"A dissertation is not a book"

If you search the internet for advice on turning your dissertation into a book, that is the sentence you will see most often. Advice columns repeat it a lot, certain that you don't believe them. I believe them, I really do! But when it comes to the specifics, I'm at a loss for how to proceed. Things they say:

• Cut down your overabundance of citations: Okay, I can do that.

• Remove your methodology and lit review sections: I barely had these. Basically, I should cut most of my (short) introduction.

• Write more engagingly for a non-specialist audience: I've done that all along. I know this, because my supervisor called me out on it a lot.

• Rearrange everything to a) say the most interesting stuff first, and b) make your argument emerge.

The last one is what I'm struggling with. Unlike American PhDs, I didn't have hermetically-sealed chapters that each handled separate authors. I had themes that bled into each other. I spent the last few months before submission moving things around between different chapters. I simply don't know where I would move things again, having spent a lot of time finding the right place for them.

So am I deluded? Did I actually manage to write a dissertation that doesn't require total reorganization? These are the decisions I weigh as I prepare a book proposal. I moved onto that project after I finally sent off an article I'd been working on for ages (including two trips to Lincoln). What a relief that was! I dearly hope it gets accepted.

In the meantime, end-of-term festivities kicked off with the choir's annual advent carol service and wine-soaked dinner yesterday. I have the rest of the week to pack up for winter break and consult any books that might inform said book proposal. The weather has turned windy, gray and miserable, guaranteeing that the annual Fairbairns race will be the usual uncomfortable experience. On we muddle...