Q&A: Lynne Rienner

Back in the summer of 1984, Lynne Rienner—an ambitious young woman with a publishing background and a history major—founded an independent publishing company in Boulder, CO, that would specialize in high-quality political science books. At the time, she employed fewer than three people, who covered editing, marketing, and everything in between. Some 25 years later, the company—still bearing her name—is going strong, with main offices in Boulder, marketing offices in London and Melbourne, and an annual roster of 60 titles published with the help of an army of freelancers. Rienner also made some wise real estate choices along the way, purchasing an apartment in New York City that she now utilizes as both her second home and her second office. We met there on a September afternoon for a leisurely conversation about the company's venture into reference publishing. Rienner was eager to discuss the forthcoming release of the three-volume Encyclopedia of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict (ISBN 978-1-58826-686-6. $395), four years in the making and requiring the input of well over 100 contributors.

What is Lynne Rienner Publishing's mission?

We are primarily a political science publisher. In fact, I've never met a social sciences librarian who doesn't know who we are. We actually think of ourselves as an international community of scholars.

Your big bet in early 2010 is the publication of the Encyclopedia of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. Why venture into reference at this time?

Our first venture into reference took place 15 years ago with the publication of Desmond Dinan's Encyclopedia of the European Union. At the time, we simply wanted to meet the need in the area in which we publish. With this new encyclopedia, our goal is similar. Despite all of the books on Palestinian-Israeli relations (many of which we've published ourselves), it struck us that there was still an absence of a balanced treatment—objective information, as opposed to passionate opinions—covering all aspects of the conflict.

Given the topic, is remaining fully neutral even possible? Drawing the line must might have been challenging at times.

Some would say that the very act of choosing the entries in an encyclopedia reveals a bias. I can't argue with that, but, yes, to the extent that it is humanly possible, the entries consist of information, not opinion. We set out to publish a traditional encyclopedia, not a collection of op-ed pieces. And to keep to that goal, we preceded the copyediting stage with an exhaustive "bias-hunting" editorial process. I believe that we succeeded. But I also believe that there will be readers who will find a pro-Palestinian bias, just as there will be readers who will find a pro-Israeli bias—and that in some of those cases, the conflicting accusations will be directed at the same entry.

Did you model this encyclopedia on your previous reference endeavor?

We started out thinking that we would use the Encyclopedia of the European Union model for this work and keep it the same size. It was going to be a one-volume resource of about 500 pages, but we quickly realized the model wouldn't work because the material wouldn't allow it. It kept growing over time until it reached three volumes and 2000 pages. The mantra all along has been: if it will enhance something, put it in.

Can you describe the process of amassing all that information?

We started from scratch instead of using previous material as the foundation, creating an advisory board that would revise the proposed list of initial entries. We also spent a lot of time and money on editing. Then, before we got to the copyediting stage, we hired a person whose job was to get rid of anything that sounded like an interpretation and not a statement of fact. The efforts of two people stand out in particular in the whole process: Steve Barr, the director of production, who has been living with the project for a long time and making it happen, and Cheryl Rubenberg, the encyclopedia editor who kept going (and going…and going…), as what was conceived as a one-volume work grew into a three-volume set.

Did you get any guidance from the library community?

Everything that we publish goes through an external review process. We function like a university press in that regard. In this case, we called on several librarians to review the manuscript—we would not have proceeded without their thumbs up.

Why the decision not to put any art on the cover?

The absence of cover art was not the result of a political decision—though how we would have come up with an appropriate, neutral image escapes me—but instead because we wanted the volumes to be bound in the highest quality, library-friendly cloth.

Any plans for an electronic version?

We do not feel that we are ready at this stage to deliver the kind of first-rate electronic encyclopedia that libraries should expect from us. There likely will be an e-version at some point, but when, and what it will look like, we don't yet know.

Any other encyclopedic works on the horizon?

The Encyclopedia of South Africa will be the next challenge. But unlike this project, which we initiated, the South Africa project was proposed to us. (We publish extensively in the field of African studies.) Given the unique trajectory of South Africa's history, as well as the remarkable changes in the country over the past two decades, it is a natural for us. We envision a one-volume encyclopedia along the lines of the European Union work and plan to release it in late 2010.