Shalizi on Moretti

by Henry on January 25, 2006

CT readers who aren’t already following the Moretti discussion on the Valve, should head over to read Cosma Shalizi’s “essay”: on Moretti’s approach to the analysis of literature. It’s one of the best pieces of scholar blogging that I’ve ever seen, if it’s not in fact _the_ best such piece.



Scott Eric Kaufman 01.25.06 at 10:03 pm

Henry, I’m biased and obviously inclined to agree with you, but do you really see Cosma’s post as an example of scholarly blogging? It strikes me more like an actual, scholarly essay which, because of his lack of credentials, he’s posted on a blog instead of the venue it deserves.

I should also note that I’ll hawk the Moretti book-event despite the fact that I haven’t actually participated in it yet. That’s right folks:

It’s so damn golden I’ll bolster sans the typical motivations of the shameless self-promoter. Not that above self-promotion, mind you . . . especially not since I’m currently hosting a discussion of Adam Roberts’ excellent sci-fi novel Stone, which has already drawn comparisons to Iain Banks, Jack Vance, Jack Kerouac and Henry Fielding. (See, I can self-promote. But go to the Valve now. That’s where all the action’s at.


ab 01.26.06 at 6:08 am

Good piece, but too long to count as blogging.


Bill Gardner 01.26.06 at 6:55 am

With respect to comment 1, ‘lack of credentials’ means ‘lack of credentials in literary studies’. Clearly, Scott meant no disrespect. However, a PhD in statistical mechanics and time at the Santa Fe Institute impress me, at least, and the CMU Statistics Department may be the best in the alpha quandrant.


Timothy Burke 01.26.06 at 8:29 am

I think I would put it this way: it is the best scholarly piece I’ve seen published in the blog format. Honestly, it took my breath away.

Comments on this entry are closed.