I remember the first paper I sent off to a peer-reviewed journal. This was way back in 2007 or so. I remember the dejected feeling a got when I received a "revise and resubmit" email. It seemed like a failure at the time. At least I treated it as such in my naivete. I'd just finished a master's degree (without a thesis) at Marshall University, and the paper was the biggest effort I'd made at primary research.
I thought "revise and resubmit" meant that the editor had no interest in the project. I then sent it to a small newsletter tied to a state historical society, which published the paper. Here's a link: https://archive.wvculture.org/history/wvhs/wvhs2203.pdf. It's not close to my best work, but it was probably the best I had done at the point in my journey as an aspiring historian.
In 2008, I received a study grant to go to the Southern Baptist Historical Library and Archive to work on a very vaguely defined research project. It's shocking I got the grant, to be honest. I've since had much better proposals rejected. Anyway, I wrote up the paper, and again, I received a revise and resubmit request that said more research was necessary. I was teaching at a small private K-12 school in West Virginia, and the archive was located in Nashville. The travel would entail too much expense in my mind. I proceeded to sit on the paper for about two or three years. Again, this felt like a rejection.
However, while engaged in doctoral studies at the University of North Dakota, I decided to revisit that manuscript and engage with some of the scholarship I'd wrestled with in the ensuing years, including that of Robert Bellah and Harry Stout which interacted with the concept of civil religion. I also utilized interlibrary loan (thanks to UND's Chester Fritz Library) to access some of the books written by the main historical character in my research. After making a major overhaul of the paper, I decided to take a chance and resubmit.
After waiting for a few months (and basically forgetting I'd resubmitted the paper), I received an email indicating acceptance of the manuscript pending a few, very slight, edits. The result was this article:
Price, Christopher. “Social Justice and American Exceptionalism in the Writings of Southern Baptist Statesmen H. Cornell Goerner,” Baptist History & Heritage 47 no. 3 (Fall 2012): 52-64.
When I received my copies of the issue that held my article, I felt like I had a chance at becoming a legit historian.
Tonight, I sent back revisions requested in my most recent revise-and-resubmit email. I've learned since 2007 that revise and resubmit means that an editor finds that a piece might be appropriate for a journal. It just needs some additional work. Sometimes, that work can be pretty substantial.
At present, I have three different articles submitted with three different peer-reviewed journals. Should they all get published, I'll be up to nine peer-reviewed articles in print. Only one of the six that have already been published got accepted without major revisions. It's a part of the process, and hopefully it makes the publications stronger.
Revise and resubmit is not an outright rejection, but rather, a "maybe later." If an editor finds your work entirely unsuitable for a publication, he or she will let you know. Don't give up as easily as I first did.
