Beschreibung:
<jats:p>Searching for the phrase “appreciation of literature” in Google's <jats:italic>Ngram Viewer</jats:italic> shows that the phrase reached its peak usage in English publications between 1936 and 1937 and then nosedived after those years. It's interesting to speculate about what came together at that time. In 1937, DC Thomson published the first issue of <jats:italic>The Dandy,</jats:italic> one of the best selling comics in the history of British pop culture and the third-longest-running comics in the world; Daffy Duck debuted in the animated short <jats:italic>Porky's Duck Hunt,</jats:italic> directed by Tex Avery for the Looney Tunes series; and <jats:italic>Detective Comics</jats:italic> commenced publication. A year later, <jats:italic>Superman</jats:italic> went public. But 1937 also was the year that John Crowe Ransom left Vanderbilt University for Kenyon College and published “Criticism, Inc.” in <jats:italic>The Virginia Quarterly Review</jats:italic>. The target of Ransom's ire is “moralist” historical criticism, into which camp he puts actual morality purveyors, the new humanists and the new leftists (those purveyors of what we often now call symptomatic readings), and “personal registrations” or unfettered appreciation (597). While of course correlation is not causation, 1937 might mark an important fork in the subterranean lines in the United States, where the two trains of comics fandom and literary criticism begin to go in different directions, on trajectories that take them farther apart during and after World War II: comics toward the aesthetics of appreciation, and criticism to increasingly professionalized literary analysis. Critics today seem to be returning to this junction, asking how comics and criticism might reunite. Perhaps that convergence is happening now, through approaches variously known as surface reading (Best and Marcus), reparative reading (Sedgwick), close reading, postcritique (Felski, <jats:italic>Limits),</jats:italic> thin description (Love), or redescription (Latour)—each of which encourages professionalized critical appraisal without taking rolling stock into dead-end symptomatic tunnels. Perhaps it is through some other approach, one that may look like Hillary Chute's <jats:italic>Why Comics?</jats:italic></jats:p>