FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4365808051> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4365808051 endingPage "613" @default.
• W4365808051 startingPage "612" @default.
• W4365808051 abstract "Reviewed by: Plagiarizing the Victorian Novel: Imitation, Parody, Aftertext by Adam Abraham Lisa Rodensky (bio) Plagiarizing the Victorian Novel: Imitation, Parody, Aftertext, by Adam Abraham; pp. v + 282. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019, £75.00, £22.99 paper, $99.99, $29.00 paper, $24.00 ebook. This book offers a new kind of reception history, promises Adam Abraham in his prologue to Plagiarizing the Victorian Novel: Imitation, Parody, Aftertext—a promise he fulfills in the five illuminating chapters that follow (19). That said, the book's title is a bit misleading, since Abraham is not that interested in plagiarism itself. The book's subtitle is a more accurate description of its topic. Here Abraham identifies two familiar subgenres and a third that he invents. Acknowledging Gérard Genette's earlier use of after-text (Palimpsests: Literature in the Second Degree, translated by Channa Newman and Claude Doubinsky [University of Lincoln Press, 1997], 399), Abraham loses the hyphen and widens the term's meaning to take in not just authorial versions/revisions, but also the varieties he specifically names in the title and subtitle (18). Moreover, Abraham renames the original-text-plus-aftertext(s) as the work which encompasses the totality of a literary existence (19). Rather than sideline what many see as mere rip-offs of an original text, Abraham argues that scholars should recognize aftertexts as significant source[s] of literary knowledge (20). Charles Dickens, Edward Bulwer Lytton, and George Eliot are the novelists around whom Abraham situates the aftertexts. The authors of the decidedly noncanonical productions are either anonymous or long forgotten, with the exception of William Makepeace Thackeray (a premier Bulwer Lytton parodist), along with the somewhat less exceptional Rosina Bulwer Lytton, and Edith Simcox, George Eliot's longtime devotee. Although I have reservations about Abraham's new definition of the so-called work, his analysis constitutes a significant contribution to reception history and to a deeper understanding of the marginal texts that circulated around the canonical originals. Like the Victorian period itself, Abraham begins with Dickens's The Posthumous Papers of the Pickwick Club (1836–7), a text which launched a thousand aftertexts, not to mention Pickwick cigars, breeches, and chintzes. Focusing on Pickwick imitations, Abraham examines two varieties: club imitations and prostheses (plagiaristic extensions of original characters and plots). While current Pickwick readers might have little or no interest in the club part of Pickwick (Dickens himself lost interest in it), the club imitators made it their raison d'etre. Abraham exhumes three such imitations and gives an engaging account of the ways each imagines club scenes that they believe Dickens was going to write, meant to write, advertised in the prospectus, or neglected to write (30). It is not that Abraham thinks these imitations give the real Pickwick a run for his money (he does not), but rather that in them we witness how another group of Dickens's readers actually read the book; in short, they become an untapped resource for reception studies. Not surprisingly, these aftertextual authors try their hands at Dickensian hyperbole, dialect, and interpolated stories, and Abraham takes them seriously—but not too seriously. Instead of trying to elevate these imitations, Abraham helps us to see Dickens through their eyes and to consider (more specifically) how they tune in to the undercurrents of racism, anti-Semitism, and sexuality that later critics have identified in the novel. So, for instance, examining the more anti-Semitic outgrowths, Abraham argues that they are derived from the repressed Jewish origins of Samuel Pickwick; Abraham supports his argument by adducing convincing evidence (his own and that gleaned from [End Page 612] other critical works) of the novel's anti-Semitic impulses (48). Perhaps Abraham's most provocative speculation concerns moments in the Pickwick aftertexts that evoke Warren's Blacking well before information about Dickens's past would have been publicly known. Were Dickens's imitators picking up on the references that he could not help but drop into his novels? Giving appropriate credit to Rosemarie Bodenheimer for the work she does in Knowing Dickens (2010), Abraham reads these aftertexts carefully to illuminate what Dickens's contemporary readers might have registered themselves. If Abraham's work..." @default.
• W4365808051 created "2023-04-16" @default.
• W4365808051 creator A5047518315 @default.
• W4365808051 date "2021-12-01" @default.
• W4365808051 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W4365808051 title "Plagiarizing the Victorian Novel: Imitation, Parody, Aftertext, by Adam Abraham" @default.
• W4365808051 doi "https://doi.org/10.2979/victorianstudies.63.4.27" @default.
• W4365808051 hasPublicationYear "2021" @default.
• W4365808051 type Work @default.
• W4365808051 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W4365808051 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4365808051 hasAuthorship W4365808051A5047518315 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConcept C124952713 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConcept C126388530 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConcept C2780364048 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConcept C2780627709 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConcept C2780876879 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConceptScore W4365808051C111472728 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConceptScore W4365808051C124952713 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConceptScore W4365808051C126388530 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConceptScore W4365808051C138885662 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConceptScore W4365808051C142362112 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConceptScore W4365808051C15744967 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConceptScore W4365808051C2780364048 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConceptScore W4365808051C2780627709 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConceptScore W4365808051C2780876879 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConceptScore W4365808051C41895202 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConceptScore W4365808051C77805123 @default.
• W4365808051 hasConceptScore W4365808051C95457728 @default.
• W4365808051 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W4365808051 hasLocation W43658080511 @default.
• W4365808051 hasOpenAccess W4365808051 @default.
• W4365808051 hasPrimaryLocation W43658080511 @default.
• W4365808051 hasRelatedWork W1531601525 @default.
• W4365808051 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W4365808051 hasRelatedWork W2758277628 @default.
• W4365808051 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W4365808051 hasRelatedWork W2935909890 @default.
• W4365808051 hasRelatedWork W2948807893 @default.
• W4365808051 hasRelatedWork W3173606202 @default.
• W4365808051 hasRelatedWork W3183948672 @default.
• W4365808051 hasRelatedWork W2778153218 @default.
• W4365808051 hasRelatedWork W3110381201 @default.
• W4365808051 hasVolume "63" @default.
• W4365808051 isParatext "false" @default.
• W4365808051 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W4365808051 workType "article" @default.