This social constructivist reading of the Book of Common Prayer is unusually slick in feel, and redolent of Judith Butler, but startling undertones of Stephen Greenblatt and Gloria Steinem combine to produce an unusual chocolaty aftereffect. The finish is reminiscent of slightly undercooked green beans, but with an intriguing aftertaste not unlike parboiled Foucault. Verdict: Revise and resubmit.
Although the multicolored hues of this new digital edition of Eliza Cook’s poetry promise a cherry-like taste, somewhat akin to Lacanian interpretations of Dickens, the actual result resembles nothing so much as a combination of Ouzo and petroleum, liberally seasoned with pizza, and with pulsing undertones of Pepto-Bismol. The mélange of digital humanities jargon and New Criticism in the body is liable to upset the stomach, rather like subpar Jungianism. Verdict: Reject.
This exceptionally fruity deconstruction of Emily Sarah Holt has been nicely aged in the author’s hard drive, and thus has pleasantly warm tones of circuit boards and Microsoft Office ’97, with a slightly tart finish. Close attention to Lollards provides structure to an article that, thanks to its potentially unsettling infusion of Derrida, might otherwise lack body. Verdict: Accept.
The nose promises a tangy tartness not unlike a sour gumdrop. But the body of this Foucauldian interpretation of Windows 8 is so acidic as to dissolve all tastebuds in the immediate vicinity. Unpleasant tones of spoiled milk in the finish merely clinch the final effect. May benefit from further aging. Verdict: Revise and resubmit.
As one might expect of a New Historicist analysis of late-Victorian hymnals, the nose combines rag paper, leather, and just a hint of active mold. It’s a little startling, then, to come across an aroma of overspiced cranberry juice in the footnotes, drifting across the more substantial body of dark chocolate (72% cacao), cinnamon, and neo-Darwinian theory. Strong notes of Lyotard in the finish make for an unexpectedly pleasant read. Verdict: Accept with minor revisions.
This article, written on a topic in which I specialize, starts off well, with enjoyable, inviting aromas of slightly overripe pears, well-aged Cheddar cheese, and a slight hint of triple-chocolate-chip cookies. But the article itself, which fails to reference my seminal contributions to the field, entirely lacks taste. The ill-judged mix of Derrida, Irigaray, and Bakhtin in the finish reminded me of unwashed socks. Read my work instead! Verdict: Reject.