AustLit

The author's approach is 'to use quantitative reading data to analyse the circulation of Victorian written culture in a range of Australian colonial contexts, and to construct from that analysis locally situated re-readings of well-known and lesser-known novels' (275). By looking at library records and establishing borrowing patterns, Dolin examines reading culture in colonial South Australia, using as an example the reception and impact of Dickens's Great Expectations.

Focusing on a process of reading 'conscripted' by Victorian sensation fiction, the article begins 'by outlining the European tradition of the Antipodes before discussing the conscription process using [Mary Elizabeth Braddon's] Lady Audley's Secret, and then comparing this to the discoveries and development of the early science of reading'. It concludes 'by alluding to the implications of this reading process for the formation of British imperial subjectivity, and the continuing role of the tradition of "the Antipodes"' (295).

The article explores the tastes and values of late-nineteenth-century reading groups and societies in Hobart, Sydney and Adelaide, and of their interest (or lack thereof) in Australian literature.

In focussing on four Australian novels on the New Zealand (or Maori) Wars, Wevers discusses these questions: 'Why were Australian writers drawn to the New Zealand Wars as a fictional location, and how were these novels received in New Zealand? Who were their audience, and what narratives of colonial worlds were being worked through them?' (319).

The article proposes a rethinking of the notion of the middle-brow in terms of the proliferation of 'new books' in the interwar period, through an analysis of the review journal All About Books.

In this first critical essay on the work of Wendy Scarfe, Bode argues that Scarfe's novels, in particular Miranda, both represent and seek to create a community of feminist readers.

A response to Clement Semmler's criticism of A. G. Stephens's editing of Barcroft Boake's poetry. Concludes that 'on the evidence available, Stephens must be regarded as more respectful of Boake's own words than he has hitherto been given credit for' (371).

Introduces a newly-found manuscript of Boake's most famous poem which differs from a later printed version.