女性主义小说阅读的代际分歧,1995-2020:解读群体的计算分析

Q1 Arts and Humanities Journal of Cultural Analytics Pub Date : 2021-11-19 DOI:10.22148/001c.30009
Lisa Mendelman, Anna Mukamal
{"title":"女性主义小说阅读的代际分歧,1995-2020:解读群体的计算分析","authors":"Lisa Mendelman, Anna Mukamal","doi":"10.22148/001c.30009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article furthers ongoing work on the merits of the feminist novel’s intrinsic variability by probing its dynamics in four publishing contexts: contemporary anglophone literary criticism, prestigious review publications, marketing materials, and online book reviews by social readers. We explore how these interpretive communities converge and diverge in their assessments of feminist fiction over the past twenty-five years by evaluating articles from the MLA International Bibliography , book reviews in The New York Times, The New Yorker, Times Literary Supp-lement, and other prominent periodicals, blurbs from Amazon, and Goodreads reviews. We trace the feminist novel’s ambivalent fates—or rather, feminist novel s ’ ambivalent fates—in and across these four domains. To do so, we engage computational methods of topic modeling, most distinctive word analysis, and named entity recognition. We synthesize these quantitative results with qualitative attention to provocative examples from our corpus. In so doing, we consider how literary scholars can develop more robust understandings of what feminism and feminist fiction mean to contemporary readers and what we stand to gain by bringing this diverse interpretive labor into our scholarly conversations. Our synthetic interpretive approach reveals these communities’ shared topical investments in feminist fiction, though the communities talk about these topics in importantly different ways. Together, their discourse converges on two organizing concerns: embodied subjectivity and temporality. Different configurations of these aspects of personhood in time inform the communities’ vocabularies, their modes of self-address, the rationales they offer for reading feminist novels, and the forms of feminist subjectivity they promote. Our analysis thus demonstrates how novel reading can function as a mode of forging feminist knowledge and constructing feminist value","PeriodicalId":33005,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cultural Analytics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Generative Dissensus of Reading the Feminist Novel, 1995-2020: A Computational Analysis of Interpretive Communities\",\"authors\":\"Lisa Mendelman, Anna Mukamal\",\"doi\":\"10.22148/001c.30009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article furthers ongoing work on the merits of the feminist novel’s intrinsic variability by probing its dynamics in four publishing contexts: contemporary anglophone literary criticism, prestigious review publications, marketing materials, and online book reviews by social readers. We explore how these interpretive communities converge and diverge in their assessments of feminist fiction over the past twenty-five years by evaluating articles from the MLA International Bibliography , book reviews in The New York Times, The New Yorker, Times Literary Supp-lement, and other prominent periodicals, blurbs from Amazon, and Goodreads reviews. We trace the feminist novel’s ambivalent fates—or rather, feminist novel s ’ ambivalent fates—in and across these four domains. To do so, we engage computational methods of topic modeling, most distinctive word analysis, and named entity recognition. We synthesize these quantitative results with qualitative attention to provocative examples from our corpus. In so doing, we consider how literary scholars can develop more robust understandings of what feminism and feminist fiction mean to contemporary readers and what we stand to gain by bringing this diverse interpretive labor into our scholarly conversations. Our synthetic interpretive approach reveals these communities’ shared topical investments in feminist fiction, though the communities talk about these topics in importantly different ways. Together, their discourse converges on two organizing concerns: embodied subjectivity and temporality. Different configurations of these aspects of personhood in time inform the communities’ vocabularies, their modes of self-address, the rationales they offer for reading feminist novels, and the forms of feminist subjectivity they promote. Our analysis thus demonstrates how novel reading can function as a mode of forging feminist knowledge and constructing feminist value\",\"PeriodicalId\":33005,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cultural Analytics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cultural Analytics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22148/001c.30009\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cultural Analytics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22148/001c.30009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文通过探讨女权主义小说在四种出版背景下的动态,进一步探讨了其内在可变性的优点:当代英语文学批评、著名评论出版物、营销材料和社会读者的在线书评。我们通过评估MLA国际书目、《纽约时报》、《纽约客》、《泰晤士报文学补充》和其他著名期刊的书评、亚马逊的简介和Goodreads评论,探讨了这些解释性群体在过去25年中对女权主义小说的评估是如何趋同和分化的。我们在这四个领域中追踪女权主义小说的矛盾命运——或者更确切地说,女权主义小说矛盾命运。为此,我们采用了主题建模、最具特色的单词分析和命名实体识别的计算方法。我们综合了这些定量的结果,并对语料库中的挑衅性例子给予了定性的关注。在这样做的过程中,我们考虑文学学者如何更有力地理解女权主义和女权主义小说对当代读者意味着什么,以及通过将这种多样的解释劳动纳入我们的学术对话,我们将获得什么。我们的综合解释方法揭示了这些社区对女权主义小说的共同主题投资,尽管社区以重要的不同方式谈论这些主题。他们的话语集中在两个组织关注点上:体现的主观性和时间性。这些人格方面在时间上的不同配置告知了社区的词汇、他们的自我称呼模式、他们为阅读女权主义小说提供的理由,以及他们提倡的女权主义主体性形式。因此,我们的分析表明,小说阅读是如何作为一种锻造女性主义知识和建构女性主义价值的模式发挥作用的
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Generative Dissensus of Reading the Feminist Novel, 1995-2020: A Computational Analysis of Interpretive Communities
This article furthers ongoing work on the merits of the feminist novel’s intrinsic variability by probing its dynamics in four publishing contexts: contemporary anglophone literary criticism, prestigious review publications, marketing materials, and online book reviews by social readers. We explore how these interpretive communities converge and diverge in their assessments of feminist fiction over the past twenty-five years by evaluating articles from the MLA International Bibliography , book reviews in The New York Times, The New Yorker, Times Literary Supp-lement, and other prominent periodicals, blurbs from Amazon, and Goodreads reviews. We trace the feminist novel’s ambivalent fates—or rather, feminist novel s ’ ambivalent fates—in and across these four domains. To do so, we engage computational methods of topic modeling, most distinctive word analysis, and named entity recognition. We synthesize these quantitative results with qualitative attention to provocative examples from our corpus. In so doing, we consider how literary scholars can develop more robust understandings of what feminism and feminist fiction mean to contemporary readers and what we stand to gain by bringing this diverse interpretive labor into our scholarly conversations. Our synthetic interpretive approach reveals these communities’ shared topical investments in feminist fiction, though the communities talk about these topics in importantly different ways. Together, their discourse converges on two organizing concerns: embodied subjectivity and temporality. Different configurations of these aspects of personhood in time inform the communities’ vocabularies, their modes of self-address, the rationales they offer for reading feminist novels, and the forms of feminist subjectivity they promote. Our analysis thus demonstrates how novel reading can function as a mode of forging feminist knowledge and constructing feminist value
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Cultural Analytics
Journal of Cultural Analytics Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
Soviet View of the World. Exploring Long-Term Visual Patterns in “Novosti dnia” Newsreel Journal (1945-1992) A Digital Archaeology of Early Hispanic Film Culture: Film Magazines and the Male Fan Reader A Digital Trail of Rupture. The German Film Exile 1933-1945 in the Data of Günter Peter Straschek Approaching a National Film History through Data. Network Analysis in German Film History Digital Film Historiography: Challenges of/and Interdisciplinarity
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1