This article argues that, in her final novel, Daniel Deronda, Eliot uses her eponymous protagonist to simultaneously exemplify and problematize the type of sympathy she had championed from the 1850s. Sympathetic affinity in the novel works like original ‘occult’ sympathy, irresistibly connecting non-adjacent things, and matched in its force by sympathy’s original twin, antipathy. The article investigates the novel’s antipathies, arguing that Eliot eschews meliorism and offers instead a brave glimpse into the obdurate forces of hatred and destructiveness that shadow our best selves.
{"title":"Sympathy–Antipathy in Daniel Deronda","authors":"C. Burdett","doi":"10.16995/ntn.1983","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/ntn.1983","url":null,"abstract":"This article argues that, in her final novel, Daniel Deronda, Eliot uses her eponymous protagonist to simultaneously exemplify and problematize the type of sympathy she had championed from the 1850s. Sympathetic affinity in the novel works like original ‘occult’ sympathy, irresistibly connecting non-adjacent things, and matched in its force by sympathy’s original twin, antipathy. The article investigates the novel’s antipathies, arguing that Eliot eschews meliorism and offers instead a brave glimpse into the obdurate forces of hatred and destructiveness that shadow our best selves.","PeriodicalId":90082,"journal":{"name":"19 : interdisciplinary studies in the long nineteenth century","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76299017","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Henry James first met George Eliot in 1869, before he had published any fiction, and he did not see her again until 1878, by which time she was the universally admired author of Middlemarch (1871–72) and he had at last begun to make his name as a novelist, with Roderick Hudson (1875), The American (1876–77), and The Europeans (1878). There are two accounts of the first meeting, one written the following day, 10 May 1869, the other shortly before James’s death in 1916. The later account is a much embellished version of the earlier; interestingly, both are striking for their writerliness. Both accounts reward close scrutiny, especially the later account, which has been neglected by scholars. Such scrutiny offers a fresh insight into the relationship between the two writers, and in particular makes it possible to revisit and re-evaluate James’s criticisms of George Eliot’s fiction.
{"title":"Henry James Visits the Priory: A Twice-Told Tale","authors":"R. Ashton","doi":"10.16995/ntn.1919","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/ntn.1919","url":null,"abstract":"Henry James first met George Eliot in 1869, before he had published any fiction, and he did not see her again until 1878, by which time she was the universally admired author of Middlemarch (1871–72) and he had at last begun to make his name as a novelist, with Roderick Hudson (1875), The American (1876–77), and The Europeans (1878). There are two accounts of the first meeting, one written the following day, 10 May 1869, the other shortly before James’s death in 1916. The later account is a much embellished version of the earlier; interestingly, both are striking for their writerliness. Both accounts reward close scrutiny, especially the later account, which has been neglected by scholars. Such scrutiny offers a fresh insight into the relationship between the two writers, and in particular makes it possible to revisit and re-evaluate James’s criticisms of George Eliot’s fiction.","PeriodicalId":90082,"journal":{"name":"19 : interdisciplinary studies in the long nineteenth century","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74253273","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article examines three types of interconnected afterlives that have their roots in George Eliot’s well-known insistence that the diffusion of the work is what mattered, not the identity or personality of the writer who produced that work. It suggests, however, that Marian Evans’s efforts to shape the terms in which she would be remembered were riven with a sense of the precariousness of the potential outcomes for legacy building on the basis of written work or good deeds. Her complicated relationship with the idea of an afterlife is a core preoccupation of her final collection of poetry, The Legend of Jubal and Other Poems, Old and New (1878). The poems were originally published in magazines and are not typically read consecutively. Collectively, however, they can be seen to reinforce her understanding that legacy building by abjuring ego is a paradoxical and possibly pointless activity. Two other types of afterlife confirm Evans’s anxieties about remembrance. Obituaries and memorial essays that followed in the days and weeks after her death and twenty-first century biofictional representations of the writer, despite their generic distinctiveness as ‘afterlife’ modes, both present reactionary personalized but partial pictures of the woman behind the work in ways that signal a limited capacity to appreciate the complexity and the conflicted and radical nature of both the woman and her work.
{"title":"George Eliot’s Precarious Afterlives","authors":"Fionnuala Dillane","doi":"10.16995/ntn.1981","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/ntn.1981","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines three types of interconnected afterlives that have their roots in George Eliot’s well-known insistence that the diffusion of the work is what mattered, not the identity or personality of the writer who produced that work. It suggests, however, that Marian Evans’s efforts to shape the terms in which she would be remembered were riven with a sense of the precariousness of the potential outcomes for legacy building on the basis of written work or good deeds. Her complicated relationship with the idea of an afterlife is a core preoccupation of her final collection of poetry, The Legend of Jubal and Other Poems, Old and New (1878). The poems were originally published in magazines and are not typically read consecutively. Collectively, however, they can be seen to reinforce her understanding that legacy building by abjuring ego is a paradoxical and possibly pointless activity. Two other types of afterlife confirm Evans’s anxieties about remembrance. Obituaries and memorial essays that followed in the days and weeks after her death and twenty-first century biofictional representations of the writer, despite their generic distinctiveness as ‘afterlife’ modes, both present reactionary personalized but partial pictures of the woman behind the work in ways that signal a limited capacity to appreciate the complexity and the conflicted and radical nature of both the woman and her work.","PeriodicalId":90082,"journal":{"name":"19 : interdisciplinary studies in the long nineteenth century","volume":"593 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72423688","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Hegelian context of Middlemarch, prompted by Lewes’s ambivalent reading of the philosopher, allowed Eliot, through the aesthetics and the Phenomenology’s reading of struggle to the death, to find a structure for exploring power and destruction in relationships.
{"title":"George Eliot, Hegel, and Middlemarch","authors":"Isobel Armstrong","doi":"10.16995/ntn.1992","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/ntn.1992","url":null,"abstract":"The Hegelian context of Middlemarch, prompted by Lewes’s ambivalent reading of the philosopher, allowed Eliot, through the aesthetics and the Phenomenology’s reading of struggle to the death, to find a structure for exploring power and destruction in relationships.","PeriodicalId":90082,"journal":{"name":"19 : interdisciplinary studies in the long nineteenth century","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87156013","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
While it may be the modern reader’s habit to skip or skim the epigraphs, their use in George Eliot’s novels generated a substantial amount of notice. By the time Eliot published Daniel Deronda, her epigraphs had grown substantially in number and length, and most readers found them tiresome. Critics cited the novel’s first epigraph, which relates to the arbitrary nature of all beginnings, as a prime example of Eliot’s sententiousness. Formally, epigraphs illuminate the difficulty of deciding where a narrative actually begins. They raise questions about the extent to which beginnings establish the parameters of what will follow, and whether endings determine how we understand beginnings. This article contests the assertion that Eliot’s epigraphs are inordinately long, or long-winded. It first considers the influence of Laurence Sterne on Eliot’s novel to argue for the importance of digression to the novel’s form. It then examines Eliot’s use of maxims, quoted as epigraphs, and her mimesis of them, in order to demonstrate the moral implications of the form. Finally, it uses Barthes to trace the maxim to the character most associated with it: Grandcourt. His linguistic concision suggests that, in this novel, digression and concision are loaded with their own moral valences.
{"title":"‘An inordinate number of words’: Epigraphs in Daniel Deronda","authors":"E. Yem","doi":"10.16995/ntn.1926","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/ntn.1926","url":null,"abstract":"While it may be the modern reader’s habit to skip or skim the epigraphs, their use in George Eliot’s novels generated a substantial amount of notice. By the time Eliot published Daniel Deronda, her epigraphs had grown substantially in number and length, and most readers found them tiresome. Critics cited the novel’s first epigraph, which relates to the arbitrary nature of all beginnings, as a prime example of Eliot’s sententiousness. Formally, epigraphs illuminate the difficulty of deciding where a narrative actually begins. They raise questions about the extent to which beginnings establish the parameters of what will follow, and whether endings determine how we understand beginnings. This article contests the assertion that Eliot’s epigraphs are inordinately long, or long-winded. It first considers the influence of Laurence Sterne on Eliot’s novel to argue for the importance of digression to the novel’s form. It then examines Eliot’s use of maxims, quoted as epigraphs, and her mimesis of them, in order to demonstrate the moral implications of the form. Finally, it uses Barthes to trace the maxim to the character most associated with it: Grandcourt. His linguistic concision suggests that, in this novel, digression and concision are loaded with their own moral valences.","PeriodicalId":90082,"journal":{"name":"19 : interdisciplinary studies in the long nineteenth century","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83311530","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
It is helpful to understand George Eliot as a ‘woman of letters’ whose literary work extends beyond the novel, even fiction. The considerable variety of formats and range of genres of which Marian Evans/George Eliot availed herself between 1840 and 1880 are directly related to the coincidence of her lifespan with the efflorescence of the press. This article examines the trajectory of her career through three networks of print production: that of the Brays in Coventry, including Charles Bray and his newspaper in which Marian Evans published early work, and his family, Cara Bray and Sara Hennell with whom she made close emotional and literary bonds; that of John Chapman and his publishing and periodical circles in London, where she was afforded a unique opportunity to edit in its office one of the famous quarterlies of the day, the Westminster Review, and to read, meet and edit its contributors and their work; and lastly, the network of George Henry Lewes, her partner in life and work, whose range of journalism and publications — including fiction, drama, science, and criticism of German literature offered her access to reliable advice, wide experience, and contacts with editors, publishers, and authors across the literary spectrum.
把乔治·艾略特理解为一位“文学家”是有帮助的，她的文学作品超越了小说，甚至小说。玛丽安·埃文斯/乔治·艾略特在1840年至1880年间创作了多种多样的形式和体裁，这与她的一生正好赶上出版业的繁荣期有直接关系。本文通过三个印刷生产网络考察了她的职业生涯轨迹:考文垂的布雷家族，包括查尔斯·布雷和他的报纸，玛丽安·埃文斯在报纸上发表了早期作品，以及他的家人，卡拉·布雷和萨拉·亨内尔，她与他们建立了密切的情感和文学联系;约翰·查普曼和他在伦敦的出版和期刊圈，在那里，她得到了一个独特的机会，在办公室编辑当时著名的季刊之一，威斯敏斯特评论 ，阅读，会见和编辑其撰稿人和他们的工作;最后，她的生活和工作伙伴乔治·亨利·刘易斯(George Henry lewis)的关系网，他的新闻和出版物——包括小说、戏剧、科学，以及 德国文学评论——为她提供了可靠的建议、丰富的经验，并与文学领域的编辑、出版商和作家建立了联系。
{"title":"George Eliot and Print Media: Woman of Letters","authors":"Laurel Brake","doi":"10.16995/ntn.1927","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/ntn.1927","url":null,"abstract":"It is helpful to understand George Eliot as a ‘woman of letters’ whose literary work extends beyond the novel, even fiction. The considerable variety of formats and range of genres of which Marian Evans/George Eliot availed herself between 1840 and 1880 are directly related to the coincidence of her lifespan with the efflorescence of the press. This article examines the trajectory of her career through three networks of print production: that of the Brays in Coventry, including Charles Bray and his newspaper in which Marian Evans published early work, and his family, Cara Bray and Sara Hennell with whom she made close emotional and literary bonds; that of John Chapman and his publishing and periodical circles in London, where she was afforded a unique opportunity to edit in its office one of the famous quarterlies of the day, the Westminster Review, and to read, meet and edit its contributors and their work; and lastly, the network of George Henry Lewes, her partner in life and work, whose range of journalism and publications — including fiction, drama, science, and criticism of German literature offered her access to reliable advice, wide experience, and contacts with editors, publishers, and authors across the literary spectrum.","PeriodicalId":90082,"journal":{"name":"19 : interdisciplinary studies in the long nineteenth century","volume":"146 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86066948","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
George Eliot’s biographers have viewed the triumvirate of George Eliot, G. H. Lewes, and the publisher John Blackwood from the perspective of Eliot and Lewes, making use of their extensive letters and journals, and seeing only a successful partnership that made George Eliot’s name and generated substantial profits for William Blackwood & Sons. This article argues that rather than a triumvirate in which the two men focused on nurturing a great writer, in the early stage of their relationship Lewes and Eliot were of equal value to Blackwood as contributors to his magazine. To the publisher Lewes was a writer worth cultivating, such was his reputation and his extensive contacts in the world of letters. Simultaneously, Eliot and Blackwood forged their own relationship in which Eliot articulated the principles of her art and stood her ground against the publisher’s interventions. Material to Blackwood’s conversations with Lewes and Eliot in the 1850s were the demands of Blackwood’s Magazine, a long-established fiction-bearing monthly whose fortunes were soon to be challenged by aggressive new competitors. I argue that had John Blackwood opted to serialize Adam Bede in 1859 followed by The Mill on the Floss in 1860 the decline in the circulation and the reputation of this once pre-eminent miscellany might have been temporarily halted. Margaret Oliphant, who became a Blackwood author shortly before Lewes and Eliot and was later commissioned to write the history of the publishing house, proved a shrewd observer of the relationship of these three strong personalities.
{"title":"George Eliot, G. H. Lewes, and the House of Blackwood 1856–60","authors":"Joanne Shattock","doi":"10.16995/ntn.1920","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/ntn.1920","url":null,"abstract":"George Eliot’s biographers have viewed the triumvirate of George Eliot, G. H. Lewes, and the publisher John Blackwood from the perspective of Eliot and Lewes, making use of their extensive letters and journals, and seeing only a successful partnership that made George Eliot’s name and generated substantial profits for William Blackwood & Sons. This article argues that rather than a triumvirate in which the two men focused on nurturing a great writer, in the early stage of their relationship Lewes and Eliot were of equal value to Blackwood as contributors to his magazine. To the publisher Lewes was a writer worth cultivating, such was his reputation and his extensive contacts in the world of letters. Simultaneously, Eliot and Blackwood forged their own relationship in which Eliot articulated the principles of her art and stood her ground against the publisher’s interventions. Material to Blackwood’s conversations with Lewes and Eliot in the 1850s were the demands of Blackwood’s Magazine, a long-established fiction-bearing monthly whose fortunes were soon to be challenged by aggressive new competitors. I argue that had John Blackwood opted to serialize Adam Bede in 1859 followed by The Mill on the Floss in 1860 the decline in the circulation and the reputation of this once pre-eminent miscellany might have been temporarily halted. Margaret Oliphant, who became a Blackwood author shortly before Lewes and Eliot and was later commissioned to write the history of the publishing house, proved a shrewd observer of the relationship of these three strong personalities.","PeriodicalId":90082,"journal":{"name":"19 : interdisciplinary studies in the long nineteenth century","volume":"11 1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86607943","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article examines George Eliot’s use of references to sculpture and of the sculptural metaphor and argues that this art form is central to her articulation and development of realism in fiction. In assessing sculpture’s links to women, Eliot highlights its temporal as well as its spatial dimensions, and, in so doing, disputes Gotthold Lessing’s analysis of this art form.
{"title":"Temporality and Statuesque Women in George Eliot","authors":"G. Marshall","doi":"10.16995/ntn.1937","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/ntn.1937","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines George Eliot’s use of references to sculpture and of the sculptural metaphor and argues that this art form is central to her articulation and development of realism in fiction. In assessing sculpture’s links to women, Eliot highlights its temporal as well as its spatial dimensions, and, in so doing, disputes Gotthold Lessing’s analysis of this art form.","PeriodicalId":90082,"journal":{"name":"19 : interdisciplinary studies in the long nineteenth century","volume":"65 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90836316","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Recent scholarship on the nineteenth-century serialized artists’ monograph has argued for a reassessment of this particular genre of art writing and its role in the development of art history as a discipline. Women art writers number prominently among the authors within such series, which proliferated in the English art press at the turn of the century. Significantly, many of their contributions form the first separate English-language study of several important quattrocento Italian old masters. Yet these artists, such as Luca Signorelli, Antonio Pollaiuolo, and Andrea Mantegna, were for the most part considered unpopular and ‘difficult’ for the general public to appreciate. This may explain why, despite substantial foreign-language scholarship and Mantegna’s never-waning reputation as a ‘great’ artist, it was not until 1881 that he became the subject of a dedicated study in British art historical scholarship for the first time, with Julia Cartwright’s dual monograph Mantegna and Francia. Taking Mantegna as a case study, this article traces the various forms in which the artist became increasingly visible to the British public from the mid-century onwards via the practices of acquisition, display, reproduction, and travel, and how this visibility translated into Julia Cartwright’s monograph, in which she set out to reinvigorate the reputation of an artist well represented in British collections, but deemed distasteful to the Victorian eye. As earlier women writers such as Anna Jameson, Elizabeth Eastlake, and Maria Callcott had successfully promoted the much-maligned Italian ‘Primitives’ to a wider British public, a later generation of women took advantage of gaps in English-language art criticism as they worked to establish themselves professionally in the face of an over-saturated British art press during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
{"title":"‘Such a pleasant little sketch […] of this irritable artist’: Julia Cartwright and the Reception of Andrea Mantegna in Late Nineteenth-Century Britain","authors":"M. Alambritis","doi":"10.16995/NTN.825","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/NTN.825","url":null,"abstract":"Recent scholarship on the nineteenth-century serialized artists’ monograph has argued for a reassessment of this particular genre of art writing and its role in the development of art history as a discipline. Women art writers number prominently among the authors within such series, which proliferated in the English art press at the turn of the century. Significantly, many of their contributions form the first separate English-language study of several important quattrocento Italian old masters. Yet these artists, such as Luca Signorelli, Antonio Pollaiuolo, and Andrea Mantegna, were for the most part considered unpopular and ‘difficult’ for the general public to appreciate. This may explain why, despite substantial foreign-language scholarship and Mantegna’s never-waning reputation as a ‘great’ artist, it was not until 1881 that he became the subject of a dedicated study in British art historical scholarship for the first time, with Julia Cartwright’s dual monograph Mantegna and Francia. Taking Mantegna as a case study, this article traces the various forms in which the artist became increasingly visible to the British public from the mid-century onwards via the practices of acquisition, display, reproduction, and travel, and how this visibility translated into Julia Cartwright’s monograph, in which she set out to reinvigorate the reputation of an artist well represented in British collections, but deemed distasteful to the Victorian eye. As earlier women writers such as Anna Jameson, Elizabeth Eastlake, and Maria Callcott had successfully promoted the much-maligned Italian ‘Primitives’ to a wider British public, a later generation of women took advantage of gaps in English-language art criticism as they worked to establish themselves professionally in the face of an over-saturated British art press during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.","PeriodicalId":90082,"journal":{"name":"19 : interdisciplinary studies in the long nineteenth century","volume":"116 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84892424","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Reflections on 19 Live","authors":"Herbert L. Sussman","doi":"10.16995/NTN.856","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/NTN.856","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":90082,"journal":{"name":"19 : interdisciplinary studies in the long nineteenth century","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86384020","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：