For one of my fourth hour requirements, I went to a faculty irregular lunch discussion this Friday. Though it did not address our course directly, it offered some interesting tidbits on the collaborative process of scholarly publication which I can expand into the realm of authorship.

I got the impression from the presentation that scholars in the Humanities are hesitant to take on collaborative writing. It was even mentioned that many scholars focus on their own work, a book, rather than seek publication in a journal. In retrospect, I regret not asking further on the subject. Why would a scholar choose to work on a book rather than publish an article? Perhaps, simply, the book is a hallmark of the academic and requires an immense amount of effort. However, I wonder if the idea of authorship comes into play at all in this trend. Does a book give an author more reputation than a published article? For my purposes as an undergraduate, both books and journals are considered equally scholarly and credible. I wonder if at the higher levels if their are any subtle differences in reputation between books and journals. Perhaps people only take you seriously if you have a book in your own name.