Fai clic su di un'immagine per andare a Google Ricerca Libri.
Sto caricando le informazioni... Scale, space and canon in ancient literary culturedi Reviel Netz
Nessuno Sto caricando le informazioni...
Iscriviti per consentire a LibraryThing di scoprire se ti piacerà questo libro. Attualmente non vi sono conversazioni su questo libro. nessuna recensione | aggiungi una recensione
Greek culture matters because its unique pluralistic debate shaped modern discourses. This ground-breaking book explains this feature by retelling the history of ancient literary culture through the lenses of canon, space and scale. It proceeds from the invention of the performative 'author' in the archaic symposium through the 'polis of letters' enabled by Athenian democracy and into the Hellenistic era, where one's space mattered and culture became bifurcated between Athens and Alexandria. This duality was reconfigured into an eclectic variety consumed by Roman patrons and predicated on scale, with about a thousand authors active at any given moment. As patronage dried up in the third century CE, scale collapsed and literary culture was reduced to the teaching of a narrower field of authors, paving the way for the Middle Ages. The result is a new history of ancient culture which is sociological, quantitative, and all-encompassing, cutting through eras and genres. Non sono state trovate descrizioni di biblioteche |
Discussioni correntiNessuno
Google Books — Sto caricando le informazioni... GeneriSistema Decimale Melvil (DDC)880.9Literature Greek and other Classical languages Greek literature History and criticism of Greek literatureClassificazione LCVotoMedia:
Sei tu?Diventa un autore di LibraryThing. |
Unfortunately, Netz's quantitative analysis is marred by elementary and avoidable technical errors. The question then is how much this matters. Since he clearly knows what he is talking about, it is quite possible that his conclusions are correct even so. It is also possible that the quantitative data he has collected would also support his conclusions if differently [properly] handled.
But one would really need to start from the beginning, with a technically well-founded specification of the data to collect to address specific and well-posed research questions.
I think my main concern would be not with faulty analysis - which can be fixed, especially if the data still exists - but with faulty study design, so that the data collected may be insufficient in quantity or just of the wrong type to answer the questions ( )