the writing
00:44:16.400
that we could help each other figure out.
00:44:18.920
So those are among the most rewarding conversations
00:44:21.920
that we can have.
00:44:24.320
Are you a writer yourself?
00:44:26.480
I write, particularly when I have something
00:44:28.680
that I need to work out.
00:44:30.320
But I don't write to publish.
00:44:32.400
And perhaps that will change, we'll see.
00:44:36.840
But I think that you probably have a lot of ideas
00:44:41.880
that don't find their way into a book.
00:44:44.200
And I think you should know that what you're writing deserves
00:44:49.320
to be a book.
00:44:50.040
And I don't know if there is a moment in the development
00:44:53.400
of a project in your mind when you know that this should be a book.
00:44:57.960
Well, it's an interesting issue complicated, in my case,
00:45:02.080
at least, because I don't feel
00:45:04.760
under the compulsion to write another book,
00:45:07.360
if I don't write another book for the rest of my life,
00:45:10.320
that's not a problem.
00:45:12.760
It really has to be motivated and not only worthwhile,
00:45:18.400
worth the time it would take for a reader to read it.
00:45:22.400
But it has to have some kind of inner impulse and motivation.
00:45:27.360
And since I published my last book with you
00:45:32.160
in "Truvenessence" in 2014, I've been in a position of--
00:45:39.000
well, let me compare to Pinandello, who
00:45:43.560
in his preface to his play, "Six Characters"
00:45:45.880
in search of an author, speaks about how many times
00:45:51.360
in the twilight hours after a long day
00:45:53.320
has worked that a group of characters
00:45:55.160
would come into his mind and urge him
00:45:59.920
to write their stories so that they could actually
00:46:04.520
live in the world of art and have their story played out
00:46:07.760
on a stage or in a book or a short story.
00:46:11.360
And he would consider their drama as a family.
00:46:14.920
And he says, I'm a universal writer.
00:46:18.000
I'm not a historical writer.
00:46:19.200
I need to be persuaded that there
00:46:21.840
is some kind of universal meaning before I commit something
00:46:24.160
to the world of art.
00:46:26.080
And so he keeps rejecting them.
00:46:28.640
And then one day, the idea comes to him
00:46:31.160
that what about writing a play about these characters
00:46:36.240
who have been rejected and are ex-off in the work of art
00:46:38.400
and how it has to fail because they need an author
00:46:41.360
in order to be realized.
00:46:43.520
But I mentioned this because I sit back,
00:46:46.580
you know, like Pinandello, and there are ideas that
00:46:49.440
come to me of a book about this or a book about that.
00:46:53.280
And I keep saying no often because I have
00:46:58.240
before I will commit, I have to be persuaded
00:47:00.720
that there is something in it that has justified itself
00:47:05.120
for becoming a book.
00:47:06.240
And I think one of the reasons I do this radio show
00:47:09.320
is because I realize that so many things
00:47:13.240
don't have their proper place of belonging in a book.
00:47:17.880
And yet there's a lot of thinking that takes place
00:47:20.880
outside of the parameters of print and conversations
00:47:27.760
to be had.
00:47:28.560
And therefore a podcast like this has been going--
00:47:31.920
I think we're in our 12th year--
00:47:34.720
it's a kind of--
00:47:36.560
it's an other form of doing what I consider part of the work
00:47:43.160
of thinking.
00:47:45.560
But the kind of thinking--
00:47:47.400
and I would say craftsmanship that is required of a book
00:47:53.600
is very different kind of exercise.
00:47:56.640
So how long were you working on Jufanessans before you
00:48:01.320
saw it as a book?
00:48:04.200
I started Jufanessans before even dominion of the dead,
00:48:08.560
which was published in 2003.
00:48:12.440
So at least the idea of the idea was there
00:48:16.560
could not never knew how to proceed beyond a certain point
00:48:20.760
in the argument, didn't know how to end it.
00:48:23.680
And I put it aside, dominion--
00:48:26.440
I put it aside again for gardens.
00:48:30.280
And then finally, I found out what I thought
00:48:34.360
was the proper way to go forward, which
00:48:37.160
is to not just have it being monothematic,
00:48:40.720
but give it a multi-dimensionality that I
00:48:43.960
was resisting earlier.
00:48:45.720
Whether that was a good call or not, I don't know.
00:48:47.920
I mean, I find that book--
00:48:50.600
it's challenging for the reader.
00:48:52.760
It's at multiple registers.
00:48:55.240
As you say, it might be something that has a perplexity
00:48:58.320
at the heart of it and is trying to work itself out,
00:49:01.600
whether it gets completely worked out, I'm not sure.
00:49:03.800
But--
00:49:04.600
Well, the world changed so much in those 15 years
00:49:06.880
that you were grappling with a kind of feeling of time
00:49:11.280
and acceleration of aging.
00:49:13.920
And aging, personal aging too, so that it became more
00:49:18.040
of a philosophy of age than it had been
00:49:20.520
when it was a theory of juveniles as such.
00:49:23.480
So yeah, no books take a long time to germinate
00:49:28.120
and then find their way into the light.
00:49:31.320
So--
00:49:31.960
Well, I love the perplexity at the heart of that book.
00:49:34.560
I think it's the midst of it working for the reader.
00:49:37.040
Thank you.
00:49:38.560
Good.
00:49:39.080
Well, Priya, I'm glad we had the opportunity
00:49:42.080
to kind of whisk you into the studio at very short notice
00:49:44.840
because I just met you.
00:49:46.280
I haven't even known you for 24 hours personally.
00:49:49.400
We were at a dinner together last night.
00:49:52.400
And we said, why don't we go in and do a show in the morning?
00:49:55.400
So here we are having done that.
00:49:57.600
And I want to thank you again for coming on in your title
00:50:00.440
opinions and say hello to all our friends there
00:50:03.600
at the University of Chicago Press, including
00:50:05.680
Maya Giral and Thomas.
00:50:07.240
I will.
00:50:07.760
And we're still in Montanari and other colleagues
00:50:11.120
there at the University.
00:50:12.480
We're Stanford Midwest at this point.
00:50:14.680
Yes, indeed.
00:50:17.120
This has really been a pleasure to see you this summer.
00:50:19.320
Let me just remind our listeners who've been speaking with Priya
00:50:21.560
Nelson, who is the an acquisitions editor
00:50:24.200
at the University of Chicago Press.
00:50:26.520
Stay tuned for our next show next week.
00:50:28.800
Thanks a lot.
00:50:29.520
Thank you.
00:50:30.320
And here's that song we promised you at the beginning.
00:50:32.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:50:35.600
[APPLAUSE]
00:50:38.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:50:41.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:50:43.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:50:45.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:50:47.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:50:49.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:50:51.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:50:53.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:50:55.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:50:57.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:50:59.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:01.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:03.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:05.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:07.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:09.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:11.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:13.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:15.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:17.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:19.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:21.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:23.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:25.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:27.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:29.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:31.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:33.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:35.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:37.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:39.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:41.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:43.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:45.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:47.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:49.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:51.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:53.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:55.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:57.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:51:59.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:52:01.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:52:03.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:52:05.600
[MUSIC PLAYING]
00:52:07.600
♪♪
00:52:18.700
♪♪
00:52:32.500
♪♪
00:52:35.480
I love the night and I have the love
00:52:38.580
I hangin' on with pushin' show
00:52:41.560
The whole session is the motivation that is in love
00:52:45.580
The goddamn nation looks like we always end up in a run
00:52:51.580
Everybody now trying to make it real compared to what?
00:52:57.600
♪♪
00:53:26.620
I can't use it trying to make it real compared to what?
00:53:30.620
Come on, baby!
00:53:34.640
♪♪
00:53:38.640
♪♪
00:53:42.600
I can't use it trying to make it real compared to what?
00:53:46.580
♪♪
00:53:49.600
Come on, baby!
00:53:52.620
♪♪
00:54:02.600
♪♪
00:54:13.600
♪♪
00:54:17.620
♪♪
00:54:24.600
♪♪
00:54:29.600
♪♪
00:54:34.600
♪♪
00:54:38.600
♪♪
00:54:42.620
♪♪
00:54:53.600
♪♪
00:55:03.600
♪♪
00:55:08.620
♪♪
00:55:19.600
♪♪
00:55:25.600
♪♪
00:55:29.600
♪♪
00:55:35.620
♪♪
00:55:46.600
♪♪
00:55:56.600
♪♪
00:56:02.620
♪♪
00:56:07.600
♪♪