{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03513824884792627, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.811764705882353, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Janelle A. Schwartz Worm Work: Recasting Romanticism, Scott Hess William Wordsworth and the Ecology of Authorship: The Roots of Environmentalism in Nineteenth-Century Culture

Two concepts—‘‘worm work’’ (or vermiculture) and ‘‘the ecology of authorship’’—together create an interactive structure for reading Janelle Schwartz’s and Scott Hess’s new books together. Both books purport to be about British Romanticism, but Schwartz’s book actually considers eighteenth-century botanical practices and thought and then shows them reflected in several Romantic works, while Hess’s book follows the periods subsequent to Romanticism through to present-day practices to trace cultural practices stemming from the poetics of nature that William Wordsworth iconically represents. However, in framing British Romanticism historically, the two books work together well: Schwartz’s Worm Work: Recasting Romanticism provides a deep-level analytic (which she describes as ‘‘worm praxis,’’ or ‘‘vermicular analysis’’) while Hess’s William Wordsworth and the Ecology of Authorship provides a cultural overview (authorial ecology). At the same time, both books analyze a particular kind of historically situated seeing. Schwartz theorizes a kind of double vision she terms ‘‘diplopia,’’ whereas Hess stresses an aesthetic vision developed out of the picturesque. Both kinds of seeing are related to cognitive habits that extend beyond what influential practitioners have innovated by virtue of having passed into the larger cultural habits of mind. In this way, particular scientific and artistic productions, those that already reflect a cultural tendency of mind but then exploit it, are both more influential and subsequently more valued than others.