Are you fascinated by rhetoric? Communication strategery? Do your friends and family wish you could be "less critical" and you're searching for an intellectual outlet? Harlot may be just the place for you. We're always looking for people to help us work with authors. You don't need any formal training in rhetoric to be part of the team. All you need is a critical but generous eye. Acting as a reviewer for Harlot is an opportunity to shape the future of the publication and engage in the creative process with authors, designers, artists, and members of the team — all of whom are ridiculously cool.
The review process is pretty simple: You sign up, let us know what you're interested in, and we'll occasionally ask you to review a submission we think you'd find interesting. The review process itself occurs within OJS (our journal management system): You'll get an email with links and instructions, then submit your decision and feedback on the site. Easy peasy.
The review form encourages you to focus on the following considerations:Relevance: Harlot's mission is to publish pieces that are relevant, interesting, and provocative to a wide range of audiences, not just academics or specialists in one field.
- With that mission in mind, have the authors made the topic and argument of this piece interesting and relevant to a variety of audiences (including general public as well as academic)? Have they forefronted the significance of the topic in everyday life? If not, in what ways could the authors make it more relevant?
- If you’re an academic yourself, we’d encourage you to share the piece with your family, friends, or colleagues, and ask them: Would you want to read this piece? Do you find it interesting and/or relevant? Why/why not?
- If you are not an academic, you can answer this by considering whether you wanted to keep reading/engaging with the piece as you moved through it. Do you feel included as part of the audience? Is the topic interesting to you and/or friends, colleagues, family? Why/why not? Another way to think about its relevance is whether you’d consider sharing it with friends on Facebook, Twitter, or some other social media form.
Style/Appeal: Harlot seeks to publish pieces that are not only relevant to its broad readership but also comprehensible to them. Making a piece comprehensible (or accessible) to academic and non-academic audiences can be challenging, particularly for academics trained in conventional, “specialized” scholarly prose. So, we’re asking you to consider here whether this piece seems inviting/understandable to a variety of audiences (consider the piece’s form, writing style, vocabulary, use of citations/scholarship, length).
- Does the author seem to privilege or exclude certain audiences?
- Are there ways in which the authors could increase the piece’s accessibility or inclusivity (i.e. make it shorter; include more subheadings; use fewer academic references/citations; utilize media that may enhance the piece in meaningful ways; engage the audience through wit, charm, or humor; etc.)?
(Please note: Harlot does not wish to publish pieces composed in a traditional academic form/style.)
Ethics: Is the work respectful and inclusive of diverse individuals and communities? Does it work to foster productive conversation?