FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2035895890> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2035895890 endingPage "278" @default.
• W2035895890 startingPage "258" @default.
• W2035895890 abstract "Pushing at the Boundaries of the Book:Humor, Mediation, and Distance in Carroll, Thackeray, and Stevenson Laura Kasson Fiss (bio) Alice pushes at the boundary of the book as she travels through the looking glass. John Tenniel’s twin illustrations of her journey in the first edition of Through the Looking Glass (1872) occur on either side of a single page (see Figs. 1 and 2). The mirrored orientation of the two images means that each pair of objects is printed back-to-back. Only Alice travels in one side and out the other, her head piercing the page. Her extended right hand presses on the surface of the looking glass, which ripples before giving way. That ripple on the surface of the page suggests that the page, like the looking glass, is a semipermeable membrane that the right reader can enter. Indeed, on the other side of the looking glass, Alice meets creatures out of storybooks, such as Humpty Dumpty and the Tweedles, whose stories she recalls. As readers follow Alice’s immersion, they too must place a hand upon the page—but the page turns precisely because they encounter solid resistance. Alice’s journey through the page literalizes the metaphor of reading as immersive that has characterized descriptions of Victorian reading starting in the period itself. Yet calling attention to the mechanism of immersive reading paradoxically breaks the illusion. Nicholas Dames addresses this issue in the works of W. M. Thackeray and others by arguing that Victorians conceived of attentive reading not as a steady state but as cycling between intense involvement and contemplative reverie (82–83). This intriguing theory takes on additional ramifications when considered in relation to Victorian children’s literature, especially humorous material such as Carroll’s Alice books. The conceit of the child reader enables an additional level of play. Naturally, the cautionary notes sounded by Jacqueline Rose and James Kincaid about the problematic roles of child muses also apply [End Page 258] to implied child readers, but so does Marah Gubar’s response that authors, aware of their own totalizing authority, created space for collaboration (Artful Dodgers, passim), in this case with and among child and adult readers. In addition to Carroll, two authors of humorous children’s texts who made their reputations by writing for adults, William Makepeace Thackeray and Robert Louis Stevenson, use humor and depictions of reading to represent both the immersive Wonderland of fiction and the material, mediated pleasures of getting there. Click for larger view View full resolution Figure 1. Courtesy Lilly Library, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana. Depictions of reading within these works reveal a surprising acceptance of the distancing mediation of print. Much work on children’s humor focus [End Page 259] Click for larger view View full resolution Figure 2. Courtesy Lilly Library, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana. on the oral, as in Roderick McGillis’s claim that the humor in children’s nonsense is fundamentally embodied (258). As Catherine Robson powerfully demonstrates, oral language learning registers on children’s bodies, and many considerations of humorous nonsense by Carroll and others assume the context of orality (Deleuze 187; Lecercle passim). But these works by Thackeray, Carroll, and Stevenson emphasize unique qualities of printed books, sometimes even while insisting on their own orality. Laying bare the distance between the printed word and the spoken word, these texts reveal the artificiality of the reading process, which affords the opportunity for humor but also makes the [End Page 260] pleasures of reading seem more wonderful. As critics such as Ivan Kreilkamp and Deborah Vlock have shown, Victorian print culture as a whole owed much to oral performance genres but remained ambivalent about this debt. Oral analogies offered a sense of immediacy not only between performer and audience but within audiences as well—particularly useful during the rise of what Richard Altick termed the “mass reading public.” The audience for these books was divided not merely by age, but also by class, gender, geography, and time. Yet Thackeray and Stevenson make divided readership a subject of humor, acknowledging distance while treating it lightly. This metatextual humor presents mediation itself as a laughing matter. Calling attention to print in this context poses..." @default.
• W2035895890 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2035895890 creator A5059640578 @default.
• W2035895890 date "2014-01-01" @default.
• W2035895890 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W2035895890 title "Pushing at the Boundaries of the Book: Humor, Mediation, and Distance in Carroll, Thackeray, and Stevenson" @default.
• W2035895890 cites W1482603553 @default.
• W2035895890 cites W1504211123 @default.
• W2035895890 cites W1550449699 @default.
• W2035895890 cites W1587819869 @default.
• W2035895890 cites W1606459794 @default.
• W2035895890 cites W1979755378 @default.
• W2035895890 cites W1994931295 @default.
• W2035895890 cites W2023540974 @default.
• W2035895890 cites W2026078978 @default.
• W2035895890 cites W2035262813 @default.
• W2035895890 cites W2037869661 @default.
• W2035895890 cites W2039028779 @default.
• W2035895890 cites W2049238691 @default.
• W2035895890 cites W2050724657 @default.
• W2035895890 cites W2059327706 @default.
• W2035895890 cites W2086250486 @default.
• W2035895890 cites W2479042111 @default.
• W2035895890 cites W2500555193 @default.
• W2035895890 cites W581335853 @default.
• W2035895890 cites W599743943 @default.
• W2035895890 cites W604025960 @default.
• W2035895890 cites W618867597 @default.
• W2035895890 cites W636544013 @default.
• W2035895890 doi "https://doi.org/10.1353/uni.2014.0035" @default.
• W2035895890 hasPublicationYear "2014" @default.
• W2035895890 type Work @default.
• W2035895890 sameAs 2035895890 @default.
• W2035895890 citedByCount "3" @default.
• W2035895890 countsByYear W20358958902016 @default.
• W2035895890 countsByYear W20358958902017 @default.
• W2035895890 countsByYear W20358958902018 @default.
• W2035895890 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2035895890 hasAuthorship W2035895890A5059640578 @default.
• W2035895890 hasConcept C124952713 @default.
• W2035895890 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2035895890 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W2035895890 hasConcept C2778311575 @default.
• W2035895890 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W2035895890 hasConcept C52119013 @default.
• W2035895890 hasConcept C554936623 @default.
• W2035895890 hasConceptScore W2035895890C124952713 @default.
• W2035895890 hasConceptScore W2035895890C138885662 @default.
• W2035895890 hasConceptScore W2035895890C142362112 @default.
• W2035895890 hasConceptScore W2035895890C2778311575 @default.
• W2035895890 hasConceptScore W2035895890C41895202 @default.
• W2035895890 hasConceptScore W2035895890C52119013 @default.
• W2035895890 hasConceptScore W2035895890C554936623 @default.
• W2035895890 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W2035895890 hasLocation W20358958901 @default.
• W2035895890 hasOpenAccess W2035895890 @default.
• W2035895890 hasPrimaryLocation W20358958901 @default.
• W2035895890 hasRelatedWork W1523912978 @default.
• W2035895890 hasRelatedWork W2097530137 @default.
• W2035895890 hasRelatedWork W2169362620 @default.
• W2035895890 hasRelatedWork W2370691982 @default.
• W2035895890 hasRelatedWork W2375144526 @default.
• W2035895890 hasRelatedWork W2390412843 @default.
• W2035895890 hasRelatedWork W2417491547 @default.
• W2035895890 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W2035895890 hasRelatedWork W2909529313 @default.
• W2035895890 hasRelatedWork W623378499 @default.
• W2035895890 hasVolume "38" @default.
• W2035895890 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2035895890 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2035895890 magId "2035895890" @default.
• W2035895890 workType "article" @default.