This article contributes to recent debates on anonymous publication, authorship, and attribution. Following early modern examples from Shakespeare, Erasmus, Montaigne, and others, I argue that central to debates on anonymity is the relation between the known and the unknown. I propose that the drive towards attribution runs the risk of explaining away issues surrounding anonymous publication too easily and that, from the perspective of ethics as defined by Lévinas, Derrida, and DIanchot, there is a need to develop a critical response to anonymity that maintains a text's capacity for 'strangeness' rather than making it reassuringly familiar.
|Number of pages||14|
|Journal||Modern Language Review|
|Publication status||Published - Apr 2008|