It’s a book

IMG_0134The Voice of the Backbenchers – my history of the 1922 Committee – was launched on Tuesday at a reception, attended by the Prime Minister, to mark the 90th anniversary of the 1922 Committee.    It is published by the Conservative History Group on behalf of the 1922 Committee.  I shall circulate details shortly of how copies may be obtained for those wishing to acquire copies.

Now that it is published and I have copies, I have decided that it is indeed a book.  I had listed it under the category of a short monograph, but as that basically means a short book I thought I may as well list it with the rest of my books.

Does this classification matter?  Only for where I list it in my CV, but that has little relevance for anyone else as there is little reason why anyone else would see it.   It has more relevance in terms of providing the answer when people ask me how many books I have published.  Instead of saying ‘thirty, plus a short monograph’, I can now say ‘thirty-one’.   Each response excludes new editions.  And talking of new editions, more shortly on the 2nd edition of Parliament in British Politics

UPDATE: See John Rentoul’s report on the book at

About Lord Norton

Professor of Government at Hull University, and Member of the House of Lords
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to It’s a book

  1. franksummers3ba says:

    Lord Norton,
    I know that Alexandre Dumas Pere told Napoleon he had penned 1,200 volumes, but :”The Three Musketeers” accounted for eight of those and his complete works fill 277 or so volumes. Barbara Cartland and a good number of Americans who combined journalism, fantasy and history for New York editors during the wild west days to create the first Westerns are among the writers with huge numbers in English. But for the kind of thing you write, I may simply be ill informed but you must be getting near the top of the list of the most prolific writers of political history and theory. Do you know and will you indulge us with an observation on that subject?

    • Lord Norton says:

      frankwsummers3ba: I’ve not done a study, so could not say with any certainty, though I am fairly sure I’m not near the top. There are other political scientists – and social scientists more generally – who have written far more books than I have, though I may be doing rather well relative to age. In any event, my goal is not to achieve a record in terms of the number of books I publish. My focus is more qualitative than quantitative. I have no interest in publishing for the sake of publishing. I try to ensure that why I do publish is clear, well researched and makes a contribution to knowledge. I’m also keen to avoid writing the ‘the world according to Norton’ type book!

      • Lord Norton,
        Perhaps you are right. I am still looking. Prolific is not bad surely. I rather think that Dumas and Cartland deserve some respect as writers. Certainly they have been economic powerhouses of durable tenure…

        I do appreciate your response.

      • Lord Norton says:

        Frank W. Summers III: I certainly would not object to being described as prolific!

  2. ladytizzy says:

    One MP declares his income* from a book publisher:

    22 March 2012: received £30,750,
    Time taken so far (since October 2011): at least 300 hrs

    31 July 2012, received £30,750
    Hours: between 2 April and 31 July 2012, at least 400 hrs

    9 October 2012, received £30,750
    Hours: between 31 July and 9 October 2012 at least 200 hrs


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s