Shakespeare and Textual Studies
- Submitting institution
-
King's College London
- Unit of assessment
- 27 - English Language and Literature
- Output identifier
- 147264005
- Type
- B - Edited book
- DOI
-
10.1017/CBO9781139152259
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- ISBN
- 9781107023741
- Open access status
- -
- Month of publication
- November
- Year of publication
- 2015
- URL
-
-
- Supplementary information
-
-
- Request cross-referral to
- -
- Output has been delayed by COVID-19
- No
- COVID-19 affected output statement
- -
- Forensic science
- No
- Criminology
- No
- Interdisciplinary
- No
- Number of additional authors
-
1
- Research group(s)
-
-
- Proposed double-weighted
- No
- Reserve for an output with double weighting
- No
- Additional information
- My work in this field straddles neighbouring disciplines, bringing together my training as a philologist and textual editor with research I undertook in book history and the London early modern book trade. My interdisciplinary approach to the study of the transmission of Shakespeare’s works from manuscript into print enabled me to identify press correctors as previously overlooked proto-editorial agents, who actively perfected Shakespeare’s texts as they were printed and reprinted prior to the official rise of the editorial tradition in the early eighteenth century.
This mindset fed directly into how this collection of essays was conceived, structured and commissioned. My co-editor and I sought out contributors who would similarly push the boundaries of what each area of research interest predisposes scholars to investigate and how. Among our contributors, I, for example, personally contacted American philosopher, David Weinberger, who is employed by Harvard University as Senior Researcher at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society and as co-director of the Harvard Library Innovation Lab, because of the insights that he can bring to Shakespeare Textual Studies from the perspective of someone interested in evaluating the impact of digital technology on what is possible for scientific investigation to make knowable within individual disciplines. Weinberger’s notion of ‘networked knowledge’ invites scholars within relevant disciplines – bibliography, palaeography, philology and textual studies, book history and the sociology of the text – to be more explicit about their “metadata”, or, in other words, to spell out the “implicit knowledge” mobilized by their practice in order to interrogate it and refine it. The ultimate aim of network scholarship is to create “smarter rooms” or more connected scholarly communities that can better define what questions their disciplinary areas open up and in what ways those questions define our epistemological moment.
- Author contribution statement
- -
- Non-English
- No
- English abstract
- -