FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1972510100> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1972510100 endingPage "390" @default.
• W1972510100 startingPage "389" @default.
• W1972510100 abstract "Forum Response of GJ. Barker-Benfield to Isobel Grundy's review of The Culture of Sensibility: Sex and Society in Eighteenth-Century Britain in Eighteenth-Century Fiction 6:2 (January, 1994), 191-93. As an historian I was very pleased that Eighteenth-Century Fiction chose to review my The Culture ofSensibility: Sex and Society in Eighteenth-Century Britain and I was grateful for Isabel Grundy's revelation of embarrassing errors, which can be corrected for the paperback edition. Many of these errors, including those of proofreading, she terms inadvertent, minor, and irrelevant, reserving her chief criticism for quotations taken out of context, betraying what she as a literary critic judges to be the book's lack of literary-critical rigour. I might note that Grundy's own list contains errors—nowhere do I say that Miss Milner/Lady Elmwood's daughter was illegitimate—and in order to characterize some of my points as flaccid and crashingly obvious, she resorts to taking them out of context! The only place she quotes the book's title, she gets it wrong: significantly in this connection Grundy opens her review by slighting that title's challenge to the literary convention of a cult of sensibility. I am scrupulous to define both cult and culture and their relationship to each other. In any case, Grundy found that these inaccuracies taken altogether distracted her admittedly irritable scholarly mind from the broad sweep of the argument. What that argument is, therefore, your reader cannot learn from the review, although, since the reviewer dismisses its general outline as not unfamiliar, it would seem not to matter anyway. I was as surprised by this dismissal as I suspect your readers may be, were they to learn of my book's argument, because it has never been made before . It concludes that a major reform movement aiming at the reformation of males (symbolized as rakes), embodying other potentials, and animated in significant part by women was central to eighteenth-century British, middle-class history. To declare, as Grundy does, that my favourite territory is that of works about literary works, is further to evade my historical subject. I have learned a great deal from literary critics but I have favourite territories lying quite elsewhere. The first of them is primary sources. Your reviewer gives the impression that the only primary works I read were those by Dr EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY FICTION, Volume 6, Number 4, July 1994 390 EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY FICTION 6:4 Cheyne, garnished with some inadequately contextualized or inaccurately quoted scrapings from J.M.S. Tompkins. In fact, I provide my own analyses of, for example, texts by Castiglione, Newton, Locke, Shaftesbury, Mandeville, Hume, Smith, Wesley, Barbauld , More, and Wollstonecraft, the latter a major subject of The Culture ofSensibility. I present my own interpretations of fiction by Richardson, Fielding, Lennox, Smollett, Sterne, MacKenzie, Burney, Inchbald, Day, Radcliffe, Hays, Austen, and Edgeworth, not to mention the Spectator at one end of the century and Jacobin and anti-Jacobin journals at the other. Far from smoothing away the knotty specificities of dramatic situation or plot function I provided them wherever essential in my readings of these works, a task of selection and informed judgment with which I hope others attempting large-scale works will sympathize. The second of my favourite territories was the findings of my fellow historians in all aspects of eighteenth-century British society, far beyond the kinds of literary subjects illustrated by Grundy's own publications. (I regret I did not cite her own, literary encyclopedia .) Having belaboured me for my literary-critical derelictions she then lectures me on the definition of cultural history in which encyclopedic knowledge, preferably of literary texts at first hand, takes pride of place in her list which tails off into unspecified historical research. Grundy would conduct such research by summoning Dr Johnson and the other canonical Augustans for questioning. With all due respect, this is an entirely inadequate conception of historical research. Even so, this historian is not insensitive to literary criticism's current preoccupation with literary texts as sites for the production and contestation of meaning. Indeed, production, contestation , and consumption of meaning are central subjects of my book, above all..." @default.
• W1972510100 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1972510100 creator A5029706860 @default.
• W1972510100 date "1994-01-01" @default.
• W1972510100 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W1972510100 title "G.J. Barker-Benfield Replies to Isobel Grundy" @default.
• W1972510100 doi "https://doi.org/10.1353/ecf.1994.0000" @default.
• W1972510100 hasPublicationYear "1994" @default.
• W1972510100 type Work @default.
• W1972510100 sameAs 1972510100 @default.
• W1972510100 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W1972510100 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1972510100 hasAuthorship W1972510100A5029706860 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConcept C124952713 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConcept C166957645 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConcept C27206212 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConcept C2776405206 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConcept C2777336010 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConcept C2779343474 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConcept C2780493273 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConcept C52119013 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConcept C74916050 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConcept C7991579 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConcept C98184364 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConceptScore W1972510100C124952713 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConceptScore W1972510100C126322002 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConceptScore W1972510100C138885662 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConceptScore W1972510100C142362112 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConceptScore W1972510100C166957645 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConceptScore W1972510100C27206212 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConceptScore W1972510100C2776405206 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConceptScore W1972510100C2777336010 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConceptScore W1972510100C2779343474 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConceptScore W1972510100C2780493273 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConceptScore W1972510100C52119013 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConceptScore W1972510100C71924100 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConceptScore W1972510100C74916050 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConceptScore W1972510100C7991579 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConceptScore W1972510100C95457728 @default.
• W1972510100 hasConceptScore W1972510100C98184364 @default.
• W1972510100 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W1972510100 hasLocation W19725101001 @default.
• W1972510100 hasOpenAccess W1972510100 @default.
• W1972510100 hasPrimaryLocation W19725101001 @default.
• W1972510100 hasRelatedWork W1571361333 @default.
• W1972510100 hasRelatedWork W2052961056 @default.
• W1972510100 hasRelatedWork W2069551903 @default.
• W1972510100 hasRelatedWork W2129352205 @default.
• W1972510100 hasRelatedWork W2616469606 @default.
• W1972510100 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W1972510100 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W1972510100 hasRelatedWork W3093005823 @default.
• W1972510100 hasRelatedWork W3203795623 @default.
• W1972510100 hasRelatedWork W580998099 @default.
• W1972510100 hasVolume "6" @default.
• W1972510100 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1972510100 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1972510100 magId "1972510100" @default.
• W1972510100 workType "article" @default.