You are here Home  > Journals >  Dissidences


Close Comments

Comments (14)

  1. I have not published in this particular journal. however, I am writing this because it has struck me to see how “easy” it has been for the editors to start a journal in a very unprofessional way and to get away with it.
    Although it has a glowing list of assessors, most of the articles are of a very low quality.

  2. I have to agree with the above comment. the quality is extremely low. see for instance an article on Pérez Reverte’s Pintor de Batallas by a Alex Grohmann: virtually no intellectual depth and lacking a critical apparatus.

  3. I am so glad that two years ago I reconsidered submitting to this journal, as I understand that the MLA may stop indexing it.

    _Dissidences_ was supposed to be the vanguard and beacon of the open access online journal movement in Hispanic Studies. The first issue is quite good if you subscribe to a Duke-styled culturalist approach. However, it has degenerated into another web-dump for poorly researched material that hasn’t been accepted elsewhere, or a welcoming home for assistant professors desperate to publish *something* before their pretenure review.

    The whole project has been neglected: it used to publish yearly, now it’s twice a year. Although it sports some big names in its advisory board, the current editorial board is less than stellar. And it shows: the latest issue (6/7) is particularly dismal. If the editors claim this is a peer reviewed journal, I guess we’ll have to take their word for it.

  4. Ojalá hubiera leído estos comentarios antes de mandar mi artículo a esta revista. Nunca te contestan cuando les escribes, tardan meses y meses en comunicarse contigo. Al final de este proceso interminable, no aguanté más y les tuve que escribir que retiro mi articulo de su consideración. Puesto que otra vez nadie me contestó nada, ni siquiera sé si se enteraron de mi última comunicación. Ha sido una pérdida de tiempo muy frustrante.

    • A mi me pasó EXACTAMENTE lo mismo, son unos inprofesionales jugando con el tiempo de la gente que estamos trabajando muy duro para conseguir el tenure…

  5. I’m so glad I found this blog with so useful information, links and comments on journals. I really think that we should be careful with where to send our articles to because the amount of time and effort put into our writing should be valued and not wasted by amateur journals like this one that could not keep up with the demands of good peer-reviewed journals. On the other hand, it would be a good idea to contact them and let them know about their flaws; they are our colleagues and they might need our input.

  6. Como alguien ha dicho antes, se supone que esta revista iba a ser un lugar para hacer teoría literaria en castellano, catalán o vasco. Sin embargo, los artículos son los típicos textos de crítica literaria que consisten en: 1) Paráfrasis (pobres) de alguna teoría “cool” del tipo Foucault, Derrida o Deleuze en los primeros párrafos; 2) Aplicación directa de estos postulados teóricos a un texto literario determinado. El texto literario, por supuesto, es un simple pretexto.

    Así que de hacer teoría literaria como tal, nada de nada. Luego está el tema de la calidad, que deja mucho (muchísimo) que desear y la frecuencia de la revista ha caído en picado.

  7. Pretty annoying experience. I submitted an article, never heard anything… never heard anything… still nothing. After nearly two months in limbo, I sent a retraction email. Still no response.

  8. It’s disheartening to read that a journal that once promised to focus on the intersection of theory and creative texts has fallen so far from its objectives and the promised quality of research. There may now be too many new open access Hispanic journals in which one can publish unacceptable articles in the less than the 3 to 4 years it often takes in a few major, print journals in the field. I have come across in Dissidences two articles rejected by two other journals for which I serve as a peer-reviewer. The articles were not revised in accordance with the suggestions provided by the peer reviewers who read the submissions,

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *