tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8929346053949579231.post530968360680674448..comments2024-03-23T00:59:24.057-04:00Comments on Sapping Attention: The Age of Capital–Benhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04856020368342677253noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8929346053949579231.post-53153053342734699402010-12-11T11:34:08.246-05:002010-12-11T11:34:08.246-05:00I appreciated the way you demystified the methodol...I appreciated the way you demystified the methodology by going step-by-step. It helped me get a better sense of how DH work is done on both technical and interpretive levels. I wonder whether the word "utopia" is on the radar in the long 19th century. Would it make the cut of 150 appearances in 90 years? Anyway, thanks for these interesting posts!Pey-Yinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8929346053949579231.post-31380995435489023212010-12-06T10:14:14.251-05:002010-12-06T10:14:14.251-05:00This is fantastic. I think it confirms, but nuance...This is fantastic. I think it confirms, but nuances, the story I would expect: one that begins with "capital" as an object of practical use and Smithian investigation, moves on to "capitalists" as a term of art for the skilled employer of capital, and becomes an increasingly pejorative "capitalism" by the turn of the twentieth century, before the mid-twentieth century re-appropriation of capitalism and capitalist by big business as positive goods.<br /><br />Still, I do think there's some established historiography that explains "capitalist" as an analog to "Quaker": a term of derision adopted as a badge of honor. That story doesn't look very solid any more---except perhaps as a story about the twentieth century.Danhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05217832960135325575noreply@blogger.com