For my ongoing project on the history of emotions in the novel, I thought I’d post a first pass of emotion networks that appear in the Romantic Novel versus the Postwar Novel. The networks are based on emotion words that occur in the same sentence. The more often emotions appear in the same sentence the stronger their connections, the closer they will appear. The size of the word is an indication of the number of different emotion words that each word connects with.
The initial finding of interest here is the way the postwar network is both less dense and also more heterogeneous (what network scientists would call a decline of assortativity). The emotional intensity of the novel has declined, but the emotional complexity has arguably increased. Emotion words are not grouping quite as strongly with words in their own emotions. The hypothesis would be that there is more emotional conflict happening at the sentence level of the novel as it appears in the second half of the twentieth century.
These networks represent small sets of around 40 novels each. I am taking a second pass on larger data sets and am curious if the results hold. I will also be calculating the actual measures of things like density and assortativity to better understand the extent of this shift. The next step will be going in and finding out what it means when different kinds of emotion words appear in sentences together. What is being captured here?
I thought these graphs give a nice initial idea of the ways in which the emotional networks of the novel have changed over the course of two centuries.
I have been increasingly focusing on the history of feeling in the novel, especially as a way of differentiating feeling from sentiment analysis. Emotions aren’t the same as sentiments, as they are commonly defined today (and usually only in binary fashion — happy/unhappy or positive/negative). Instead, I was interested in the ways different kinds of emotions change as the novel evolves and what kinds of configurations one might find — the way words for sadness move and reposition in relation to words for joy or love or even anger.
I’m still working on this, but I did want to share an interesting insight about the overall decline of emotionality in the novel. While I know we associate Romanticism with the pathetic and the bathetic, I was still surprised at how much the vocabulary of emotions declined as a percentage of words within the novel overall. We have indeed gotten colder — at least the list of canonical novels has.
Things really fall off the charts if you compare contemporary novels with the novel of the long nineteenth century. These are novels published between 2012-2014 and reviewed in the NY Times Book Review — suggesting that they have some kind of highbrow (but not too high) identity. Here are the different averages for all emotions in the novel:
19C Novel = 0.015117854
Contemporary Novel = 0.008936122
Look again at those numbers. The first one isn’t twice as much. It’s 17x as much. The contemporary novel is seventeen times less defined by a vocabulary of feelings than its predecessors of the long nineteenth century (1770-1930). That’s insane (and usually grounds for suspecting the data is off, but I keep checking it…Keep in mind too that the words are coming from a contemporary thesaurus). The Young Adult novel interestingly gets closer (avg = 0.01030404), suggesting an answer as to where the novel’s feelings are hiding these days.
Last, for the Romanticists out there, I was intrigued by the centrality of anger to the Romantic period, where most of the highest scoring angry novels are located during this period. So things Romantic are not just more emotional, but also more volatile, fitting for a period of revolutionary and post-revolutionary unrest.
I’m still wondering where all those feelings went for the adults?