But Why Always the Novel? Midrange Reading Samples of Persons and Texts

IF 0.8 2区文学 0 LITERATURE

New Literary History Pub Date : 2022-09-01 DOI:10.1353/nlh.2022.a898321

A. Booth

{"title":"But Why Always the Novel? Midrange Reading Samples of Persons and Texts","authors":"A. Booth","doi":"10.1353/nlh.2022.a898321","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Literary studies, whether digital or analog, have overemphasized the novel, itself an example of the problem of misrepresenting a more complex system through favored individuals or reductive samples. Digitized access to more of the published English-language texts over centuries enables research on overlooked forms beyond boundaries of genre, nation, and period, and yet \"distant reading\" or algorithmic textual analysis continues to favor the portion of novels that have been digitized—not a representative proxy for literature. The essay reflects on changing methods experienced in the author's career in light of persistent misconstructions of digital humanities (DH); illustrates difficulties of identifying and representing networks and typologies of individual people through an online database, Collective Biographies of Women; and discusses other digital projects working at mid-range with book history as well as cultural and material contexts. Citing colleagues in this issue and a range of advocates for uniting \"theory,\" close reading, and social-justice and engagement initiatives with new media and methods, the essay advocates for varieties of digital scholarship that serve humanities inquiry without privileging the novel as data.","PeriodicalId":19150,"journal":{"name":"New Literary History","volume":"54 1","pages":"559 - 581"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Literary History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/nlh.2022.a898321","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract:Literary studies, whether digital or analog, have overemphasized the novel, itself an example of the problem of misrepresenting a more complex system through favored individuals or reductive samples. Digitized access to more of the published English-language texts over centuries enables research on overlooked forms beyond boundaries of genre, nation, and period, and yet "distant reading" or algorithmic textual analysis continues to favor the portion of novels that have been digitized—not a representative proxy for literature. The essay reflects on changing methods experienced in the author's career in light of persistent misconstructions of digital humanities (DH); illustrates difficulties of identifying and representing networks and typologies of individual people through an online database, Collective Biographies of Women; and discusses other digital projects working at mid-range with book history as well as cultural and material contexts. Citing colleagues in this issue and a range of advocates for uniting "theory," close reading, and social-justice and engagement initiatives with new media and methods, the essay advocates for varieties of digital scholarship that serve humanities inquiry without privileging the novel as data.

查看原文本刊更多论文

但为什么总是小说？人物和文本的中级阅读样本

摘要：文学研究，无论是数字的还是模拟的，都过分强调了这部小说，它本身就是一个例子，说明了通过偏爱的个人或简化的样本来歪曲一个更复杂的系统的问题。几个世纪以来，对更多出版的英语文本的数字化访问使人们能够对被忽视的形式进行超越流派、国家和时期界限的研究，然而“远程阅读”或算法文本分析仍然有利于小说中已经数字化的部分，而不是文学的代表。鉴于数字人文（DH）的持续误解，本文反思了作者职业生涯中所经历的方法的变化；说明了通过一个名为“妇女集体传记”的在线数据库识别和代表个人网络和类型的困难；并讨论了其他与书籍历史以及文化和物质背景相关的中等规模数字项目。这篇文章引用了本期的同事以及一系列将“理论”、细读、社会正义和参与倡议与新媒体和方法相结合的倡导者的话，倡导各种数字学术，为人文学科研究服务，而不将小说作为数据。

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

New Literary History LITERATURE-

CiteScore

1.50

自引率

11.10%

发文量

期刊介绍： New Literary History focuses on questions of theory, method, interpretation, and literary history. Rather than espousing a single ideology or intellectual framework, it canvasses a wide range of scholarly concerns. By examining the bases of criticism, the journal provokes debate on the relations between literary and cultural texts and present needs. A major international forum for scholarly exchange, New Literary History has received six awards from the Council of Editors of Learned Journals.