The Book in History, The Book as History: New Intersections of the Material Text. Essays in Honor of David Scott Kastan ed. by Heidi Brayman, Jesse M. Lander, and Zachary Lesser
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Reviewed by: The Book in History, The Book as History: New Intersections of the Material Text. Essays in Honor of David Scott Kastan ed. by Heidi Brayman, Jesse M. Lander, and Zachary Lesser Neal Hackler Brayman, Heidi, Jesse M. Lander, and Zachary Lesser, eds. The Book in History, The Book as History: New Intersections of the Material Text. Essays in Honor of David Scott Kastan. New Haven, CT: Yale UP, 2016. Pp. 420 illus. $25.00. The editors of The Book in History honour Prof. Kastan with a thick collection of thirteen expansive articles under four headings, not including a general introduction and Peter Stallybrass's afterword. The volume's self-stated aim is to inaugurate "a second wave of early modern literary studies in book history and the materiality of the text" (9). The contributors pursue this goal mostly with inquiries in the centre of the canon, with five essays on Shakespeare, two each for Spenser and Milton, and such prominent men as Bacon and Elyot standing large in the remainder. The scholarly queries are more diverse, ranging from more traditional questions of book history such as rubrication and early-modern bibliophilia to less obvious inclusions such as German adoption of Shakespeare as a cultural icon. Moreover, editorial sensitivity to textual materiality and the physicality of printing can be identified in the volume itself. The paper stock is comfortably heavy, and, more importantly, many of the essays contain ample colour imagery of the texts, which much augments the studies in question. The first section, "Past Impositions," contains three essays, and Alan B. Farmer's "Playbooks and the Question of Ephemerality" stands out. Farmer uses "quantitative methods of analysis" (87), following the example of D.F. McKenzie, in questioning whether early modern readers truly regarded playbooks as disposable, a fact often asserted to explain the scarcity of early editions, particularly of Shakespeare. His [End Page 492] methodology relies on establishing a baseline survival rate for any impression, which he establishes from works published in numbered editions. Farmer then adjusts for an impressive set of confounding variables en route to concluding that a book's "edition-sheet length," or "the number of sheets of paper it would take to print one copy of a book" (98), is the primary predictor of survival. Genre, Farmer shows, plays a secondary role, with utilitarian (textbooks) or topical (news) printed matter surviving less than literary or theoretical works of similar length. As for playbooks, they prove more resilient than expected: "Taken together, all of these features suggest that the bibliographical ephemerality of playbooks is an idea more grounded in assumptions rather than facts" (116). The only arguable weakness of Farmer's approach is the small sample size–the numbered editions that establish his baselines form a relatively small collection–but for that, there is no remedy. The second section, "Textual Incarnations," looks to the book in history. Benedict S. Robinson examines early modern unease with the fetishized book, especially with practices of kissing and revering the printed matter of holy scriptures. Christian commentators derided such idolatrous practice among "the Turkes" (129), and he identifies a paradox for "Protestant iconoclasm" was that to give supremacy to scripture risked similarly "idolizing the book" and "turning the word of God itself into a fetish" (134). Daniel Vitkus's "Indicating Commodities in Early English Discovery Narratives" looks similarly outward from England, arguing that travel writing commodified exotic lands. He demonstrates that the book itself abetted colonial efforts in that early travel writing describes North America, the Middle East, and the Indies in terms of economic potential. Several images of detailed early modern lists supplement the discussion, but a beautiful full-spread map from the age of exploration dives into the gutter, leaving some interesting bits illegible. Finally, Sarah A. Kelen's "'His Idoliz'd Book': Milton, Blood, and Rubrication" identifies the monochromatic images of Early English Books Online as a limitation to the power of that scholarly tool. Kelen examines the role of rubrication in Eikon Basilike and Eikonoklastes, a feature neither visible on EEBO nor replicated in modern print editions of either text. Kelen (and the editors) takes the extra step of...
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Communication savante | 0,011 | 0,010 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,055 | 0,018 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».