Editor’s Note: Restoring the Director’s Cut

IF 0.2 3区 艺术学 0 ART
John Cunnally
{"title":"Editor’s Note: Restoring the Director’s Cut","authors":"John Cunnally","doi":"10.1086/718484","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Not all bowdlerization is the result of sexual prudery. I heard Leo Steinberg once express disappointment with an edition of the Diary of John Evelyn that he was reading because the editor had decided to eliminate Evelyn’s extensive reports and critiques of sermons he attended on Sundays. The editor was convinced that no modern reader would have the slightest interest in such tedious accounts of theology and exegesis. Yet these homilies, Steinberg noted, not only excited great attention and curiosity during Evelyn’s lifetime (1620–1706), but they were regarded as important forms of communal entertainment and popular discussion,","PeriodicalId":43235,"journal":{"name":"SOURCE-NOTES IN THE HISTORY OF ART","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SOURCE-NOTES IN THE HISTORY OF ART","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/718484","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ART","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Not all bowdlerization is the result of sexual prudery. I heard Leo Steinberg once express disappointment with an edition of the Diary of John Evelyn that he was reading because the editor had decided to eliminate Evelyn’s extensive reports and critiques of sermons he attended on Sundays. The editor was convinced that no modern reader would have the slightest interest in such tedious accounts of theology and exegesis. Yet these homilies, Steinberg noted, not only excited great attention and curiosity during Evelyn’s lifetime (1620–1706), but they were regarded as important forms of communal entertainment and popular discussion,
编者按:恢复导演的剪辑
并非所有的包皮化都是性矫饰的结果。我曾听利奥·斯坦伯格(Leo Steinberg)对他正在阅读的《约翰·伊夫林日记》的一个版本表示失望,因为编辑决定删除伊夫林对他周日参加布道的大量报道和评论。编辑确信,没有一个现代读者会对这种冗长乏味的神学和注释有丝毫的兴趣。然而,斯坦伯格指出,在伊夫林的一生中(1620-1706),这些布道不仅引起了极大的关注和好奇心,而且被视为公共娱乐和大众讨论的重要形式,
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
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
×
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