Conclusion

Abstract

This trilogy of volumes has important themes in common, shared between Samuel Johnson in Historical Context (2002), The Politics of Samuel Johnson (2012) and The Interpretation of Samuel Johnson (2012). They explore ways in which the interpretation of texts and their authors is confined as well as aided by conventional explanatory frameworks. In order to give shape to their research and to draw on the reassurance of professional consensus, writers often come to rely too much on simplifying paradigms; these paradigms then predetermine the outcomes of enquiry, prescribing what is allowed to count as relevant evidence and restricting the range of interpretation. The effects of such restrictions are seldom apparent to specialists within a field, who often largely share the same broad set of assumptions, but are clearer to those who come to that field from without.