{"title":"Reading Pudd’nhead Wilson: Criticism and Commentary from the Gilded Age to the Modern, Online Era","authors":"Philip Goldstein","doi":"10.5325/RECEPTION.9.1.0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although Mark Twain’s Tragedy of Pudd’nhead Wilson and his Extraordinary Twins began as a single work, Twain separated them, in a decision that has a bearing on the reception of the better-known Pudd’nhead Wilson. After briefly summarizing the differences between Twins and Pudd’nhead Wilson, this article discusses the reception history of the latter book, including the reviews, which gave the novel a mixed reception until the 1950s, when it achieved the status of a classic comparable to Huckleberry Finn: the diverse and contrary analyses of the academic criticism and the highly divided feelings of recent online responses. This article will show, moreover, that changing cultural institutions explain the differences and divisions of the reviews, which are public and general, the academic criticism, which is specialized and autonomous, and the online responses, which derive from the novel’s educational contexts.","PeriodicalId":40584,"journal":{"name":"Reception-Texts Readers Audiences History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2017-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reception-Texts Readers Audiences History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5325/RECEPTION.9.1.0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Although Mark Twain’s Tragedy of Pudd’nhead Wilson and his Extraordinary Twins began as a single work, Twain separated them, in a decision that has a bearing on the reception of the better-known Pudd’nhead Wilson. After briefly summarizing the differences between Twins and Pudd’nhead Wilson, this article discusses the reception history of the latter book, including the reviews, which gave the novel a mixed reception until the 1950s, when it achieved the status of a classic comparable to Huckleberry Finn: the diverse and contrary analyses of the academic criticism and the highly divided feelings of recent online responses. This article will show, moreover, that changing cultural institutions explain the differences and divisions of the reviews, which are public and general, the academic criticism, which is specialized and autonomous, and the online responses, which derive from the novel’s educational contexts.
期刊介绍:
Reception: Texts, Readers, Audiences, History is a scholarly, peer-reviewed journal published once a year. It seeks to promote dialog and discussion among scholars engaged in theoretical and practical analyses in several related fields: reader-response criticism and pedagogy, reception study, history of reading and the book, audience and communication studies, institutional studies and histories, as well as interpretive strategies related to feminism, race and ethnicity, gender and sexuality, and postcolonial studies, focusing mainly but not exclusively on the literature, culture, and media of England and the United States.