{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.012477718360071301, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.198717948717949, '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}}
Public Humanities' (Victorian) Culture Problem

Questioning scholars who claim that the public humanities are the future of the humanities, this article argues that contemporary public humanities initiatives reproduce Victorian cultural logics by reinforcing divisions between popular and national culture, defining democracy through the state and state institutions and maintaining social inequality while perpetuating imperialism. It contends that like Victorian cultural critics, especially Matthew Arnold and John Stuart Mill, who differentiate between culture and public culture in order to exclude particular social groups from democratic participation, these contemporary programs define culture institutionally in order to secure the authority of the university. Instead of changing the principle of knowledge or cultural authority, the public humanities strengthen and legitimate established power relations as they exclude minority cultural groups. Warning against channelling new energy into old forms, the article concludes by focusing on public culture as a mode of relation rather than an institutional form.