<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.2 20190208//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.2/JATS-journalpublishing1-mathml3.dtd">
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.2" xml:lang="en">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
      <journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">1832</journal-id>
      <journal-title-group>
        <journal-title>Journal of Cultural Analytics</journal-title>
      </journal-title-group>
      <issn pub-type="epub">2371-4549</issn>
      <publisher>
        <publisher-name>Center for Digital Humanities, Princeton University</publisher-name>
      </publisher>
      <self-uri xlink:href="https://culturalanalytics.org/">Website: Journal of Cultural Analytics</self-uri>
    </journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">22221</article-id>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.22148/001c.22221</article-id>
      <article-categories>
        <subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
          <subject>Article</subject>
        </subj-group>
      </article-categories>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>The Goodreads “Classics”: A Computational Study of Readers, Amazon, and Crowdsourced Amateur Criticism</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <name>
            <surname>Walsh</surname>
            <given-names>Melanie</given-names>
          </name>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <name>
            <surname>Antoniak</surname>
            <given-names>Maria</given-names>
          </name>
        </contrib>
      </contrib-group>
      <pub-date publication-format="electronic" date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2021-04-20">
        <day>20</day>
        <month>4</month>
        <year>2021</year>
      </pub-date>
      <pub-date publication-format="electronic" date-type="collection" iso-8601-date="2021-04-21">
        <year>2021</year>
      </pub-date>
      <volume>6</volume>
      <issue seq="6">2</issue>
      <issue-title>Post-45 by the Numbers</issue-title>
      <elocation-id>22221</elocation-id>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="2020-11-01">
          <day>1</day>
          <month>11</month>
          <year>2020</year>
        </date>
        <date date-type="accepted" iso-8601-date="2021-01-01">
          <day>1</day>
          <month>1</month>
          <year>2021</year>
        </date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <license license-type="open-access">
          <ali:license_ref xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/">
              http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
            </ali:license_ref>
          <license-p>
              This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0">Creative Commons Attribution License (4.0)</ext-link>, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
            </license-p>
        </license>
      </permissions>
      <self-uri content-type="pdf" xlink:href="https://culturalanalytics.org/article/22221.pdf"/>
      <self-uri content-type="xml" xlink:href="https://culturalanalytics.org/article/22221.xml"/>
      <self-uri content-type="json" xlink:href="https://culturalanalytics.org/article/22221.json"/>
      <self-uri content-type="html" xlink:href="https://culturalanalytics.org/article/22221"/>
      <abstract>
        <p>This essay examines how Goodreads users define, discuss, and debate “classic” literature by computa-tionally analyzing and close reading more than 120,000 user reviews. We begin by exploring how crowdsourced tagging systems like those found on Goodreads have influenced the evolution of genre among readers and amateur critics, and we highlight the contemporary value of the “classics” in particu-lar. We identify the most commonly tagged “classic” literary works and find that Goodreads users have curated a vision of literature that is less diverse, in terms of the race and ethnicity of authors, than many U.S. high school and college syllabi. Drawing on computational methods such as topic modeling, we point to some of the forces that influence readers’ perceptions, such as schooling and what we call the classic industry — industries that benefit from the reinforcement of works as classics in other mediums and domains like film, television, publishing, and e-commerce (e.g., Goodreads and Amazon). We also high-light themes that users commonly discuss in their reviews (e.g., boring characters) and writing styles that often stand out in them (e.g., conversational and slangy language). Throughout the essay, we make the case that computational methods and internet data, when combined, can help literary critics capture the creative explosion of reader responses and critique algorithmic culture’s effects on literary history.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>canonicity</kwd>
        <kwd>social media</kwd>
        <kwd>literature</kwd>
        <kwd>english literature</kwd>
        <kwd>readers and reading</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
</article>
