MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2004444125 · doi:10.1353/jeu.2014.0000

Advertising the Self: The Culture of Personality in E. B. White’s Charlotte’s Web

2014· article· en· W2004444125 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gabrielle Ceraldi

Notice bibliographique

RevueJeunesse Young People Texts Cultures · 2014
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueThemes in Literature Analysis
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésWhite (mutation)PersonalityCulture of the United StatesAppealSociologyAestheticsHistoryLiteratureArtPsychologyLawPsychoanalysisPolitical science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Advertising the Self:The Culture of Personality in E. B. White’s Charlotte’s Web Gabrielle Ceraldi (bio) “The only thing wrong with my big brother,” Sally proclaims in the stage musical You’re a Good Man, Charlie Brown, “is lack of confidence.” The hapless Charlie Brown, who appeared in the first Peanuts comic strip in 1950 (Keillor x), is an icon of mid-twentieth-century American culture. Although he is universally acknowledged to be “a good man,” his sister Sally implies that goodness is not enough; in addition to being virtuous, one must be confident. Published two years after the first Peanuts comic strip, E. B. White’s Charlotte’s Web reflects similar cultural concerns. In that novel, Wilbur must become famous in order to survive, leaving the intimacy of the barn for the spotlight of the County Fair. In that sense, White’s novel reflects the emergence of what Warren I. Susman has termed the “culture of personality”: “The older culture—Puritan-republican, producercapitalist—demanded something it called ‘character,’ which stressed moral qualities, whereas the newer culture insisted on ‘personality,’ which emphasized being liked and admired” (xxii). Published in 1973, Susman’s Culture as History reads this shift against the backdrop of twentieth-century urbanization. He locates the culture of character in the nineteenth century and links the rise of the industrialized United States in the opening decades of the twentieth century to the increasing dominance of personality over character in American culture.1 What Susman situates as a historical shift from an older culture of character to a newer culture of personality is often represented in children’s literature as a spatial shift from a small, intimate social environment to a more exposed and public one. Wilbur’s transition from barn to County Fair mimics [End Page 77] similar transitions in novels published both before and after Susman’s historical divide. Louisa May Alcott’s Little Women, for instance, features Meg’s movement from the intimacy of the March household to the glare of Vanity Fair, while L. Frank Baum’s The Wizard of Oz narrates Dorothy’s movement from a one-room house in Kansas to the urban environment of the Emerald City. Susman’s distinction provides a useful vocabulary for analyzing such novels precisely because they situate the cultures of character and personality as coexisting in tension with one another. While Alcott and Baum depict the culture of personality as something that can be rejected and escaped, White sets up a more complex relation in Charlotte’s Web as he acknowledges the need for confident self-promotion but interrogates the culture of personality, resurrecting aspects of the culture of character as a corrective to the competitive and egoistic norms of the modern marketplace. Meg’s Dilemma: Modesty vs. Self-Promotion The demands of the culture of character are aptly summed up in Little Women by Marmee, the authoritative matriarch of Alcott’s novel: “Learn to know and value the praise which is worth having,” she tells her daughter Meg, “and to excite the admiration of excellent people by being modest as well as pretty” (150). Marmee’s words are spoken to Meg upon her return from “Vanity Fair,” where she has allowed herself to be styled by the fashionable Belle Moffat, who “crimped and curled her hair, … polished her neck and arms with some fragrant powder, touched her lips with coralline salve” and “would have added ‘a soupçon of rouge’, if Meg had not rebelled” (139). The problem with Meg’s appearance is not that it bespeaks sexual availability or defies the social norms of her time; rather, this makeover is problematic for Alcott because it suggests that Meg is participating in a vulgar culture of self-promotion. Published in 1868, Alcott’s novel depicts the Moffats’ ballroom as an environment of public scrutiny that elicits a need for performance and artificiality, foreshadowing the traits Susman would later herald as hallmarks of a culture of personality. Marmee’s insistence on the need for modesty, rather than self-promotion, situates her within Susman’s notion of the culture of character. For Susman, the word “character” encapsulates a set of virtues that functioned in nineteenth-century...

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.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut 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: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,042
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,083

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0080,005
Communication savante0,0150,005
Science ouverte0,0000,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0080,002

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 Opus0,008
Tête enseignante GPT0,230
Écart entre enseignants0,222 · 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

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2014
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJeunesse Young People Texts CulturesMême sujetThemes in Literature AnalysisTravaux en français237 207