{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02372093023255814, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0037209302325581397, 'mean_word_length': 5.345132743362832, '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}}
Review: Britannia's Children. Reading Colonialism through Children's Books and Magazines, Writing India 1757–1990

In writing of the French Revolution in landscape metaphors Helen Maria Williams simply ignored aesthetic theory's insistence on autonomy and separation from either practical or political interests. By so doing she challenged not merely the theory but the whole nature of the society on which that theory rested. The later course of the Revolution finally defeated her efforts to make sense of events in aesthetic terms. Mary Wollstonecraft had showed Burke's aesthetics of the sublime to be inextricably linked with anti-egalitarian politics. Her Letters from Sweden, Norway and Denmark provide an alternative aesthetics inseparable from everyday life, where distance between perceiver and the perceived is destroyed, where human beings are at the centre of representation of land. But she acknowledged that a true revision of aesthetics turned on a fundamental reorganisation of society. In her Journal Dorothy Wordsworth rejects the theorists' segregation of aesthetics and sees walks in the hills as just one of the many pleasures of everyday life that also included the 'repetitive cycle of housework'. Far from ignoring those who inhabit the land she talks of these country people's unfulfilled needs alongside descriptions of natural beauty. But when as a tourist she travels in Scotland and writes her Recollections her comments reflect an increasing unease at the conventions of scenic tourism. There is, as Bohls remarks, 'a suppressed anxiety...a sense of her own suspect credentials'. As with other women travel writers, even radicals like Williams and Wollstonecraft, her writing 'oscillates between distance and closeness, solidarity and disdain for the laboring classes they set out to liberate'. Both Ann Radcliffe and Mary Shelley used the Gothic novel to criticize the patriarchal structure of aesthetics. They deal with those normally excluded from aesthetic discourse. Shelley's monster, the author writes, 'grotesquely embodies all of those...whose suppression or exclusion is aesthetics' condition of possibility'.