About Goldsmiths Press

Open Access

Goldsmiths Press launched in 2016 as a green open access monograph publisher. Since then, we have been actively involved in debates and experiments with open access models in the quest for a sustainable, inclusive open access landscape.

 To this end, we offer the following routes to open access:

• Final published version available open access after an embargo period of 18 months unless UKRI funding is acknowledged, in which case, after an embargo period of 12 months.
• Full and immediate open access on receipt of a subvention to cover the costs of production. Costs may vary and should be discussed with the publisher, but for standard length (50-80,000 word) monographs, the subvention is £7,500.

All open access books are published under a creative commons license. CC-BY-NC-ND is our default license, but other licenses are available on request and we will comply with funder requirements.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ 

 Authors retain full copyright of their open access books.

 Open access books may be published in print and digital formats.

 Our open access books receive the same rigorous and professional peer review, production and editorial treatment as our other books.

 We work with MIT Press and Penguin Random House for print sales and distribution. Open access titles are indexed in the Directory of Open Access Books (DOAB).

Peer review procedure

All Goldsmiths Press books go through the same peer review process, whether published open access or not.

Goldsmiths Press is committed to a constructive and rigorous peer review process. Rather than replacing anonymous with open peer review or individual (one-to-one) with community-based (peer-to-peer) review, Goldsmiths Press invites reviewers to note the importance of a generous and generative critique, designed to help the author or artist improve the quality of their work. An ethical review process is, we believe, different from an open/closed one and is based on reciprocal respect and responsibility. Our contributors are encouraged to attend carefully to reviewer’s comments and to recognize the gift of time (very often, free labour) and of intellectual and creative engagement involved in reviewing. Conversely, reviewers are encouraged to recognize what our contributors are trying to do and to evaluate how well they are doing it without imposing their own agenda or, in effect, asking for an entirely different project! The tone of a review might matter more than whether or not it is anonymous. Individual reviewers may decide for themselves if they wish to sign their report and/or engage directly with the contributor. 

Book Proposals

• Your proposal will initially be assessed by the Goldsmiths Press editorial team (and series editors, where relevant). If it fits with our publishing programme and we decide to proceed with your proposal, we will send it out for peer review. We aim to keep authors updated throughout the process.
• The review process is double blind, although we give reviewers the option of conducting open peer review if they wish. This is in recognition of the critiques of double blind peer review and to facilitate dialogue between author and reviewer where it might be useful. Proposals and sample material are sent to a minimum of two external peer reviewers.
• Reviewers are selected for their scholarly expertise and experience in the proposal’s field. Suggestions for reviewers are sought from authors in order to help streamline the process, but we will send the proposal to at least one other reviewer as well.
• It is expected that peer reviewers will declare any potential conflicts of interest to Goldsmiths Press prior to accepting a review invitation.
• Reviewers are asked to provide feedback on: coverage (what is distinctive about the proposal, what the proposed book would add to the field, suggestions for improving scope or structure); readership/reception/market potential (including courses on which the book might be read) and overall recommendation.
• If two reviewer reports differ considerably, or are uncertain in their recommendations, a third review will usually be sought.
• Completed reviews are sent to the author/editor for a response which is then considered alongside the proposal and the peer reviews by the Goldsmiths Press editorial team, series editors where appropriate and the editorial board. A decision is made on whether to recommend the proposal for acceptance, to request revisions to the proposal (which may necessitate a further round of peer reviews of the revised material), or to decline the proposal for publication. The final decision rests with the editorial board.
• Membership of the editorial board consists of academic staff from a range of departments at Goldsmiths and other academic institutions in the UK and abroad. Series editors are invited to become members of the editorial board. Authors are offered a contract for their book once the proposal has been accepted by the board.

Final manuscripts

Final manuscripts are sent out for a final round of peer review. Reviewers are invited to comment on: whether the project represents a high-quality, original contribution to the field; whether the relevant modes of communication (writing, image making and so on) are of an acceptable standard; if there are any problems relating to accuracy and inclusiveness of citation, presentation or referencing systems; whether the book is ready for publication and if the reviewer has any suggestions for improvement.

Review feedback is communicated to the author and any final revisions to the manuscript are requested and implemented according to an agreed timeline. Following Goldsmiths Press approval, the manuscript is prepared for production by the editorial team.

Proposal and final manuscript reviewers are offered a copy of the relevant book as a token of our appreciation.

 

Editorial and Governance

Editorial Board

Our editorial board combines and crosses a range of disciplines. Members support the Press in identifying high-quality research and contribute to our peer review and selection process.

Members include:

• Rebecca Coleman 
• Sean Cubitt
• Gabriel Dattatreyan 
• Will Davies
• Livia Franchini
• Matt Fuller
• Jennifer Gabrys
• Stephen Graham
• Blake Morrison
• Deirdre Osborne
• Helena Reckitt
• Holly Rogers
• Anamik Saha
• Edgar Schmitz
• Atau Tanaka
• Jack Underwood
• Duncan Fairfax
• Dubravka Sekulic
• Helen V Pritchard
• Charlie Gere
• Simon O'Sullivan
• Andrew Dewdney

Advisory Board

Goldsmiths Press is supported by an extensive and growing international advisory board.

We are grateful to our advisors who act as ambassadors for the Press as well as contributing advice and expertise to help shape its current, and future, direction.

Members include:

• Lisa Adkins
• Howard Becker
• Michael Bhaskar
• Barbara Bolt
• Bruce Braun
• Roger Burrows
• Gavin Butt
• Joe Deville
• Kate Devlin
• Lori Emerson
• Maria Fusco
• Bill Germano
• Liam Gillick
• Tariq Goddard
• Joyce Goggin
• Yasmin Gunuratnam
• Fernando Gutiérrez
• Matthew Harle
• Gay Hawkins
• Stefan Helmreich
• Keisuke Kitano
• Deepa Kumar
• Brandon LaBelle
• Andrew Lockett
• Alessandro Ludovico
• Wolfgang Marx
• Tara McPherson
• Alexandra Midal
• Lisa Nakamura
• Jenna Ng
• Dave O’Brien
• Tom Overton
• Andrew Parker
• Sarah Rifky
• Nelson Rodriguez
• Laetitia Rutherford
• Sukhdev Sandhu
• Steven Shaviro
• Margrit Shildrick
• Ali Smith
• Carol Stabile
• Philip Terry
• Iris Van der Tuin
• Simon Worthington

Gold SF, an imprint of Goldsmiths Press, is supported by an Editorial Board comprised of established academics, authors, and experts.

The Goldsmiths Shorts pamphlet series brings together poetry, fiction and non-fiction by alumni from across the creative writing programmes and modules, taught within the Department of English and Comparative Literature at Goldsmiths.

The alumni are asked to consider the pamphlet as an introduction to their work so far, as a unit that requires brevity but that also allows room for them to declare themselves. They are also invited to view the pamphlet’s history as an artefact of experimentation or provocation.