Just a small post in reponse to my review of Todd Porterfield (ed.), The Efflorescence of Caricature: 1759-1838 (London, Ashgate, 2011) appearing in the IHR's Reviews in History (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/1084).
First, I wanted to praise the IHR for providing such a reactive and reflexive space as RIH. I first saw this book at BSECS '11 (which was in early January), asked for a copy days after, recieved it just a few days after that, and having only submitted the review to them in mid-April it is already up. So huge kudos to the IHR.
Second, I wished to add that I really did enjoy this book even if at times my review comes across as a little negative. There were some moments of signifcant frustration with the 'representation without physical grounding' direction some of the contributions took (my flatmate can verify to one particular moment where the book was in risk of being hurled out of a room - I'm sure you can guess which from the review...), but the willingness of Porterfield in particular to break the study of graphic satire out of the shackles of orthodoxy must be applauded. So if you like your history to be both annoying and inventive (comes with the territory of being radical I guess), then pick up a copy.
First, I wanted to praise the IHR for providing such a reactive and reflexive space as RIH. I first saw this book at BSECS '11 (which was in early January), asked for a copy days after, recieved it just a few days after that, and having only submitted the review to them in mid-April it is already up. So huge kudos to the IHR.
Second, I wished to add that I really did enjoy this book even if at times my review comes across as a little negative. There were some moments of signifcant frustration with the 'representation without physical grounding' direction some of the contributions took (my flatmate can verify to one particular moment where the book was in risk of being hurled out of a room - I'm sure you can guess which from the review...), but the willingness of Porterfield in particular to break the study of graphic satire out of the shackles of orthodoxy must be applauded. So if you like your history to be both annoying and inventive (comes with the territory of being radical I guess), then pick up a copy.
No comments:
Post a Comment