Judgment and Its Publics

This response essay overviews the timely interventions of Michael W. Clune’s A Defense of Judgment , which was published amid a larger sociopolitical crisis in expert judgment. Clune productively develops an account of the specialized nature of literary expertise. However, this essay also asks wheth...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Modern fiction studies 2024-07, Vol.70 (2), p.214-224
Main Author: Anker, Elizabeth S
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Criticism
Critics
Defense
Egalitarianism
Equal rights
Equality
Humanism
Humanities
Judgment
Literary studies
Politics
Skills
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page 224
container_issue 2
container_start_page 214
container_title Modern fiction studies
container_volume 70
creator Anker, Elizabeth S
description This response essay overviews the timely interventions of Michael W. Clune’s A Defense of Judgment , which was published amid a larger sociopolitical crisis in expert judgment. Clune productively develops an account of the specialized nature of literary expertise. However, this essay also asks whether too much force is attributed to the logic of the market, and it similarly questions the vision of the public implicit to Clune’s model of literary studies.
doi_str_mv 10.1353/mfs.2024.a928339
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_3062786103</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3062786103</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1143-3c46929637d583a791f7feb297da052e843dbfaa4fad59b3bd25f478e52471e73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFkEFLAzEQRoMouFbvPRY8b53MJJvkKEVtpaCggreQ3STS0u3Wze7Bf-8uLXoaGN58w_sYm3KYc5J0V8c0R0AxdwY1kTljGQcNeSH15znLALDIlUJxya5S2gKAVAYyNn3u_Vcd9t3M7f1s1aXZa1_uNlW6ZhfR7VK4Oc0J-3h8eF8s8_XL02pxv84rzgXlVInCoClIeanJKcOjiqFEo7wDiUEL8mV0TkTnpSmp9CijUDpIFIoHRRN2e8w9tM13H1Jnt03f7oeXlqBApQsONFBwpKq2SakN0R7aTe3aH8vBjv528Lejvz35DyfiL3gbqq7uU_jPPkL2bexorAgFDp0My19mMlwk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3062786103</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Judgment and Its Publics</title><source>Project Muse:Jisc Collections:Project MUSE Journals Agreement 2024:Premium Collection</source><creator>Anker, Elizabeth S</creator><creatorcontrib>Anker, Elizabeth S</creatorcontrib><description>This response essay overviews the timely interventions of Michael W. Clune’s A Defense of Judgment , which was published amid a larger sociopolitical crisis in expert judgment. Clune productively develops an account of the specialized nature of literary expertise. However, this essay also asks whether too much force is attributed to the logic of the market, and it similarly questions the vision of the public implicit to Clune’s model of literary studies.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0026-7724</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1080-658X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1080-658X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1353/mfs.2024.a928339</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press</publisher><subject>Criticism ; Critics ; Defense ; Egalitarianism ; Equal rights ; Equality ; Humanism ; Humanities ; Judgment ; Literary studies ; Politics ; Skills</subject><ispartof>Modern fiction studies, 2024-07, Vol.70 (2), p.214-224</ispartof><rights>Copyright © The Purdue Research Foundation.</rights><rights>Copyright Johns Hopkins University Press 2024</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,27911,27912</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Anker, Elizabeth S</creatorcontrib><title>Judgment and Its Publics</title><title>Modern fiction studies</title><description>This response essay overviews the timely interventions of Michael W. Clune’s A Defense of Judgment , which was published amid a larger sociopolitical crisis in expert judgment. Clune productively develops an account of the specialized nature of literary expertise. However, this essay also asks whether too much force is attributed to the logic of the market, and it similarly questions the vision of the public implicit to Clune’s model of literary studies.</description><subject>Criticism</subject><subject>Critics</subject><subject>Defense</subject><subject>Egalitarianism</subject><subject>Equal rights</subject><subject>Equality</subject><subject>Humanism</subject><subject>Humanities</subject><subject>Judgment</subject><subject>Literary studies</subject><subject>Politics</subject><subject>Skills</subject><issn>0026-7724</issn><issn>1080-658X</issn><issn>1080-658X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpFkEFLAzEQRoMouFbvPRY8b53MJJvkKEVtpaCggreQ3STS0u3Wze7Bf-8uLXoaGN58w_sYm3KYc5J0V8c0R0AxdwY1kTljGQcNeSH15znLALDIlUJxya5S2gKAVAYyNn3u_Vcd9t3M7f1s1aXZa1_uNlW6ZhfR7VK4Oc0J-3h8eF8s8_XL02pxv84rzgXlVInCoClIeanJKcOjiqFEo7wDiUEL8mV0TkTnpSmp9CijUDpIFIoHRRN2e8w9tM13H1Jnt03f7oeXlqBApQsONFBwpKq2SakN0R7aTe3aH8vBjv528Lejvz35DyfiL3gbqq7uU_jPPkL2bexorAgFDp0My19mMlwk</recordid><startdate>20240701</startdate><enddate>20240701</enddate><creator>Anker, Elizabeth S</creator><general>Johns Hopkins University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20240701</creationdate><title>Judgment and Its Publics</title><author>Anker, Elizabeth S</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1143-3c46929637d583a791f7feb297da052e843dbfaa4fad59b3bd25f478e52471e73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Criticism</topic><topic>Critics</topic><topic>Defense</topic><topic>Egalitarianism</topic><topic>Equal rights</topic><topic>Equality</topic><topic>Humanism</topic><topic>Humanities</topic><topic>Judgment</topic><topic>Literary studies</topic><topic>Politics</topic><topic>Skills</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Anker, Elizabeth S</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Modern fiction studies</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Anker, Elizabeth S</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Judgment and Its Publics</atitle><jtitle>Modern fiction studies</jtitle><date>2024-07-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>70</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>214</spage><epage>224</epage><pages>214-224</pages><issn>0026-7724</issn><issn>1080-658X</issn><eissn>1080-658X</eissn><abstract>This response essay overviews the timely interventions of Michael W. Clune’s A Defense of Judgment , which was published amid a larger sociopolitical crisis in expert judgment. Clune productively develops an account of the specialized nature of literary expertise. However, this essay also asks whether too much force is attributed to the logic of the market, and it similarly questions the vision of the public implicit to Clune’s model of literary studies.</abstract><cop>Baltimore</cop><pub>Johns Hopkins University Press</pub><doi>10.1353/mfs.2024.a928339</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0026-7724
ispartof Modern fiction studies, 2024-07, Vol.70 (2), p.214-224
issn 0026-7724
1080-658X
1080-658X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_3062786103
source Project Muse:Jisc Collections:Project MUSE Journals Agreement 2024:Premium Collection
subjects Criticism
Critics
Defense
Egalitarianism
Equal rights
Equality
Humanism
Humanities
Judgment
Literary studies
Politics
Skills
title Judgment and Its Publics
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-15T21%3A20%3A32IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Judgment%20and%20Its%20Publics&rft.jtitle=Modern%20fiction%20studies&rft.au=Anker,%20Elizabeth%20S&rft.date=2024-07-01&rft.volume=70&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=214&rft.epage=224&rft.pages=214-224&rft.issn=0026-7724&rft.eissn=1080-658X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1353/mfs.2024.a928339&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3062786103%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1143-3c46929637d583a791f7feb297da052e843dbfaa4fad59b3bd25f478e52471e73%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3062786103&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true