{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01832460732984293, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005235602094240838, 'mean_word_length': 4.795454545454546, '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}}
Philip Roth through the Lens of Kepesh by Paul McDonald and Samantha Roden (review)

Fall 2017 the context that history provides. Moreover, Derrida is not the only theorist to emphasize the ghost in his writing. Freud and Judith Butler provide accounts of the ghost that might have been useful for Coughlan’s work. Despite these minor infelicities—or perhaps because of them—Coughlan’s work is an exemplary work of critical theory that will no doubt haunt scholarship of spectrality and the ghost for years to come. By using the figure of haunting to create a genealogy of contemporary American fiction, he has suggested a new way to think about historicity and the novel, as well as about the anxiety of influence experienced by even the strongest of our writers.