PDF (Version of Record)
- Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
|Google Scholar:||Look up in Google Scholar|
This thesis challenges the conventional opinion that Ford Madox Ford was a great editor. It establishes criteria by which an editor can be judged; these are the literary and cultural opinions on which a review operates, an awareness of the needs of readers of a review as revealed in its style and content, and the way in which a review is managed. These criteria are applied to three different, though overlapping fields of enquiry. Firstly, the thesis examines how far Ford's editorial practice was consistent with his own literary and critical principles as expressed through a long and varied writing career. Secondly, it places the two reviews edited by Ford in the context of the society which produced them, English Review in London between 1908 and 1910, and The Transatlantic Review in Paris in 1924, and compares these two reviews with a wide range of contemporary cultural journals on the basis of the three criteria outlined above. Finally the study compares Ford's achievement as editor of The English Review and The Transatlantic Review. It concludes that while Ford was a good editor in some respects, he was not the great editor which is so often claimed for him.
|Item Type:||Thesis (PhD)|
|Copyright Holders:||1996 The Author|
|Academic Unit/Department:||Arts > English|
|Depositing User:||Ann McAloon|
|Date Deposited:||26 Nov 2009 15:10|
|Last Modified:||24 Feb 2016 14:38|
|Share this page:|
► Automated document suggestions from open access sources
Download history for this item
These details should be considered as only a guide to the number of downloads performed manually. Algorithmic methods have been applied in an attempt to remove automated downloads from the displayed statistics but no guarantee can be made as to the accuracy of the figures.