2013
DOI: 10.1111/lic3.12026
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

History of Reading: The long Eighteenth Century

Abstract: Describes recent developments in this interdisciplinary field, showing how they alter our previous assumptions about eighteenth‐century reading; indicates lacunae and opportunities for future work.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 55 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This is in part because we are necessarily reliant on written accounts to supply information about reading, and in part because, as we are coming to understand more and more, reading involves an exceptionally complex set of cognitive, physical, social and material processes. In her Literature Compass essay, “History of Reading: The long Eighteenth Century,” Eve Bannet (2013) provides a superb overview of the dynamic scholarship that has emerged over the past two decades. She notes that reading must be understood as a complex and diverse range of activities; that theories of intensive or extensive reading, solitary or social reading, compliant or transgressive reading, should be rejected as reductive as reading practices varied.…”
Section: History Of Readingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is in part because we are necessarily reliant on written accounts to supply information about reading, and in part because, as we are coming to understand more and more, reading involves an exceptionally complex set of cognitive, physical, social and material processes. In her Literature Compass essay, “History of Reading: The long Eighteenth Century,” Eve Bannet (2013) provides a superb overview of the dynamic scholarship that has emerged over the past two decades. She notes that reading must be understood as a complex and diverse range of activities; that theories of intensive or extensive reading, solitary or social reading, compliant or transgressive reading, should be rejected as reductive as reading practices varied.…”
Section: History Of Readingmentioning
confidence: 99%