Show Sidebar Log in
NYC Digital Humanities
  • Home
  • People
  • Groups
  • Calendar
  • Student Award
  • NYCDH Week
  • Site-Wide Activity
  • Help
  • About
    • NYCDH Logo

Group Admins

  • Profile picture of Kimon Keramidas
  • Profile picture of Matthew K. Gold

NYCDH Announcements

Public Group active 6 days, 22 hours ago

Join this group to receive announcements about all-NYCDH activities or other news of interest to the whole community. And use this group to send such announcements. When you join, you may adjust your settings on how much email you’d like to receive.

Talk @ NYU | Andrew Goldstone, “Corpus or Field? A Challenge for Quantitative Methods”

  • This topic has 1 reply, 1 voice, and was last updated 9 years, 8 months ago by Collin Jennings.
Viewing 1 reply thread
  • Author
    Posts
    • October 6, 2015 at 2:02 pm #1263
      Collin Jennings
      Participant

      Mark your calendars. This promises to be a fascinating talk:

      Sponsored by the NYU Department of English and NYU Libraries

      Corpus or Field?
      A Challenge for Quantitative Methods

      Andrew Goldstone, Rutgers University

      *4:30 PM, Thursday, October 15 *
      *East Room, Avery Fisher Center, *
      *Bobst Library, 2nd Fl. *
      *New York University *

      One of the most promising prospects for quantitative methods in literary
      studies is that of rigorous and empirically wide-ranging accounts of the
      relations between literature and society. Yet the boundary between textual
      interpretation and a sociological analysis of literature has proven
      surprisingly hard to cross. In this talk, I retrace some sociological
      traditions of quantitative textual study, from postwar content analyses of
      political opinion to contemporary field theory, and I argue that they offer
      literary scholars alternatives to the doxa of “reading” that dominates and
      limits methodological discussion in our discipline. The sociological
      traditions turn us from corpus to field, from text collections to social
      spaces of symbolic competition and collaboration. I will discuss (and
      exemplify) the many challenges and pitfalls of this shift, technical and
      conceptual, in my own attempts to quantify the changing status of “reading”
      in the history of literary scholarship.

      Dinner & drinks will follow the talk and Q&A.

      Andrew Goldstone is an Assistant Professor in the Department of English at
      Rutgers University. He has collaborated with Ted Underwood on “The Quiet
      Studies of Literary Studies: What Thirteen Thousand Scholars Tell Us,” *New
      Literary History*, 45.3 (Summer 2014) and “What Can Topic Models of PMLA
      Teach Us About the History of Literary Scholarship?”*Journal of Digital
      Humanities* 2.1 (Winter 2012).Goldstone’s book, *Fictions of Autonomy:
      Modernism from Wilde to de Man* (Oxford University Press, 2013), shows how
      modernists’ many attempts to make literature a law unto itself devised
      distinctive modes of relation between literary works and their social
      world. His work in progress includes a book project, “Wastes of Time: Genre
      and the Literary Field since 1890,” and a text-mining investigation of the
      scholarly field of modernist studies.

    • October 13, 2015 at 10:19 pm #1339
      Collin Jennings
      Participant

      REMINDER: This Thursday!

      Sponsored by the NYU Department of English and NYU Libraries

      Corpus or Field?
      A Challenge for Quantitative Methods

      Andrew Goldstone, Rutgers University

      4:30 PM, Thursday, October 15
      East Room, Avery Fisher Center,
      Bobst Library, 2nd Fl.

      One of the most promising prospects for quantitative methods in literary studies is that of rigorous and empirically wide-ranging accounts of the relations between literature and society. Yet the boundary between textual interpretation and a sociological analysis of literature has proven surprisingly hard to cross. In this talk, I retrace some sociological traditions of quantitative textual study, from postwar content analyses of political opinion to contemporary field theory, and I argue that they offer literary scholars alternatives to the doxa of “reading” that dominates and limits methodological discussion in our discipline. The sociological traditions turn us from corpus to field, from text collections to social spaces of symbolic competition and collaboration. I will discuss (and exemplify) the many challenges and pitfalls of this shift, technical and conceptual, in my own attempts to quantify the changing status of “reading” in the history of literary scholarship.

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 1 reply thread
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Log In
Group logo of NYCDH Announcements
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Announcements
  • Docs
  • Members 746

Groups

Newest | Active | Popular | Alphabetical
  • Group logo of NYCDH Announcements
    NYCDH Announcements
    746 members
  • Group logo of Digital Pedagogy
    Digital Pedagogy
    110 members
  • Group logo of NYC Omeka Group
    NYC Omeka Group
    90 members
  • Group logo of digiBar
    digiBar
    78 members
  • Group logo of NYC Digital Art History
    NYC Digital Art History
    73 members
Powered by Commons In A Box
css.php
Skip to toolbar
  • About WordPress
    • About WordPress
    • Get Involved
    • WordPress.org
    • Documentation
    • Learn WordPress
    • Support
    • Feedback
  • Log In
  • Register