@article{3685ef357bff42638e8701c8c28fe64b,
title = "Why literary time is measured in minutes",
abstract = "Critics often discuss works of fiction by condensing them into a few resonant scenes. We are so attached to this strategy, in fact, that we sometimes apply it to history itself: New Historicists explicitly theorize the anecdote as an appropriately literary representation of the past. But why should minutes and hours be more literary than months and years? This essay traces the belief back to changes in the pacing of fiction. But the changes at stake are not themselves easily crystallized into an anecdote or even a generational conflict: they seem on the contrary to have sprawled across several centuries. It thus turns out that we need long timelines even to understand the history of gem-like moments.",
author = "Ted Underwood",
note = "Funding Information: This article was sparked by thinking about Sharon Marcus, “Erich Auerbach{\textquoteright}s Mimesis and the Value of Scale,” MLQ 77.3 (2016): 297–319. Eleanor Courtemanche contributed many leads on narrative theory; Andrew Goldstone convinced me to try sociological content analysis. Texts of novels after 1900 came from Hoyt Long and Richard Jean So at the Chicago Text Lab; for texts before 1900, I collaborated with HathiTrust Research Center. Data about the novels was gathered in collaboration with Jessica Mercado and Sabrina Lee; research was funded by SSHRC via the NovelTM project, directed by Andrew Piper. 1See Catherine Gallagher, “Formalism and Time,” MLQ 61.1 (2000): 229–51.",
year = "2018",
month = jun,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1353/elh.2018.0013",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "85",
pages = "341--365",
journal = "ELH - English Literary History",
issn = "0013-8304",
publisher = "Johns Hopkins University Press",
number = "2",
}