Reading Pudd’nhead Wilson: Criticism and Commentary from the Gilded Age to the Modern, Online Era

IF 0.1 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Philip Goldstein
{"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":"24 1","pages":"22 - 4"},"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.
阅读《笨蛋威尔逊:从镀金时代到现代网络时代的批评与评论》
虽然马克·吐温的《笨蛋威尔逊的悲剧》和他那对非同寻常的双胞胎是作为一部作品开始的,但吐温把它们分开了,这一决定影响了人们对更著名的《笨蛋威尔逊》的接受程度。在简要总结了《双胞胎》和《布丁海德·威尔逊》的不同之处之后,本文讨论了后者的接受史,包括评论,直到20世纪50年代,这部小说才获得了与《哈克贝利·费恩历险记》相当的经典地位:学术批评的多样化和相反的分析,以及最近网上反应的高度分裂的感受。此外,本文还将说明,不断变化的文化制度解释了评论的差异和分歧,评论是公开的和一般性的,学术批评是专业化的和自主的,而在线回应则源于小说的教育背景。
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
Reception-Texts Readers Audiences History
Reception-Texts Readers Audiences History HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
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.
×
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