Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T04:41:53.553Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Aggregation, Public Criticism, and the History of Reading Big Data

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 October 2020

Benjamin Mangrum
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

This essay traces the history of ideas behind the critical methods of distant reading and macroanalysis, modes of criticism enabled by the rise of the science, media, and technology of aggregation. I situate these methods in the intellectual shifts marked by the advent of modern polling practices, computational census technologies, post-1945 marketing strategies, and other methods of analyzing an aggregated public. Drawing on work by Sarah E. Igo, Mary Poovey, Bill Kovarik, and others, I demonstrate that the ideas legitimated through these shifts in technology and public sentiment are fundamental to the types of claims made in the “big data” digital humanities. This attention to intellectual history raises important problems and qualifications for big data methods like distant reading, particularly regarding their underlying assumptions about the publics of literary history.

Information

Type
Special Topic: Cultures of Reading
Information
PMLA , Volume 133 , Issue 5: Special Topic Cultures of Reading , October 2018, pp. 1207 - 1224
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 2018

References

Works Cited

Adams, Maeve E. “Numbers and Narratives: Epistemolo-gies of Aggregation in British Statistics and Social Realism, c. 1790-1880.” Crook and O'Hara, pp. 101–20.Google Scholar
Algee-Hewitt, Mark, and McGurl, Mark. Between Canon and Corpus: Six Perspectives on Twentieth-Century Novels. Stanford Literary Lab, Jan. 2015, litlab.stanford.edu/LiteraryLabPamphlet8.pdf.Google Scholar
Allison, Sarah, et al. Quantitative Formalism: An Experiment. Stanford Literary Lab, 15 Jan. 2011, litlab.stanford.edu/LiteraryLabPamphlet 1.pdf.Google Scholar
Allison, Sarah, et al. Style at the Scale of the Sentence. Stanford Literary Lab, June 2013, litlab.stanford.edu/LiteraryLabPamphlet5.pdf.Google Scholar
Anderson, Benedict. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. Revised ed., Verso, 2006.Google Scholar
Anderson, Sheila, and Blanke, Tobias. “Taking the Long View: From E-science Humanities to Humanities Digital Ecosystems”. Historical Social Research/Histori-sche Sozialforschung, vol. 37, no. 3, 2012, pp. 147–64.Google Scholar
Badiou, Alain. Number and Numbers. translated by Mackay, Robin, Polity, 2008.Google Scholar
Birkerts, Sven. “The Little Magazine in the World of Big Data”. Sewanee Review, vol. 123, no. 2, Spring 2015, pp. 224–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buurma, Rachel Sagner, and Heffernan, Laura. “Interpretation, 1980 and 1880”. Victorian Studies, vol. 55, no. 4, Summer 2013, pp. 615–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ceruzzi, Paul E. A History of Modern Computing. 2nd ed., MIT P, 2003.Google Scholar
Churchill, Suzanne W., et al. Mina Loy: Navigating the Avant-Garde. July 2016, mina-loy.com/.Google Scholar
Crook, Tom, and O'Hara, Glen, editors. Statistics and the Public Sphere: Numbers and the People in Modern Britain, c. 1800-2000. Routledge, 2011.Google Scholar
Csicsila, Joseph. “John S. Tuckey's Mark Twain and Little Satan”. The Mark Twain Annual, vol. 8, 2010, pp. 14–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
“Digging into Data Challenge.” Digging into Data, diggingintodata.org/about.Google Scholar
Drouin, Jeffrey. “Close- and Distant-Reading Modernism: Network Analysis, Text Mining, and Teaching The Little Review”. The Journal of Modern Periodical Studies, vol. 5, no. 1, 2014, pp. 110–35.Google Scholar
Erlin, Matt, and Tatlock, Lynne. “‘Distant Reading’ and the Historiography of Nineteenth-Century German Literature.” Introduction. Distant Readings: Topologies of German Culture in the Long Nineteenth Century, edited by Erlin and Tatlock, Camden House, 2014, pp. 1–25.Google Scholar
Fleming, Juliet. Graffiti and the Writing Arts of Early Modern England. U of Pennsylvania P, 2001.Google Scholar
Fleming, Paul. “Tragedy, for Example: Distant Reading and Exemplary Reading (Moretti)”. New Literary History, vol. 48, no. 3, Summer 2017, pp. 437–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardiner, Eileen, and Ronald, G. Musto. The Digital Humanities: A Primer for Students and Scholars. Cambridge UP, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golumbia, David. The Cultural Logic of Computation. Harvard UP, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grusin, Richard. “The Dark Side of the Digital Humanities: Dispatches from Two Recent MLA Conventions”. Differences: A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies, vol. 25, no. 1, 2014, pp. 79–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guillory, John. “The Sokal Affair and the History of Criticism”. Critical Inquiry, vol. 28, no. 2, Winter 2002, pp. 470–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawthorn, Geofrey. Enlightenment and Despair: A History of Sociology. Cambridge UP, 1976.Google Scholar
Hegel, G.W.F. Elements of the Philosophy of Right. translated by Nisbet, H.B., Cambridge UP, 2003.Google Scholar
Heuser, Ryan, and Le-Khac, Long. “Learning to Read Data: Bringing Out the Humanistic in the Digital Humanities”. Victorian Novels, vol. 54, no. 1, 2011, pp. 79–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirst, Robert H.“Note on the Text”. No. 44, the Mysterious Stranger, by Mark Twain, edited by Gibson, William M., U of California P, 2003, pp. 201–02.Google Scholar
Hughes, James M., et al. “Quantitative Patterns of Stylistic Influence in the Evolution of Literature.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 109, no. 20, 15 May 2012, pp. 7682–86.Google Scholar
Igo, Sarah E. The Averaged American: Surveys, Citizens, and the Making of a Mass Public. Harvard UP, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jockers, Matthew J. Macroanalysis: Digital Methods and Literary History. U of Illinois P, 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinsey, Alfred C., et al. Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. W.B. Saunders, 1948.Google Scholar
Kovarik, Bill. Revolutions in Communication: Media History from Gutenberg to the Digital Age. 2nd ed., Bloomsbury, 2016.Google Scholar
Liu, Alan. “The Meaning of the Digital Humanities”. PMLA, vol. 128, no. 2, Mar. 2013, pp. 409–23.Google Scholar
Long, Hoyt, and So, Richard Jean. “Turbulent Flow: A Computational Model of World Literature”. Modern Language Quarterly, vol. 77, no. 3, Sept. 2016, pp. 345–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Looser, Devoney. “British Women Writers, Big Data and Big Biography, 1780-1830”. Women's Writing, vol. 22, no. 2, 2015, pp. 165–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Love, Heather. “Close but Not Deep: Literary Ethics and the Descriptive Turn”. New Literary History, vol. 41, no. 2, Spring 2010, pp. 371–91.Google Scholar
Lynd, Robert, and Lynd, Helen Merrell. Middletown: A Study in Contemporary American Culture. Harcourt, Brace, 1929.Google Scholar
Lynd, Robert, and Lynd, Helen Merrell. Middletown in Transition: A Study in Cultural Conflicts. Harcourt, Brace, 1937.Google Scholar
Manovich, Lev. “Trending: The Promises and the Challenges of Big Social Data”. Debates in the Digital Humanities, edited by Gold, Matthew K., U of Minnesota P, 2012, pp. 460–75.Google Scholar
Margolis, Stacey. Fictions of Mass Democracy in Nineteenth-Century America. Cambridge UP, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michel, Jean-Baptiste, et al. “Quantitative Analysis of Culture Using Millions of Digitized Books”. Science, vol. 331, no. 6014, 14 Jan. 2011, pp. 176–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moretti, Franco. “Conjectures on World Literature.” New Left Review, no. 1, Jan.-Feb. 2000, pp. 54–68.Google Scholar
Moretti, Franco. Distant Reading. Verso, 2013.Google Scholar
Moretti, Franco. Graphs, Maps, Trees: Abstract Models for a Literary History. Verso, 2007.Google Scholar
Moretti, Franco. Literature, Measured. Stanford Literary Lab, Apr. 2016, litlab.stanford.edu/LiteraryLabPamphlet12.pdf.Google Scholar
Moretti, Franco. “Style, Inc. Reflections on Seven housand Titles (British Novels, 1740-1850)”. Critical Inquiry, vol. 36, no. 1, Autumn 2009, pp. 134–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orton, Thomas. “Keening Woman and Today: James Welch's Early Unpublished Novel”. Studies in American Indian Literatures, vol. 18, no. 3, Fall 2006, pp. 52–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poovey, Mary. A History of the Modern Fact: Problems of Knowledge in the Sciences of Wealth and Society. U of Chicago P, 2009.Google Scholar
Powers, Richard. Gain. Picador, 1998.Google Scholar
Radway, Janice. Reading the Romance: Women, Patriarchy, and Popular Literature. U of North Carolina P, 1984.Google Scholar
Reeve, Clara. The Champion of Virtue: A Gothic Story: By the Editor of the Phoenix: A Translation of Barclay's Argenis. London, 1795. Eighteenth Century Collections Online, find.galegroup.com.i.ezproxy.nypl.org/ecco/infomark.do?&source=gale&docLevel=FASCIMILE&prodId=ECCO&userGroupName=nypl&tabID=T001&docId=CW3312449510&type=multipage&contentSet=ECCOArticles&version=1.0.Google Scholar
Schôch, Christof. “Big? Smart? Clean? Messy? Data in the Humanities”. Journal of Digital Humanities, vol. 2, no. 3, Summer 2013, pp. 1–13.Google Scholar
Schryer, Stephen. Fantasies of the New Class: Ideologies of Professionalism in Post-World War II American Fiction. Columbia UP, 2012.Google Scholar
Schwarzkopf, Stefan. “The Statisticalization of the Consumer in British Market Research, c. 1920-1960: Profiling a Good Society.” Crook and O'Hara, pp. 144–64.Google Scholar
Smith, Barbara Herrnstein. Contingencies of Value. Harvard UP, 1988.Google Scholar
So, Richard Jean, and Long, Hoyt. “Network Analysis and the Sociology of Modernism”. Boundary 2, vol. 40, no. 2, 2013, pp. 147–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stigler, Stephen M. The History of Statistics: The Measurement of Uncertainty before 1900. Harvard UP, 1986.Google Scholar
Tangherlini, Timothy R., and Leonard, Peter. “Trawling the Sea of the Great Unread: Sub-corpus Topic Modeling and Humanities Research”. Poetics, no. 41, 2013, pp. 725–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, James. “Printed Statistics and the Public Sphere: Numeracy, Electoral Politics and the Visual Culture of Numbers, 1880-1914.” Crook and O'Hara, pp. 121–43.Google Scholar
Trumpener, Katie. “Paratext and Genre System: A Response to Franco Moretti.” Critical Inquiry, no. 36, Autumn 2009, pp. 159–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tuckey, John S. Mark Twain and Little Satan: The Writing of The Mysterious Stranger. Purdue UP, 1963.Google Scholar
Vetter, Lara. “Theories of Spiritual Evolution, Christian Science, and the ‘Cosmopolitan Jew’: Mina Loy and American Identity”. Journal of Modern Literature, vol. 31, no. 1, Fall 2007, pp. 47–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, Jonathan Stuart, and Barker, Adam. “Undefined by Data: Survey of Big Data Definitions”. ArXiv, 20 Sept. 2013, arxiv.org/abs/1309.5821.Google Scholar
Warner, Michael. Publics and Counterpublics. Zone Books, 2002.Google Scholar
Westergaard, Harald. Contributions to the History of Statistics. Agathon Press, 1968.Google Scholar
Wickman, Matthew. “Robert Burns and Big Data; or, Pests of Quantity and Visualization”. Modern Language Quarterly, vol. 75, no. 1, Mar. 2014, pp. 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiedemann, Gregor. “Opening Up to Big Data: Computer-Assisted Analysis of Textual Data in Social Sciences”. Historical Social Research/Historische Soziafor-schung, vol. 38, no. 4, 2013, pp. 332–57.Google Scholar
Youngman, Paul A., and Carmichael, Ted. “Big Data, Pattern Recognition, and Literary Studies: N-Gramming the Railway in Nineteenth-Century German Fiction”. Distant Readings: Topologies of German Culture in the Long Nineteenth Century, edited by Erlin, Matt and Tatlock, Lynne, Camden House, 2014, pp. 285–99.Google Scholar