When we last heard from Our Hero (hey, that’s me!) about his book, his editor had approved of the draft and sent it along to a copy editor to check it over.
I figured that would take a while, but it took three weeks. I got the manuscript (called the MS by those in the know) in the mail last week, and was at first shocked: it was covered in marks!
A copy editor checks the MS for grammar, spelling, and mechanical stuff (font usage, footnotes, line spacing and the like). So really I shouldn’t have been too surprised that it was full of markups. Literally every single page had something on it, but the vast majority were where the copy editor was pointing out something for the layout people: make sure this number uses a multiplication symbol instead of the letter "x", don’t capitalize this word, do capitalize that one, and so on. Some were more serious, like subject/predicate disagreement (my kryptonite), repetitious text (that only happened once, and he was exactly right to point it out), and so on.
I was expecting to take a week or two to review it, but it only took two days. Piece of cake.
So I handed the MS over to a FedEx guy an hour ago, and soon it will be winging its way back to New York, where the folks at Penguin Viking Publishing (imagine the logo possibilities for them) will start to actually put it in book form.
So that’s another big milestone. October still seems way over the horizon, but day by day it gets closer. We’re converging on the cover art, and soon I’ll have to start thinking about blurbs for real. The next actual step, I think, will be look at the galley proofs, but that really won’t be for a couple of months or more.
So it’s on to the next project! Which is, um… hmmm. Better get on that. I need a next project!
February 23rd, 2008 at 11:08 am
Those are GREAT news, BA! Are you planning on publishing it on other countries (COUGHlike ArgentinaCOUGH), too?
February 23rd, 2008 at 11:26 am
We’ll publish it wherever we can, of course. I haven’t spent a lot of time thinking about that, but my agent has.
So wherever we can find a market we’ll send it there. Foreign languages are a bit tougher, of course, since we have to pay for translation, which makes it unlikely that the book will go to smaller markets in different languages; we’d be less likely to make the investment back. But nothing is set in stone yet as far as I know.
February 23rd, 2008 at 11:27 am
I always saw the cover as the blue marble photograph, surrounded by images of each disaster that you describe in the book (SN, asteroid, GM burst etc.)
February 23rd, 2008 at 11:36 am
You need to plan your world-wide book tour, hitting all the high spots where your faithful Bablogees live and toil.
Then your next book could be a photo essay of you, your books, and all of your adoring fans.
Nothing to be skeptical about there!!!
February 23rd, 2008 at 11:36 am
Imagine away, as long as it does not include that old fallacy of a helmet with horns…..
February 23rd, 2008 at 11:38 am
I demand a book about shooting down spy satellites.
February 23rd, 2008 at 11:56 am
How much does a translation cost?
February 23rd, 2008 at 12:10 pm
I think your next project should completely tear apart the Discovery Institute. Point out all their lies and how they try to manipulate the facts to suit their point. You could use that angle to explain in “Scientific” terms the facts, as they are in reality
February 23rd, 2008 at 12:12 pm
Hahaha, you could also start a thread over at BAUT to give away a signed copy, see how many posts you get.
February 23rd, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Heh, when I first started my job at a publishing place, I thought all these science textbook writers were horrendous writers or something when I saw the copious amount of red ink on the manuscripts.
But then when I went over them I realized that 80% of it was for page layout stuff for the composition team. So it turns out you science writers aren’t so bad, after all!
Anyway, congratulations on the book. Hopefully you’ll be able to get it published on time or ahead of schedule!
February 23rd, 2008 at 12:31 pm
Ah yes, the multiplication symbol. Good ol’ Alt + 0215 = ×
February 23rd, 2008 at 1:36 pm
“So it’s on to the next project! Which is, um… hmmm. Better get on that. I need a next project!”
Awww, heck no, treat yourself and your family to a star party first. I hear there’s a humdinger in Nebraska this summer!
February 23rd, 2008 at 1:59 pm
Congratulations, BA! I’m sure any number of new projects will occur to your seething brain soon.
If you’re really stuck for one, or just need to choose among many, I suggest consulting the Little Astronomer. I find my 3 year-old nephew a great source of insight and clarity, within certain limits.
February 23rd, 2008 at 2:02 pm
I’m always having to look up “µ” in the charmap because I seem to be measuring things in µs lately. You think I’d eventually memorize Alt+0181. It’s also amusing that “µ” (Micro Sign) is different character from “?” (Greek Small Letter Mu).
February 23rd, 2008 at 2:02 pm
Translations? Too expensive?
This calls for a BA Fan project.
February 23rd, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Congrats, BA. I know writing is your main interest now, but how about writing and producing a digital video course for grammar school students about the basics of astronomy? Or, a series aimed at the same group discussing (with visuals as only you can do) some of the points raised in each of your two books? I’m still convinced that the best place to counter the creationist whack jobs is in the public schools at the elementary level. Videos are a topical means of instruction and would benefit a harried classroom teacher short on attention-getting lessons. Start deconstructing ID at an early age and half the battle is won, and what better way than the facts about our amazing universe?
WM
February 23rd, 2008 at 3:35 pm
aporeticus: You can write “µ” by pressing Alt Gr+M
February 23rd, 2008 at 4:30 pm
Ah, the next great work for better thinking is nearing it’s arrival!
I know you covered some hoaxes in your first book Phil, but would you consider a comprehensive book on hoaxes that (still) persist and/or come up?
Or better yet, how about a sequel to your first book?
“Bad Astronomy 2: The Wrath of Kooks”
You can tackle the misinterpretations people still have, including throwing in some stuff on the recent (ex)spy satt.
And you can also update some moon hoax stuff and other bad ideas that circulate.
The time may be right for it, will all the anti-science that threatens today.
We need more people like YOU!
February 23rd, 2008 at 4:47 pm
Next Project: Perhaps you could write a book on how stupid it is to ship dead trees cross country to physically mark up pages, which results in more errors requiring more mark ups and more cross country dead trees.
Have book publishers not heard of Rich Text Format (for instance) and a little thing that we like to call the Internet?
February 23rd, 2008 at 4:50 pm
Yay! Go you! I can’t wait to read it
February 23rd, 2008 at 4:54 pm
Hooray! Any idea of when we’ll get to see the cover art? I’m very curious about how this will turn out.
Oh, and while you think of something else to do, why not bring back Q&BA?
February 23rd, 2008 at 4:56 pm
# almoon wrote: “aporeticus: You can write “µ” by pressing Alt Gr+M”
This does not work in gedit nor in OpenOffice 2.4 on Fedora 8…
February 23rd, 2008 at 5:22 pm
Gavin Flower: Well, then it might be a Windows-only thing :/
Does anyone care to try it on Mac?
February 23rd, 2008 at 7:50 pm
FedEx? Don’t they have one of those Internet thingies?
February 23rd, 2008 at 9:10 pm
I am reading “Bad Astronomy” a second time. I’m looking forward to its sequel!
February 23rd, 2008 at 9:48 pm
lolife, the copy edits are done on hardcopy.
February 23rd, 2008 at 9:50 pm
Grand Lunar has a pretty good title idea there: The Wrath of Kooks,,,however(Ah, you knew I’d have one), maybe you could try compiling some of the best responses in your Blog to the woo-woos who just have to put their two bits in(include them too, so everyone could see how innane their arguments are).
GAry 7
February 24th, 2008 at 12:49 am
on a Mac, “µ” is Option-M
February 24th, 2008 at 9:29 am
or “diamond ( alpha 5″
I always set an autocorrect entry in whatever word processor I am using so that (mu), (micro), (micron), (micrometer) are all automatically converted to the µ symbol. I do the same with various other symbols I use commonly, so ~= for instance is converted to ? and back when I was taking spanish (?) was converted to ¿. That way I don’t have to worry about remembering the keycodes.
February 24th, 2008 at 9:30 am
I’m with cletus on taking some time off to enjoy life and get inspired. And I agree with wright about asking the kids or doing something for kids. The Bad Astronomer Explores {the Earth, the Moon, the Solar System, the Universe}.
Or better yet, The Bad Astronomer Debunks the Silly Science Stories. You could be a super-hero. Teach the kids to question and think.
February 24th, 2008 at 9:31 am
That first ? is supposed to be a wavy = symbol (the “approximately equal” symbol)
February 24th, 2008 at 9:49 am
That “book for kids” idea is great. There are a lot of fun science experiment books I had when I was a kid. Perhaps a book of science experiments for kids that specifically targets myths, misconceptions, and urban legends would have been great. Sort of like “mythbusters” but only selecting ones that are safe for kids to do at home. Your egg-standing thing would be ideal for such a book. Others might deal with basic probability (for instance the gambler’s fallacy) or that the telephone transmits sound directly (I am pretty sure some people actually think this). Others could deal with older myths that they might have heard about (like how you can show the Earth is round). That would be a really great book.
February 24th, 2008 at 9:58 am
I actually had a book somewhat similar to this called “bet you can’t”, which used basic probability, mechanics, and physiology to show you all sorts of things that you would think you should be able to do but in reality can’t. The experiments are safe (some need parental supervision, some don’t) and all easy to do with household materials. Each experiment was accompanied by simple and easy-to-understand explanations for why you can’t do it (except for one where they admitted they didn’t know why). It looks like it is out of print but is worth checking out whether you like my idea or not.
February 24th, 2008 at 10:02 am
BA, I suggest what would be a truly awesome mindmeld – you and Scott Adams. He has engaged a lot of people on his blog about existential issues and apparently enjoys mental challenges. You could mock and entertain us simultaneously with what we don’t know, but should, about the stellar neighborhood. “Dilbert Astronomy: Examining Uranus for Fun and Profit”. Eh. You know what I mean.
Not that you each don’t have enough to do already. Still…
February 24th, 2008 at 10:38 am
Scott Adams is also a creationist. I don’t see that going over to well with BA, given his history on the subject.
February 24th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
I think you need to read more of what Scott Adams write and not what PZ think he writes….
February 24th, 2008 at 1:06 pm
Read what he said. You mean like this?
(profanities in the following link)
http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/the_dilbert_blog/2007/03/fossils_are_bul.html
(profanities edited)
No matter how many times he may claim he is not a creationist he has the exact same beliefs and uses the exact same flawed arguments.
February 24th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
Also, I think you might have missed the tongue in cheek aspect of his blog.
February 24th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
As I said, he claims he is not a creationist but he has the same beliefs and uses the same arguments. I am not going to just accept someone’s claims at face value. I am going to look at the beliefs they espouse, the arguments they make, the evidence they use. He claims he is not a creationist, but says he has beliefs that are the beliefs of intelligent design creationists. He says he is not a creationist, but he uses flawed arguments and faulty evidence from creationists to back up those beliefs. So he says he is not a creationist, but what exactly is the difference between him and creationists? Just saying it doesn’t make it so. Creation science should prove that.
And you can’t have it both ways, either he is being serious or he is not. Either what he says in the blog can be accepted or it can’t. You use his claim that he is not a creationist as evidence that he is not a creationist, then turn around and say that the post can’t be trusted. Which is it? He may have tongue-in-cheek aspects to his blog, but so far posts in this subject seem entirely serious. And this is not the only one, he has posted on this repeatedly (although the older ones are no longer stored on the blog it seems).
February 24th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
OH oh thread seems to to have gone adrift into the creation zone.
BA, I write as both a successful self-publisher, also a published-by-others author, and someone who knows a lot of writers, I offer a comment.
Unless you are very lucky your publisher will probably not put a huge amount of effort into promoting your book. If this book is important to you, as author you can, to some extent, take over this function. It is a real pain in the neck, but if fame and fortune are what you seek you probbaly need to do it. Basically if you go on the internet you will find there are publications for authors that are not expensive that give lists of all the radio stations and review programs that need authors to fill airt-time. You have to call them all up and arrange interviews. 90 percent of the time the person interviewing you will not have read your book and have no idea what it is about. But you have some dramatic content there, and I think could wake people up and get them listening. Good luck whatever you do!
February 25th, 2008 at 9:33 am
RE: Next Project
Are those beautiful photos from NASA public domain?
I think that a book full of amazing photos with your clear consise explainations would be awesome. You wouldn’t just be telling what the photo is “Hey look! It’s a nebula!” But you’d be writing about why this picture is so cool. The photo of a star (I think it was Mira) with the tail of gas trailing behind and the bow wave in front of it was amazing. Imagine a book of that kind of stuff. It could really build an appreciate of just how cool and amazing astronomy is.
Just a few photo ideas.
The moon of Saturn (or was it Jupiter) that has the ridge that makes it look like a walnut.
Frames from the time lapse photography of the rings of Saturn. There was one where you could see a large chunk in one of the gaps. There’s a perfect example of a large piece of rock clearing out a gap in the rings. I could imagine it happening but that was the first time I could really SEE it happening.
How about the false color image that mapped dark matter? I remember that the dark matter wasn’t where we thought it would be. That’s a great lead in to discussing what dark matter is. But it’s also a great lead in to how science can change when the evidence shows that we weren’t exactly right. That can lead into a discussion of “intellectual honesty” when dealing with a world view. You don’t have to specifically point to religion as an example of intelledtual dishonesty, but you can simply show how science tends towards truth without making judgment calls and leave the rest as an excercise for the reader.
A book like that would appeal to the astronomy fan. But it would also work as a coffee table book (Do people still have coffee tables? Is there such a thing as a Starbucks cup holder book?)
I’d buy it.
February 25th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
Well, those of you unimpressed with what you have hastily thought up about Scott Adams might want to look for “God’s Debris”.
And think about confirmation bias. Don’t pile up ideas because you want them to pile up that way.
February 26th, 2008 at 8:31 am
Like the idea of a kid’s book, especially experiments kids can do.
For a cover for the new book, I have always pictured it like a poster for a cheesy ’50s Scifi movie, with multiple simultaneous disasters afflicting the Earth, and people running in terror.