And one is supposed to publish how many pieces a year before perishing in academia?

Blech. Argh. Whatever.

Ok, you know how my paper got rejected? Right. And maybe you recall that I sent it out to another journal. I put it in the mail (b/c that's how they wanted it) back in late March. A couple of weeks later, they acknowledged receipt of the paper and wrote, in their email, that I should contact them if I hadn't heard anything in over 2.5 months. 2.5 months came and went, so I emailed them. Apparently, only one reviewer has gotten back to them (no idea what said reviewer had to say about it...puke!). They promised to nudge the others to get a response. Another week has passed and now I get an email asking for an electronic copy. I sent it immediately. G says to contact them in ANOTHER month if I still haven't heard anything. Ok. And so, if I'm lucky, I'll get an R and R. (In that case, maybe I'll have a clue if I might possibly get something published by 2007. Note: there is a big blank hole under "PUBLICATIONS" on my CV.) Or, more likely, I will send it off to another journal after another rejection that took 5 months to find out about. Was the faster rejection better? Probably. I mean, I know the whole journal publication stuff is supposed to take forever. But this experience just leads me to ask if it is even worth trying for an academic position when I am SO SLOW to produce (and feel ill about/am deathly afraid of it all)?