Reviewed by:

• Minerva’s Gothics: The Politics and Poetics of Romantic Exchange, 1780–1820 by Elizabeth A. Neiman
• Laura R. Kremmel (bio)

The gothic has long been considered a lower-class, “trash” mode of popular reading, particularly for its cheap shocks and reliance on recycled conventions. Elizabeth A. Neiman adds her worthy volume to growing scholarship that is working to dispel such notions and to revalue a highly influential literary form. In the preface, she lays out her aim to perform a focused study of the Minerva novels and their impact on the market, its readers and writers, and reading practices through an analysis of active exchange and linkages between early Romanticism and later poets.

Far from a passive act, Neiman describes participation in the Minerva Gothic as collaboration among the author, the text, and the reader. Literary conventions of the popular novel, long criticized as unoriginal and lazy, become tools of power and communication in this network of inclusive, collaborative exchange. As she writes, “reading Minerva novels as exchangeable (but not interchangeable) nodes in a network illustrates that many period novelists do not see any necessary contradiction between imagination and freedom or imitation and constraint,” an approach that liberates traditions like the gothic—discussed in her later chapters—from judgments based on such contradictions (xviii). Furthermore, “Minerva’s derivative themes are an accidental inheritance that furnishes writers with the language to respond to Romantic-era debates, most notably by refashioning Romantic redefinitions of authorship and literature into a collective authorial model,” a clear articulation of the book’s contribution to a range of ongoing debates and areas of study (xxi). The book’s complex chapter sequence traces the development of Minerva publications chronologically, [End Page 314] but also by author-readers, events, and debates. Its three sections focus on (1) the debates and texts surrounding feminist discourse and the role of romance and fantasy, (2) the impact of the French Revolution and sensibility, and (3) authorship and the gothic.

Neiman fulfils her goal of tracing the Minerva press’s influence and resuscitating often dismissed and discredited conventions in several ways. The first chapter takes a truly unique approach within literary studies through a painstaking statistical exploration of the books published in the press, the authors who published both there and elsewhere, and even the advertising and quality of paper on which these books were printed. Though such an approach may feel outside the conventional critical methodology of literary scholars, Neiman makes the data clear, relevant, and interesting, providing visual charts and graphs to illustrate the written text. Based on numerical data that leans toward a social science approach as well as literary interpretation of that data, her argument is truly interdisciplinary. Through these lists and headcounts, Neiman lays out a statistical background for the rest of her book, including how she defines a Minerva author, the role of gender in the press’s effects, the system of anonymity among authors, and the press’s rise and fall. This chapter gets at the multidimensionality of history and culture, telling the story of Minerva press’s waxing and waning with multiple layers of micro and macro perspectives. Such an approach risks alienating literary scholars, but in this case it instead models a successful expansion of critical engagement through these methods as complex, accessible, and productive.

Subsequent chapters build on this context of the rise and fall of Minerva publications, filling in the gaps of historical events and authorial pursuits, such as part 1’s exploration of romance tropes, women writers, and Mary Wollstonecraft’s contentious relationship with popular reading. Though critical of the literary conventions that give women unrealistic, even dangerous, expectations for romance and social standing, Wollstonecraft also wrests control of those same conventions to show how they might be used with restraint and care. Rather than simply repeating the oft-discussed literary tropes that contribute to ideas of female romance and sensibility, Nieman looks at them as devices in themselves: tools that can be recognized and that leave a trace. She provides a...

审核人：

• 密涅瓦的哥特式：浪漫交流的政治和诗学，1780–1820年，伊丽莎白·内曼（Elizabeth A. Neiman）
• 劳拉·克雷梅尔（生物）

哥特式语言长期以来一直被认为是低级的“垃圾”阅读模式，特别是因为它便宜的价格和对回收公约的依赖。伊丽莎白·内曼（Elizabeth A. Neiman）将自己的宝贵著作添加到不断发展的学术研究中，该学术研究致力于消除这种观念并重估极具影响力的文学形式。在序言中，她提出了她的目标，即通过分析早期浪漫主义与后来的诗人之间的积极交流和联系，对密涅瓦小说及其对市场，其读者和作家的影响以及阅读实践进行重点研究。

Neiman绝非被动行为，而是将作者，文本和读者之间的协作描述为对密涅瓦哥特式艺术的参与。长期以来被批评为独创和懒惰的通俗小说的文学惯例，在这种包容，合作的交流网络中成为力量和交流的工具。如她所写，“将密涅瓦小说作为网络中可交换（但不可互换）的节点来阅读，这表明许多时代小说家没有看到想象力与自由或模仿与约束之间的任何必要矛盾”，这种方法解放了像哥特式这样讨论的传统。在她的后续章节中-基于基于此类矛盾的判断（xviii）。此外，“密涅瓦的衍生主题是偶然的继承，使作家能够使用语言来回应浪漫主义时代的辩论，最值得注意的是，将浪漫主义的作者和文学定义重新定义为集体作者模型，”这清楚地表明了本书对一系列正在进行的辩论和研究领域的贡献（xxi）。这本书的复杂章节顺序按时间顺序追溯了密涅瓦（Minerva）出版物的发展，[尾页314]以及作者，读者，活动和辩论。它的三个部分集中在（1）围绕女权主义话语以及浪漫和幻想的作用的辩论和文本，（2）法国大革命和情感的影响，以及（3）作者和哥特式。

内曼（Neiman）实现了她的目标，即以多种方式追踪密涅瓦新闻社的影响力，并使经常被取消和贬低的惯例复苏。第一章通过对新闻出版的书籍，在此出版的书籍以及在其他地方出版的作者，甚至印刷这些书籍的广告和纸质进行艰苦的统计探索，在文学研究中采取了一种真正独特的方法。尽管这种方法在文学学者的传统批判方法之外可能感觉不到，但内曼（Neiman）使数据清晰，相关且有趣，并提供了可视化的图表来说明书面文字。基于倾向于社会科学方法的数值数据以及对该数据的文学解释，她的论点确实是跨学科的。通过这些列表和人数，内曼（Neiman）为其书的其余部分提供了统计背景，包括她如何定义密涅瓦作家，性别在新闻界影响中的作用，作者之间的匿名系统以及新闻界的兴衰。本章探讨了历史和文化的多维性，以多层的微观和宏观视角讲述密涅瓦出版社的发展历程。这种方法冒着疏远文学学者的风险，但是在这种情况下，它却以复杂，可访问和富有成效的方式，通过这些方法来模拟批判参与的成功扩展。本章探讨了历史和文化的多维性，以多层的微观和宏观视角讲述密涅瓦出版社的发展历程。这种方法冒着疏远文学学者的风险，但是在这种情况下，它却以复杂，可访问和富有成效的方式，通过这些方法来模拟批判参与的成功扩展。本章从历史和文化的多维度入手，以多层的微观和宏观视角讲述密涅瓦出版社的发展历程。这种方法冒着疏远文学学者的风险，但是在这种情况下，它却以复杂，可访问和富有成效的方式，通过这些方法来模拟批判参与的成功扩展。

随后的章节建立在密涅瓦（Minerva）出版物兴衰的背景下，填补了历史事件和作者追求的空白，例如第1部分对浪漫主义比喻的探讨，女性作家以及Mary Wollstonecraft与大众阅读之间的有争议的关系。尽管批评文学习俗赋予女性不切实际，甚至是危险的对浪漫和社会地位的期望，但沃斯通克拉夫特也夺取了对这些习俗的控制，以表明如何克制和谨慎地使用它们。涅曼不仅重复了经常讨论的有助于女性浪漫主义和情感观念的文学比较，还把它们视为本身的工具：可以被识别并留下痕迹的工具。她提供了...