PofoliaShared via Pofolia

Digital humanities quarterly· 2014Q2· Review

In Praise of Overstating the Case: A review of Franco Moretti, Distant Reading (London: Verso, 2013)

Shawna Ross

Short summary

This review critiques Franco Moretti's "Distant Reading," arguing that while it showcases the potential of quantitative literary analysis, Moretti overestimates its scientific objectivity and overlooks the nuanced value of doubt and failure in academic inquiry.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • The review positions Moretti's "Distant Reading" as a significant artifact of early digital literary studies.
  • It highlights Moretti's controversial critique of traditional close reading and his promotion of quantitative formalism.
  • The central critique is that Moretti overestimates the scientific objectivity of his quantitative analyses.
  • The reviewer argues Moretti undervalues the importance of doubt, failure, and compromise in generating nuanced hypotheses.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

This review of Franco Moretti's Distant Reading summarizes Moretti’s major arguments within the larger context of recent debates in the digital humanities. Particular attention is given to Moretti’s uptake of Immanuel Wallerstein, to his controversial critique of close reading, and to the variety of digital-humanistic methods that comprise Moretti’s quantitative formalism. Most valuable as an artifact of literary-critical history rather than a how-to guide or theoretical treatise, this hodgepodge of essays is at its best as an audacious and defensive academic memoir tracing Moretti’s transformation into a digital humanist. As Moretti champions the broad explanatory power of quantitative literary analysis, he overestimates the scientific objectivity of his analyses while undervaluing the productively suggestive stories of doubt, failure, and compromise that lend nuance and depth to his hypotheses. Combative, absorbing, highly topical, and unevenly persuasive, Distant Reading embodies both the optimism of early digital literary studies and its perils.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Digital humanities quarterly, 2014 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: General Arts and Humanities

General Arts and HumanitiesArts and Humanities