MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1979386321 · doi:10.1353/mod.2011.0033

"Harpsichords Metallic Howl—": The Baroness Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven's Sound Poetry

2011· article· en· W1979386321 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

RevueModernism/modernity · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueCultural History and Identity Formation
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSound (geography)PoetryArtLiteratureArt historyAcousticsPhysics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

"Harpsichords Metallic Howl—":The Baroness Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven's Sound Poetry1 Irene Gammel (bio) and Suzanne Zelazo (bio) Ildrich mitzdonja—astatootchNinj—iffe kniek —Ninj—iffe kniek!Arr—karr —Arrkarr—barrKarrarr—barr —Arr —Arrkarr —MardarMar—dóórde—dar — Mardoodaar!!! —Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven, "Klink—Hratzvenga (Deathwail)"2 In March 1920, the era's leading avant-garde literary magazine, The Little Review, risked ridicule by publishing the controversial elegiac sound poem "Klink—Hratzvenga (Deathwail)" by the equally controversial German émigré poet and painter's model Baroness Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven (1874–1927; figure 1). The poem appeared alongside her German poem "Irrender König," a eulogy dedicated to Leopold von Freytag-Loringhoven, her husband who had committed suicide just a year earlier following his release from five years as a prisoner of war. The publication of the poem was a provocative gesture, given also that in the very same issue, poet and editor Evelyn Scott criticized the Baroness's "strange and beautiful obliviousness," writing: "I call the Baroness a naked oriental in the sex dance of her religion."3 It was the corporality of her verse, as well as her [End Page 255] Click for larger view View full resolution Fig. 1. Else Baroness von Freytag-Loringhoven, decorated photograph. The Little Review, September-December 1920, p. [4]. Digital photograph courtesy Modern Literature and Culture Research Centre, Ryerson University, Toronto. unbridled and uncensored emotionality, that aroused controversy and debate, but also fit squarely in the Dada aesthetic, as foreign editor John Rodker was the first to note in a mock review of "Klink—Hratzvenga (Deathwail)" in the magazine's July–August issue of 1920: "It is possible that Else von Freytag-Loringhoven is the first Dadaiste in New York and that the Little Review has discovered her."4 Corroborating Rodker's assessment in the spring of 1922, the magazine's coeditor Jane Heap proclaimed the Baroness, "the first American dada … the only one living anywhere who dresses dada, loves dada, lives dada," while adding provocatively: "we do intend to drop the baroness—right into the middle of the history of American poetry!"5 In fact, this is precisely what The Little Review had done since 1918, when the New York magazine embarked on its Dada course, featuring the Baroness's poetry prominently alongside the installments of James Joyce's Ulysses. Like no other's, the Baroness's corporeally-charged [End Page 256] poetry embodied the Dada motto of The Little Review: "Making no compromise with the public taste."6 A maverick who consistently confounded the boundaries of life and art, the Baroness was known for her remarkable do-it-yourself art aesthetics, adorning her body with objects and self-made costumes, while also producing mischievously titled assemblages made from junk she found in the streets. But it was her sound poetry that provided a touchstone that created a neat division between mainstream critics who dismissed the Baroness as insane, and her admirers who championed her precisely because they recognized in her practice the promise of a new corporeal language. Thus in the magazine's "Reader Critic" column (April 1920), New York writer Maxwell Bodenheim observed that "Else von Freytag Loringhoven's 'Klink—Hratzvenga' has the virtues of so many languages and the deficiencies of none, since she can create sounds for shades of meaning that have no dictionary equivalents." Chastising those who claim not to understand the Baroness's language, Bodenheim continues: Her poem is a masterpiece of bitter simplicity, from its choked beginning to its satiated "Vrmm." Now, all together, boys: come on with your "impossible to understand it," "there's nothing to understand," "charlatan," "she's insane," and other rotten tomatoes. At your best you prefer the complex, intellectual sterilities of a Dorothy Richardson. Any new simplicity confounds you.7 Bodenheim was on to something. A simple glance at "Klink—Hratzvenga (Deathwail)" as sound text conveys how the Baroness's made-up constructions sensually evoke representational analogues, and in this case, echo a mourning cry for a generation that survived World War I. In the epigraph above (and, indeed, throughout the entire poem), the dominant construction is the word "Mardoodaar," a recombination of German word "Mord...

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)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Études des sciences et des technologies, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,699
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,000
Communication savante0,0000,002
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,001

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 Opus0,136
Tête enseignante GPT0,224
Écart entre enseignants0,089 · 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