|Scooped by GoogleLitTrips Reading List|
I wonder if it is even possible to read this article while steadfastly maintaining an unbiased curiosity about it's impact upon literary analysis?
There are so many trigger points that challenge my own ability to be unbiased, that I actually found myself becoming more and more intrigued by the concept of "'Macroanalysis' the anti-sentimental and technophile attitude toward literature defines how scholars understand the literary field, rather than how authors imagine it.
The bottom line? Data Crunching as a literary analysis tool.
One of the many intriguing challenges to my effort to restrain any pre-existing biases, came in the reference to "distant reading" rather than our typical adoration of "close reading." I suppose this references a completely different set of valuable purposes served by distancing literary analysis from our natural tendencies to want to interpret from within our inherent biases because, "Text-crunching methodologies offer the possibility of establishing verifiable, quantifiable, exact results in a field where, otherwise, everything is interpretive, hence interminably disputable."
Lest you dismiss this entire concept too quickly, the article is describing the work of Matthew L.Jockers, an assistant professor of English at the University of Nebraska at Lincoln based upon the work of Franco Moretti who teaches English and Comparative Literature at Columbia University.
Check out this link to see what literary analysis based upon data crunching looks like.
But, be forewarned, Paradigms may be shaken; or perhaps "rattled" might be a better verb.