Derek Roper – författare

First published in 1978, Reviewing before the Edinburgh is a study of English literary reviewing during the fifteen years before the founding in 1802 of the Edinburgh Review, and an assessment of the reviewers’ achievement. The long introductory chapter describes the aims, methods, staffing, readership, influence, and development of the five important Reviews of the 1790s: the Monthly Review, Critical Review, English Review, Analytical Review, and British Critic. The author argues that this type of Review declined during the 19th century, not because of poor performance, but because the ambitious aim of comprehensive reviewing had become impossible to achieve. The remaining chapters discuss and evaluate the work of these Reviews, chiefly in the fields of poetry, fiction, and political and religious controversy. The book fills a gap in the literary and political history of the period; provides a compact summary of its review criticism; and gives a better perspective on both reviewers and reviewed in years that were unusually fertile in political controversy and literary experiment. It will be of interest to students of literature and history.

First published in 1978, Reviewing before the Edinburgh is a study of English literary reviewing during the fifteen years before the founding in 1802 of the Edinburgh Review, and an assessment of the reviewers’ achievement. The long introductory chapter describes the aims, methods, staffing, readership, influence, and development of the five important Reviews of the 1790s: the Monthly Review, Critical Review, English Review, Analytical Review, and British Critic. The author argues that this type of Review declined during the 19th century, not because of poor performance, but because the ambitious aim of comprehensive reviewing had become impossible to achieve. The remaining chapters discuss and evaluate the work of these Reviews, chiefly in the fields of poetry, fiction, and political and religious controversy. The book fills a gap in the literary and political history of the period; provides a compact summary of its review criticism; and gives a better perspective on both reviewers and reviewed in years that were unusually fertile in political controversy and literary experiment. It will be of interest to students of literature and history.