The Civil War was one great eruption of something immanent in human civilization: an ineradicable cycle of violence, a timeless struggle for democracy and freedom.
How can acts of periodization produce historical frameworks commensurate to the vast trauma and shock of the Civil War?
As Marrs makes clear, the career plot of transbellum authors reveals how periodization has distorted what we could know about the works of writers stranded for too long on one side of the Civil War divide.
What happens if we pair “post” and “transbellum”?
Piketty invites us to take seriously the forms of value discussed and represented in literary texts, and to call into question the tendency to treat everything in purely quantitative economic terms.
Pourquoi Piketty? French Enlightenment and the American Reception of Capital in the Twenty-First Century
Piketty draws attention to the mystique surrounding economics, encapsulated in the notion that it is far too complex for the non-specialist to understand.
To speak of the imperfection and incompleteness of numerical data is, for Piketty, a way of speaking about the work of the economist.
Measuring Literature: Digital Humanities, Behavioral Economics, and the Problem of Data in Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty-first Century
As a literary scholar, I think we need to reevaluate . . . enthusiasm about Piketty’s use of literature as data.
Taken together, the short essays gathered here point out the ways in which numbers and graphs constitute narratives, and insist that data’s stories are just as constructed as those found in words and novels.
If Piketty had turned to literary writing before Austen, he would have found a world teeming with the world-creating energies of overseas trade that economic historians take very seriously.