Surprise: There is Messaging in Article and Book Acknowledgments and Dedications

An article recently appeared in InsideHigherEd detailing the difficulty a professor had placing an article in a physics journal because his acknowledgment footnote lambasted PhD programs and focused on the trials and tribulations of one particular PhD student who ultimately committed suicide. Sad all around.

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/08/08/scientific-papers-acknowledgments-section-calls-reform-postdocs-treatment

Finally, the article was accepted, with the acknowledgment footnote and all. The IHE piece goes on to discuss the difficulty of the whole PhD process, a worthy topic to be sure. I get the focus of the IHE piece as highlighted in the acknowledgment.

But, I think there is vastly more to be written and said about acknowledgments --- what they mean, how people frame them and why and how we need to consider what they are trying to accomplish. We should add dedications to this exploration as well. Some acknowledgments/dedications are written in code, understood and known only by those in the know; others are warm and welcoming; still others qualify as pedestrian. But, howsoever these acknowledgments and dedications appear, they provide insights into the author/scholar that can inform one’s reading of the article/book.

Acknowledgments appear in many places: articles (in the first footnote or note with an asterisk) and in books. Indeed, in some books, there is an entire acknowledgment page (or two). Dedications can appear in articles although that is not all that common; they do appear in most but not all books. And, these collective "thank you's" of sorts are seemingly innocuous and readers often bypass them or skim them.

But, there is more to them than meets the eye and merits a change in how we think about these seemingly meaningless references. For me, there is meaning in acknowledgement footnotes and dedications in both articles and books.

Consider some of these intentional and strategic uses of these entries. Back in the day and I suspect still, many people thank(ed) well-known scholars in the hopes that that would encourage the article or book’s acceptance by a prestigious journal/publisher. Then, when published, it was hoped that these listed names would improve and expand readership. It was as if the author were saying, "If famous Professor X like this article, then it must be excellent as it has his/her imprimatur." The more well-known scholars or famous folks one could link together in a row, the better.

Some acknowledgment footnotes cite to presentations made and workshops conducted with respect to the article/book in question. And, make no mistake about this: a workshopped article at Yale or Harvard is “better” in a prestige sense (whether that is warranted or not on a variety of levels) than one workshopped at Southern Vermont College or Southern New Hampshire University. Status still matters greatly in educational publishing.

Now, sometimes acknowledgments thank family, children, spouses and friends for their time and tolerance. Pets too. Yes, really. More than one dog or cat has been mentioned for his/her patience and loyalty.

Some of these acknowledgments are expressive and feelings seep through. Dedications too. And, make no mistake about it: these acknowledgements and dedications message – loudly. Just consider who is not mentioned or who is mentioned but has a strained relationship with the author/scholar. Consider those who are ill or have passed away. Consider references to those with whom one had but no longer has a relationship. Reading between the lines is key here. 

Bottom line: we message all the time --- without saying so -- in acknowledgment footnotes and dedications. And, it is hypocritical to reject some forms of acknowledgment and not others. That’s one key point to the IHE article and physics acknowledgment.

But, here is a larger question: Why not use acknowledgment to message intentionally and overtly? Authors have taken the time to write something of meaning to them; why not learn more about their motivations, their experiences, their inside thinking?

This is a topic with respect to which I have had some experience – for better or worse. I recently had just over a page of acknowledgments in my new book, Breakaway Learners (Columbia Teachers College Press 2017). I thanked institutions and the people in them. I listed readers and discussants of the book or its ideas by name – some of whom had passed away (which I stated explicitly) but there influence was real and palpable still.

Then, I used initials to reference those closest to me, an interesting twist. Why didn’t I use their name? Would you mention your oncologist? That is a hypothetical but it gives you an idea of the possible reasons for initials. Would you mention one parent or one sibling without mentioning all of them? Yes but why rub it in with real names? The people with the initials know who they are (but so do those left out but it is less public in some sense).

Much social media writing does not have acknowledgments and for 18 months, I just went along with that approach. But, I have adopted a new approach in blogs and shorter online articles – the kind that traditionally lack any reference to those whose thoughts or presence aided the writing and the ideas presented. That seemed like a big omission to me. Few of us work in a bubble without the influence of others.

So, on many blogs now (although certainly not all), I provide a note at the end – it is akin to a postscript. I usually use initials rather than names (to protect the innocent). Sometimes the notes are clear-cut. Sometimes, I am overtly messaging – positively. Other times, what I write is twinged with irony. Sometimes these notes contain hidden messages understood by only the person whose initials appear.

Here's a sample (not yet used) of such a postscript: "Note: A special thanks yet again to XX who regularly shows me how ideas can be mobilized and how technology can be personalized." Or, try this postscript (also hypothetical): Note: “I wish BB has seen the value of this piece; it might have enabled us to better understand life’s exigencies.”

In sum: we have done what this physicist did for decades: we have used acknowledgments and dedications as personal statements that often message. That message isn’t always clear but it is almost always there. We just haven't been honest about it.

Bravo to the journal that accepted this physics piece with its candid acknowledgement and let's use the occasion to reflect more on acknowledgements and the possibility of our using them overtly to speak truth to power or whatever other message an author/scholar/person cares to deliver. These small insertions into published works matter.

Now let's honor their meaning, whether narrow or broad, whether general or personal, whether strategic or Machiavellian. 

My suggestion: pull out five books and/or articles you care about. Look at the acknowledgements and dedications. Ponder their meaning and then consider whether, now seeing and trying to interpret them, they enhance the power of what was published. Were I a betting person, I’d say readers would gain through this process. And, writers: keep those acknowledgments, dedications and notes coming. And, consider using them even more boldly and creatively so one’s voice and message can be heard above the fray.

Note: A special thanks to GK and MW (real initials) who may convince me yet to disclose the names of those whose initials are what appear now in my work.