MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2058868701 · doi:10.1353/esc.2011.0024

Frye and Longinus

2011· article· en· W2058868701 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Robert D. Denham

Notice bibliographique

RevueEnglish studies in Canada · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueShort Stories in Global Literature
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSublimeTheme (computing)Rhetorical questionLiteraturePoetryCriticismCharacter (mathematics)PhilosophyArtHistoryArt history

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Frye and Longinus Robert D. Denham (bio) There he stood on the renewing crags of time, stood on the ringed summit of the sublime universe. Ferenc Juhász The earliest reference to Longinus in Frye's work is in a 1953 review of books by Allen Tate, Herbert Read, and Francis Fergusson, where he says that the theme of Read's The True Voice of Feeling "is essentially the same as the problem of ecstasis or 'transport' in Longinus," adding that this "problem" had been "ably handled" by Tate. He is referring to Tate's "Longinus and the 'New Criticism'" from a collection of Tate's essays, The Forlorn Demon (1953). About the same time, Frye writes this somewhat riddling entry in Notebook 37: "Re the first lecture: sublime process as beautiful product (Longinus on sublime). Sublime includes self-identification (process). Interest in a convention ... more congenial to the aesthetic, especially in paradoxical forms of it like T. E. Hulme's. The rhetorical relation expects to instruct & delight" (CW 23:126).1 The "first lecture" is most [End Page 87] likely a reference to the first address Frye gave at Princeton in 1954. Invited by E. D. H. Johnson of the Special Programs in Humanities at Princeton to institute a new series, known as the Class of 1932 Lectures, Frye gave four talks at Princeton in 1954: "The Critic and His Public," "Symbols of Fact and Fiction," "The Language of Poetry," and "Myth and Society" (Ayre 244). In his preface to Anatomy of Criticism, he notes that much of the substance of the book came from his Princeton lectures. In any event, Frye seems intent on exploring the connection between Longinus' emphasis on the sublime process and the Aristotelian "aesthetic" approach. The opposition between "convention" and "rhetorical relation" is apparently an opposition between final and instrumental value: the aesthetic needs no justification beyond itself, whereas rhetoric is concerned with the ways and means of instruction and delight. The reference to Hulme seems to be that his call for formal restraint and concrete imagery ("dry hardness"), along with his attacks on Romanticism, means he is a "classicist" and does not belong to the Longinian camp. The notebook entry on "the first lecture" suggests that in his thinking about the beginning of the Anatomy Frye has in mind two approaches the critic might take to literature, one emphasizing process and the other product. And in fact this opposition turns up at the end of the Anatomy's first essay where Frye expands on the meaning of the terms "fictional" and "thematic" in his theory of modes. A "fictional" work for Frye is one that has internal characters, as in novels, epics, and plays. A "thematic" work is one in which there are no characters involved except the author and the reader, as in lyrics and essays, or in which the internal characters are subordinated to the writer's argument, as in allegories and parables. The foundational category in the first essay is Aristotle's ethos, or, rather, Frye's expansion of this term: even though the meaning of "character" in "fictional" works differs from its meaning in "thematic" works, ethos is the constant term in both. Here is the passage at the end of the first essay: The difference in emphasis that we have described as fictional and thematic corresponds to a distinction between two views of literature that has run all through the history of criticism. These two views are the aesthetic and the creative, the Aristotelian and the Longinian, the view of literature as product and the view of literature as process. For Aristotle, the poem is a techne or aesthetic artefact: he is, as a critic, mainly interested in the more objective fictional forms, and his central conception is catharsis. Catharsis implies the detachment of the spectator, both from the work of art itself and from the author. The [End Page 88] phrase "aesthetic distance" is generally accepted now in criticism, but it is almost a tautology: wherever there is aesthetic apprehension there is emotional and intellectual detachment. The principles of catharsis in other fictional forms than tragedy, such as comedy or satire, were not worked out by Aristotle...

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 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 candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,855
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,402

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 technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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 Opus0,058
Tête enseignante GPT0,222
Écart entre enseignants0,164 · 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 tête enseignante, 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
Publié2011
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEnglish studies in CanadaMême sujetShort Stories in Global LiteratureTravaux en français237 207