The English Novel in History, 1700–1780 by John Richetti
Published 1999 · 107,451 words · about 8 hours at an average pace · Essays & Criticism
How hard is The English Novel in History, 1700–1780 to read?
The English Novel in History, 1700–1780 scores 57 out of 100 for difficulty on ReadingRate, making it quite demanding. The score is a weighted composite of nine measures: four of how hard the prose is to parse, five of how hard the meaning is to extract.
- Vocabulary: 68 out of 100
- Richetti deploys an extensive critical vocabulary drawn from literary theory, social history, and sociology: terms like 'sociohistorical,' 'hetero-social order,' 'fiscal-military state,' 'time-space distanciation' (from Giddens), and 'class-divided society' recur throughout. Eighteenth-century literary terms ('amatory novella,' 'pastourelle,' 'hypotaxis') appear alongside Marxist critical concepts ('reification,' 'ideological formation'). The vocabulary is demanding but not opaque — most terms are either defined in context or belong to recognizable academic registers.
- Sentence structure: 72 out of 100
- Richetti's sentences are characteristically long and architecturally intricate, often running 80–120 words with multiple subordinate clauses and embedded qualifications. Sentences like the extended analysis of Clarissa's epistolary strategy require the reader to hold several analytical threads simultaneously before the main clause resolves. The prose is Jamesian in its hypotaxis without approaching Jamesian extremity — closer to the density of Orientalism than to Absalom, Absalom!
- Abstraction: 72 out of 100
- The book operates at a high level of theoretical abstraction throughout, situating individual novels within frameworks drawn from Anthony Giddens's theory of modernity, Raymond Williams's Keywords, and Foucauldian discourse analysis. Yet abstract argument is consistently anchored in close textual readings — Pamela's jewels speech, Clarissa's letters, Matt Bramble's epistolary curmudgeonliness — so the theoretical and the concrete alternate rather than one dominating. This balancing act places it closer to Orientalism (66) than to the near-pure abstraction of Aesthetic Theory.
- Information density: 78 out of 100
- Each chapter layers historical context (Brewer on the fiscal-military state, Wrigley on urbanization), theoretical framework (Watt, Belsey, Giddens), and detailed close reading of multiple novels simultaneously. Secondary literature is cited continuously: in any given page, Richetti may reference Ian Watt, J.C.D. Clark, Raymond Williams, Ronald Paulson, and G.J. Barker-Benfield, while also quoting primary texts at length. The density is closer to War and Peace's narrative multiplicity than to the concentrated symbolic compression of Ulysses, but readers must track numerous arguments and positions at once.
How The English Novel in History, 1700–1780 is regarded
The English Novel in History, 1700–1780 holds a literary regard score of 38 out of 100, weighing its place in the canon, its critical reception, its influence on other writers, and the standing of its author. Regard is measured separately from difficulty: a demanding book is not necessarily an admired one.