언어연결망 분석을 활용한 주간지 『런던』의 문학 비평과 서평 기사 양식 비교 연구

Abstract

This paper uses comparative co-occurrence network analysis to identify the different modes of critical practice employed by the three distinct groups of criticism on literature in the “Bohemia” section of London: The Conservative Weekly Journal of Politics, Finance, Society and the Arts (1877-1879). The results of the study show that all the article groups--“Literary Criticism,” “Independent Book Reviews” and “‘Mudie’s’ Book Reviews”--have the word “Mr.” as the most central node, both in terms of its “closeness” to related words and its “betweenness” to the different word groups. “Literary Criticism” gives women novelists a networked presence on the margin of the whole network, with “Miss” as a node of moderate centralities, albeit linked exclusively to the pejorative “same” node. “Independent Book Reviews” has the most prominent “Mr.” node among all three groups. The “Miss” and “Mrs.” are within the “Mr.” cluster as mere satellites of the modest “good” node, which is also within the large “Mr.” cluster. This demonstrates how women authors were almost overlooked for serious reviews at the time of publication. “‘Mudie’s’ Book Reviews” shows some presence of “Mrs.” and “Miss” in the “good” cluster, which is larger than that of the “Independent Book Reviews” and linked to the less dominant “Mr.” cluster. The centrality of the “Co.” node suggests that this presence of women was allowed when the reviews discussed popular books for general readers of the circulating libraries. Network analysis reveals the real constitutive role of gender in London’s literary discourse. The differences in the modes of criticism between the three groups of articles precisely reflect the differences in the way gendered word clusters are positioned in the overall linguistic network structure. This study reveals the underpinnings for London’s practice of consecrating male fiction and the hegemonic claim of its young male critics to literary taste.