MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1451412144 · doi:10.1353/srm.2012.0021

Organising Poetry: The Coleridge Circle, 1790–1798 by David Fairer

2012· article· en· W1451412144 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueStudies in Romanticism · 2012
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueScottish History and National Identity
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDidacticismIdeologyRomanticismLiteraturePoetryPoliticsAestheticsHumanismPhilosophySociologyArtLawPolitical scienceTheology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BOOK REVIEWS 455 Poetry” puts it, but for the Romantics it is not because poetry has a palpa­ ble design upon its reader. Rather, “poetic thought” now shares a close in­ timacy with ideology, a condition that can in fact change—in the sense of reform—minds. As Dull7 expounds the critical controversy that has led to some of our confusion over the place of didacticism in Romanticism, he also betrays his own frustration over our current critical moment, a strain that creeps to the surface from time to time throughout this book and that might have been best left out. Discussing political didacticism, he notes that “modern critics are liable to excuse or even commend in a politically moti­ vated text a level of didacticism they might condemn in a morally didactic work—especially if the political views happen to coincide with their own. Indeed, evidence of ideological engagement, overt or covert, in a Roman­ tic text has become for many scholars a virtual precondition of critical ap­ proval, and Romanticism (the British variety at least) is now studied less for its intermittent aspirations to aesthetic autonomy than for its self-conscious politicization ofliterature” (98). There are no footnotes here, and no direct engagement with any critic in particular. Duff—and his important study— ought to be well beyond such angry gestures, for the strength of his text and his research rise far above the straw-figure smugness and self-congratu­ lating benightedness that so exasperates him. The anger that bubbles to the surface in the midst of his patient explanations is a distraction not only be­ cause it battles phantoms, but because the primary point of his text is to find a clear path through the multiple confusions prepared by the Roman­ tics themselves. The domain of current Romantic critics is more complex than Duff seems to grant. If there are some among us who would remake the world in the image of their own self-complacency, let them be and get on with it. This is a minor complaint about an otherwise judicious and impressive book. Duff lays bare the various tangles in which Romanticism meets genre. It is well worth dallying in these engaging knots, for they expose the strength as well as the novelty of Romantic literature. Karen Weisnran University of Toronto David Fairer. Organising Poetry: The Coleridge Circle, 17QO—I/Q8. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. Pp. xiv+345. $99.00. Romantic scholarship continues to grapple with the organic model of de­ velopment, born of nineteenth-century German idealism, which became so intimately associated with Coleridge. Although the idealist model has SiR, 51 (Fall 2012) 456 BOOK KEVIEWS been ably challenged from various quarters, it nevertheless generates regu­ lar critical engagement. David Fairer’s Organising Poetry complements a sizeable body ofscholarship in this vein, including Charles Armstrong’s Ro­ mantic Organicism: From Idealist Origins to Ambivalent Afterlife (Palgrave, 2003); Idealism without Absolutes: Philosophy and Romantic Culture, edited by Tilottama Rajan and Arkady Plotnitsky (SUNY Albany, 2004); and Life: Organic Form and Romanticism (Yale, 2009) by Denise Cligante, whose turn to life science engages organicism in a fresh way. Because Coleridge so fully espoused German idealism, the critical heritage has held him up as one of its exemplars. Yet this could only occur, argues Fairer, by privileging the mature poet over the Coleridge of the 1790s. As Fairer sees it, the tension between the post-1801 visionary and his younger, naive, alter ego parallels irreconcilable definitions of the organic: that which derives from the ideal­ ist model and that which preceded it—an earlier conception posited by Locke and native to eighteenth-century England. Pursuing that earlier tra­ dition, Fairer’s often brilliant analysis takes us on a path through the tillage of eighteenth-century poetic traditions and historical conceptions, includ­ ing the fecundity ofthe georgic—the poetic sibling ofLockean organicism. In the first three chapters of the book, Fairer establishes the theoretical underpinning for subsequent analysis. The opening chapter’s treatment of the tradition handed down by mid-twentieth-century giants like M. H. Abrams and Morse Peckham is too strong, succinct, and important not to be a candidate for required reading in courses...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,344
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,615

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,084
Tête enseignante GPT0,312
Écart entre enseignants0,229 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle