I just wanted to say THANKS to everyone who commented here yesterday and today. I had too much stuff to do to participate in the conversation, but I really appreciate the references to other blogs-to-books (successful and not so successful), and to your perspective as readers (many of whom are also bloggers.)

I guess I wouldn’t particularly want to publish just a clip mash-up of what I’ve written already, although I am fond of some of my posts–I really have enjoyed the food blogging, especially in the posts in which I’ve done some historical work too. (As someone pointed out upthread, maybe it’s no coincidence that a number of the bigger blogs-to-books started as food blogs.) But–as several of you have pointed out–writing a substantially new book would mean actual work! And as others of you have pointed out, blogs are perhaps most effective as online workbooks in which ideas are sketched and explored through dialog with others.

It’s losing the commenters, and the possibility of someone chiming in with yet another brilliant take on whatever we’re talking about, that makes blogging fresh and fun (and not coincidentally, sometimes vulgar, offensive, or just weird, and full of fun images for which I don’t pay royalties.) I really appreciate the comments by Dr. Crazy and Undine on the aesthetics of reading blogs v. books. I feel very much the same way, but you both articulated it much better than I could have.

Finally, I appreciated the Madwoman’s comment about not wanting to die as an Associate Professor. Of course, that’s underlining all of my thinking on these issues, too.

I wouldn’t want to make a book out of my blog, although sometimes I try bits of work out on my blog that make their way into a book chapter or article. More often, what goes into the blog is the process of creating the book or, on occasion, the cast-offs.

As well as a book on academia, I’d go for a Historiann channel on Youtube – maybe recommend all your favourites for those late-night grading marathons?

Blog posts can serve as an early draft for a book of essays. I think every good blog post has both immediacy and a kernel of the timeless. I think you could take the “whig of history” posts and turn them into a series of essays that highlight the immediate spark and then dwell on the nature of patriarchy.

But that would sound an awful lot like work!

No one is knocking down my door with book (or film!) offers, but I’ve thought a lot about designing a book that would be some kind of hybrid — a mix of blog posts and analysis (of a lit critical/cultural studies sort) of blogging as a writing practice and a world-building practice. Not sure if a “book” is exactly what I have in mind, because I’d hate to give up the richness and dynamism of electronic publication, but I’d also like for my hybrid critter to be peer-reviewable and permanent. Because, you know, I’m trying not to die as an associate professor.

Agreed. I used to get up every morning at six and, trust me, I’m a late riser, to read Julie Powell’s blog at Salon.
Her continuing adventures-especially the mishaps-were funny and interesting and I couldn’t wait to see what happened next. I came to feel I knew Julie, Eric (sob), the cat and their awful yet spacious apartment.
As her self imposed deadline drew near, the blog developed some real, edge of your seat suspense.
Silly, but true.

Is there a difference between the book that is a compilation of blogposts and the book that is a compilation of columns? I have read quite a few of the latter and found that when the columns were reproduced for the book, they lost a lot of the original context and thought that there should an up-to-date complimentary text explaining the original piece. (I can’t remember whose book of columns did that now!) I think a blog-to-book would suffer from the same and may be helped by a more recent commentary on the original posts.