MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2035622819 · doi:10.1353/utq.2007.0233

Northrop Frye's Writings on the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries. Volume 17 of Collected Works of Northrop Frye (review)

2007· article· en· W2035622819 sur OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Trevor Ross

Notice bibliographique

RevueUniversity of Toronto Quarterly · 2007
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueShort Stories in Global Literature
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPeriod (music)HistorySensibilityLiteratureArgument (complex analysis)CitationClassicsArt historyArtLawAesthetics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Northrop Frye’s Writings on the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries. Volume 17 of Collected Works of Northrop Frye Trevor Ross (bio) Northrop Frye. Northrop Frye’s Writings on the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries. Volume 17 of Collected Works of Northrop Frye. Edited by Imre Salusinszky University of Toronto Press. xli, 416. $85.00 The title of this volume, number 17 in the collected edition of Frye's works, is somewhat misleading. The volume omits all of Frye's writings on Blake, which appear elsewhere in the edition. At the same time, it contains a number of items that are only indirectly about the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries: student reviews of contemporary performances of Gilbert and Sullivan, a later review of a cbc radio adaptation of Goethe's Egmont, and a citation for an honorary degree given to Coleridge scholar and department colleague Kathleen Coburn. The title may also lead one to think Frye wrote about as much on the eighteenth century as the nineteenth. Yet with the exception of his work on Blake, Frye spent little time on the eighteenth century and almost none on the first half of the period. He did produce one masterful synoptic essay, 'Towards Defining an Age of Sensibility,' from 1956, but did not return in any sustained way to the period until he was invited thirty-five years later to expand his original argument for a special issue of Eighteenth-Century Studies devoted to his work. That essay and its sequel are included in the present volume but, inexplicably, Frye's brief response to the special issue has been left out; this, despite the fact that the response offers enough interesting admissions on Frye's part about his working methods that the editor quotes from it three times in his introduction. The nineteenth-century section of the volume is anchored by two substantial essays on Dickinson and Dickens, essays justly celebrated in their time and now held up by Imre Salusinszky as counter-evidence to the view that 'Frye's archetypal method can only lead to pigeonholing.' One would think it is rather late in the day for Salusinszky to be defending Frye from this old charge. More importantly, these essays are not the most significant in the volume in terms of what they tell us about the development of Frye's thinking. Frye's approach and assumptions stayed remarkably consistent throughout his career. But he did make one crucial adjustment to his criticism, beginning in his 1963 English Institute essay on Romanticism, 'The Drunken Boat,' and then in its reincarnation five years later as a short book, A Study of English Romanticism, both of which are here reprinted in full. These writings present Frye taking a cultural turn, moving out from the genre-based system he'd elaborated in the Anatomy of Criticism towards a broader consideration of the history of beliefs and images. The Romantics, Frye argued, were the first generation of poets to realize that 'civilization was a purely human artifact,' whose myths were theirs to create rather than merely repeat, and this realization led them to revolutionize 'the language of poetic mythology.' In the Anatomy Frye had addressed the role of change in literary history, but with this later [End Page 576] argument he was attempting more definitively to identify the causes of change and in doing so to add a temporal dimension to his system's spatial charting of the literary cosmos. The attempt had become necessary after it seemed as if the Anatomy had left little unmapped, but it was not altogether successful. Frye was reluctant to step far outside the literary cosmos or to deal with changes whose causes lay beyond the history of ideas. The result was an argument where Frye's usual brilliant generalizations about literature were displaced by an awkward straining after large explanations that could seem at once gnomic and bathetic: 'The arts illustrate the form of the world that man is trying to create out of the world he is in.' A Study of English Romanticism would be Frye's least-reviewed book and would have negligible impact on the field. It may not have signalled a decline in Frye...

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)0,004
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: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,051
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,101

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0040,005
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,002
Communication savante0,0020,003
Science ouverte0,0010,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0260,008

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 Opus0,007
Tête enseignante GPT0,187
Écart entre enseignants0,180 · 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
GenreSynthèse

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
Publié2007
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueUniversity of Toronto Quarterly→Même sujetShort Stories in Global Literature→Travaux en français237 207→