The Goodreads “Classics”: A Computational Study of Readers, Amazon, and Crowdsourced Amateur Criticism

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Melanie Walsh, Maria Antoniak
{"title":"The Goodreads “Classics”: A Computational Study of Readers, Amazon, and Crowdsourced Amateur Criticism","authors":"Melanie Walsh, Maria Antoniak","doi":"10.22148/001C.22221","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This essay examines how Goodreads users define, discuss, and debate “classic” literature by computa-tionally analyzing and close reading more than 120,000 user reviews. We begin by exploring how crowdsourced tagging systems like those found on Goodreads have influenced the evolution of genre among readers and amateur critics, and we highlight the contemporary value of the “classics” in particu-lar. We identify the most commonly tagged “classic” literary works and find that Goodreads users have curated a vision of literature that is less diverse, in terms of the race and ethnicity of authors, than many U.S. high school and college syllabi. Drawing on computational methods such as topic modeling, we point to some of the forces that influence readers’ perceptions, such as schooling and what we call the classic industry — industries that benefit from the reinforcement of works as classics in other mediums and domains like film, television, publishing, and e-commerce (e.g., Goodreads and Amazon). We also high-light themes that users commonly discuss in their reviews (e.g., boring characters) and writing styles that often stand out in them (e.g., conversational and slangy language). Throughout the essay, we make the case that computational methods and internet data, when combined, can help literary critics capture the creative explosion of reader responses and critique algorithmic culture’s effects on literary history.","PeriodicalId":33005,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cultural Analytics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"24","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cultural Analytics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22148/001C.22221","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 24

Abstract

This essay examines how Goodreads users define, discuss, and debate “classic” literature by computa-tionally analyzing and close reading more than 120,000 user reviews. We begin by exploring how crowdsourced tagging systems like those found on Goodreads have influenced the evolution of genre among readers and amateur critics, and we highlight the contemporary value of the “classics” in particu-lar. We identify the most commonly tagged “classic” literary works and find that Goodreads users have curated a vision of literature that is less diverse, in terms of the race and ethnicity of authors, than many U.S. high school and college syllabi. Drawing on computational methods such as topic modeling, we point to some of the forces that influence readers’ perceptions, such as schooling and what we call the classic industry — industries that benefit from the reinforcement of works as classics in other mediums and domains like film, television, publishing, and e-commerce (e.g., Goodreads and Amazon). We also high-light themes that users commonly discuss in their reviews (e.g., boring characters) and writing styles that often stand out in them (e.g., conversational and slangy language). Throughout the essay, we make the case that computational methods and internet data, when combined, can help literary critics capture the creative explosion of reader responses and critique algorithmic culture’s effects on literary history.
Goodreads“经典”:读者、亚马逊和众包业余批评的计算研究
本文通过计算分析和细读超过120000条用户评论,考察了Goodreads用户如何定义、讨论和辩论“经典”文学。我们首先探索像Goodreads上发现的众包标签系统如何影响读者和业余评论家的类型演变,我们特别强调了“经典”的当代价值。我们确定了最常见的“经典”文学作品,发现Goodreads用户策划的文学愿景在作者的种族和民族方面不如许多美国高中和大学的教学大纲多样化。利用主题建模等计算方法,我们指出了影响读者认知的一些力量,如学校教育和我们所说的经典产业——这些产业受益于在电影、电视、出版和电子商务等其他媒体和领域(如Goodreads和亚马逊)将作品强化为经典。我们还强调了用户在评论中经常讨论的主题(例如,无聊的角色)和在评论中突出的写作风格(例如,对话和俚语)。在整篇文章中,我们证明,计算方法和互联网数据相结合,可以帮助文学评论家捕捉读者反应的创造性爆炸,并批评算法文化对文学史的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Cultural Analytics
Journal of Cultural Analytics Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信