MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2039237544 · doi:10.1353/ecf.2006.0070

Filming Tourism, Portraying Pemberley

2006· article· en· W2039237544 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Linda Troost

Notice bibliographique

RevueEighteenth-Century Fiction · 2006
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueSport and Mega-Event Impacts
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésWrightPrideArt historyTourismPerformance artHospitalityEntertainmentArtFirthHistorySociologyVisual artsLaw

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Filming Tourism, Portraying Pemberley Linda V. Troost (bio) The past quarter-century has seen three notable film productions of Jane Austen's novel Pride and Prejudice (1813). In 1979, Fay Weldon's screenplay for the BBC featured Elizabeth Garvie and David Rintoul as Elizabeth Bennet and Mr Darcy.1 In 1995, Andrew Davies's adaptation for the BBC in collaboration with A&E, The Arts and Entertainment Network, made superstars of Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle. In 2005, Deborah Moggach (assisted by Emma Thompson) adapted the novel for director Joe Wright and Working Title Films, with Matthew Macfadyen and Keira Knightley in the lead roles. All three versions depict Elizabeth Bennet's excursion to Derbyshire and her visit to Darcy's ancestral home, but all three treat the pivotal moment differently. This article examines the Pemberley sequence in these three adaptations as well as in the novel to see how the touristic moment can be used to reveal a character's understanding of him/herself and others, as well as the reader/viewer's relationship with the past. Architectural historian Adrian Tinniswood argues that a visit to a country house is not about finding "inner truth" or "historical reality"; [End Page 477] instead, "it is about us, here, now, and our ambivalent relationship with the past. The country house is a cluster of images, with as much to say about contemporary society as it has about what has gone before." 2 Likewise, the way country-house tourism is depicted in art and literature is a direct commentary upon that relationship at a specific temporal moment, and, since Austen's time, that relationship has changed. In the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, the tourist had a tenuous connection to the past. Country-house tourism focused largely on pragmatic concerns of the current day: economics and power, not history. Yet one sees in a novel such as Pride and Prejudice another strain—the romantic—in which the tourist eschews the works of mankind and contemplates mountains, lakes, or even ruined abbeys in solitude. 3 For this second group of tourists, the past was also of minimal interest: only the sublime or the timeless mattered. Modern-day tourism retains romantic tourism with regard to natural attractions but changes its focus with regard to country-house visiting. The tourist wishes to connect with the past, to see history. Since the early 1990s, heritage tourism has become an important niche market in Britain, perhaps riding on the success of celebrated BBC productions. All three versions of Pride and Prejudice reveal heritage values, but the relationship each implies about our connection to the past has altered in the years between them, a change reflected in actual heritage tourism, not just filmic representations of it. Elizabeth views Pemberley from her social position, and the property represents the present, and eventually her future as its mistress. We too view Pemberley from a specific social perspective, but we can find a way to take possession of it, and, eventually, our past. Our changing cultural positions, however, require various modes of taking possession as each successive adaptation of Pride and Prejudice demonstrates. Tourism is nothing new, and it was often about more than filling time. In the Middle Ages, tourists—pilgrims—visited holy shrines to commune with saints. 4 After the Protestant Reformation in England, secular shrines took their places: the homes of the rich, famous, and [End Page 478] powerful. 5 The aristocrat's country seat was not simply a home; it was his principal source of income and the economy of his part of the world. A visit to a great house, therefore, was a way of seeing England's economic power and a way to come in contact with its political leaders. 6 During the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, the new Whig ruling class began to build—or rebuild—grand houses that attracted a significant tourist trade: Blenheim Palace, seat of the Duke of Marlborough; Chatsworth, home of the Duke of Devonshire; Castle Howard, home of the Earl of Carlisle. 7 Even the wealthy middle class got into the act: Stourhead and Osterley Park House were built by the heads of London banking families...

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)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,030
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,060

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0040,002
Communication savante0,0030,002
Science ouverte0,0000,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0150,001

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 Opus0,013
Tête enseignante GPT0,266
Écart entre enseignants0,253 · 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'étudeQualitatif
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

Citations7
Publié2006
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEighteenth-Century FictionMême sujetSport and Mega-Event ImpactsTravaux en français237 207