Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Reviewed by: Subterranean Worlds: A Critical Anthology Paul Alkon (bio) Peter Fitting, editor. Subterranean Worlds: A Critical Anthology Wesleyan University Press, 2004. xii, 226. US $29.95 The bizarre idea that our earth is hollow and perhaps populated inside has been put to effective imaginative use by writers ranging from Edgar Allan Poe and Jules Verne to Rudy Rucker. The notion of a hollow earth had respectability as a scientific hypothesis among seventeenth- and eighteenth-century geologists. In the early nineteenth century, when most scientists no longer gave that hypothesis much credence, the American naval exploring expedition of 1838–42, sponsored by an 1836 act of Congress, was initiated to test John Cleves Symmes's theory that the earth 'is hollow and habitable within.' A beneficial unintended consequence of this expedition, which soon turned to less trivial pursuits, was establishment of the Smithsonian Institute to house collected specimens. Even now, belief in a hollow earth oddly persists among a lunatic fringe of no influence but (like flying saucer and alien abduction believers) of some interest to sociologists, satirists, and students of abnormal psychology. A niche in the overlapping histories of literature and of science is occupied by books and articles about hollow-earth proponents, their theories, and the literary uses of such ideas by writers of science fiction, fantasy, and utopias. Peter Fitting's critical anthology contributes to existing scholarship on its topic by correcting errors in previous accounts and by making available a selection of relevant passages, many in his own translation to English. He concentrates on lesser-known and rare texts written before 1821 while also including judicious selections from more accessible works by such well-known later writers as Poe, Verne, Edward Bulwer-Lytton, and Edgar Rice Burroughs. Taking bits and pieces from larger works is seldom a good practice, but here it is very helpful. People concerned only with tracing from a literary or scientific angle passages explicitly dealing with the idea [End Page 462] of a hollow earth are spared the task of tracking down extremely rare books, while also in some cases having to translate them once found or having to winnow out a few pages from gigantic books otherwise irrelevant, such as Casanova's five-volume L'Icosameron. For each selection Fitting provides enough summary of the omitted material so that his readers can easily decide if for their purposes they ought to seek out and read the entire work. In this way Subterranean Worlds has the virtues without the usual tedium of an annotated bibliography. Moreover, Fitting's introductory survey and subsequent remarks introducing each selection comprise an accurate concise history of the scientific and literary uses of ideas about a hollow earth. There is also a comprehensive bibliography of primary and secondary material, including references to many helpful websites. Fitting's introductions are elegant critical assessments in jargon-free prose with nice touches of wry humour that enliven his account. All this makes Fitting's anthology an excellent starting-point for neophytes. For advanced scholars, Subterranean Worlds is indispensable because in it Fitting includes very scarce texts that have more often been misquoted, misunderstood, or ignored altogether than carefully read. He corrects previous errors while providing evidence that sets the record straight. This anthology is based on sound scholarship and original research on neglected texts, all dished up with impressive erudition and appealing enthusiasm for a topic that Fitting too modestly describes as, for himself at least, 'somewhere between a hobby and an obsession.' In fact, works in many genres about subterranean worlds are important for historians of geology, fantasy, science fiction, and utopias. Subterranean Worlds advances knowledge in ways that make it valuable in itself and also as a signal aid and stimulus to further research that can now build on Fitting's contribution to the history of ideas about a hollow earth. Paul Alkon Paul Alkon, Department of English, University of Southern California Copyright © 2007 University of Toronto Press Incorporated
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,016 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,008 | 0,009 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,006 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,005 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,021 | 0,006 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».