Review: Old Books & New Histories: An Orientation to Studies in Book and Print Culture by Leslie Howsam
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Old Books & New Histories: An Orientation to Studies in Book and Print Culture by Leslie Howsam. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2006. 111 pp. ISBN 0-8020-94384-4 As a subject of study, the history of the book has shown tremendous growth within academic circles in both Europe and North America over the past thirty years. During this time, it has expanded to consider printing as a technology of communication and explored the reader’s role in this development of “print culture.” From classics such as Elizabeth Eisenstein’s The Printing Press as an Agent of Change: Communications and Cultural Transformations in Early Modern Europe (1979) and Roger Chartier’s The Cultural Uses of Print in Early Modern France to more recent texts such as Adrian Johns’ mammoth The Nature of the Book: Print and Knowledge in the Making (1998) and Ronald and Mary Saracino Zboray’s Literary Dollars and Social Sense: A People’s History of the Mass Market Book (2005), the study of book and print culture has developed into a rich and significant field of study. In response to this growth, a number of universities in the United Kingdom and North American have added departments and programs of study that focus specifically on book history and print culture. For those new to this field, Howsam’s Old Books & New Histories: An Orientation to Studies in Book and Print Culture, provides a useful introduction as it identifies the three disciplines—history, literature and bibliography—that have traditionally focused on the study of the book and print culture. It provides a concise introduction to the context in which these disciplines approach their study of the book and also identifies some of the recent interdisciplinary studies and trends that have added new depth to the field. It is structured as both an introductory volume for those students just beginning their investigation of the field, and as a review essay for the specialist audience who may be more concentrated in one of the three fields. Using examples drawn from scholarly works in these three fields, Howsam’s work illustrates both the unique strengths (and limitations) of each discipline, and the manner in which interdisciplinary approaches (such as those involving reception theory, creation of knowledge and sociology of texts) are changing the face of traditional book and print culture studies. The author also concludes that there is a need for mutual respect (which has often been missing) between these disciplines if they are to advance this field of study. Howsam’s first significant task is defining book and print culture. She then provides thoughtful commentary on each of the three disciplines—literature (with its focus on texts and criticism), bibliography (with its focus on the book as a physical object) and history (with its traditional emphasis on aspects of agency, power and experience)—but admits that her strengths lie in the historical
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it