MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2092927307 · doi:10.1353/vcr.2013.0024

The York Retreat

2013· article· en· W2092927307 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Barry Edginton

Notice bibliographique

RevueVictorian review · 2013
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueTravel Writing and Literature
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésHistoryArchaeology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The York Retreat1 Barry Edginton (bio) On 29 April 1790, the Society of Friends in York was informed that Hannah Mills had died in the York Asylum. Although there was no evidence of mistreatment, the society was shocked. Later, at a gathering of the Tuke family, Anne, daughter-in-law of William Tuke, asked why there was no establishment for such persons in their society (Allott, 61–62). This question became a “guiding light” for William Tuke, who, at the age of sixty, set about to reform the treatment of insanity. In 1791, William Tuke presented his ideas for the treatment of the insane to the quarterly meeting of the York Society of Friends. Although he met considerable opposition, especially from his wife, Esther, he was allowed, according to the Quaker tradition, to develop his ideas.2 The two influences affecting Tuke’s ability to carry on the project of asylum reform came from his Quaker beliefs. First, he acknowledged that the force of goodness flowed through him and, second, that this “inner light” enveloped every person. This idea of an “inner light” affected the way Tuke thought about insanity. He thought that goodness, reason, and faith were within everyone and that madness could be remedied not only by kindness but also by a proper atmosphere and environment. Tuke would “profess to do little more than assist Nature, in the performance of her own cure” (Stewart 8). Tuke’s moral treatment favoured a therapeutic environment in which “sane” ideas and behaviours were encoded in a design that would transform the actions of its patients. “The curative power of pure, romantic nature itself … was called into service. Nature was to heal insanity like all the other problems caused by chaotic social progress” (Doerner 80). The question of how space could be constructed to reflect a calm within the patient became a constant topic in the building and maintenance of The Retreat. The organization and assistance of the Quaker community as a group whose “culture of opposition was instrumental in the production of early modern subjectivity” (Pointon 398) became the social basis of his support. Tuke, as with all Quakers, took representational modes of living seriously. Just as the Quaker meeting house extended their beliefs about spatial organization to design, so too the design of The Retreat would privilege sight, sound, and smell in an “environment” of treatment. The design incorporated the image of a healthy life and the material means by which it was to be achieved. Theirs was an image of insanity that “stressed the same mind / body unity in their medical treatment as they did in their own personal worship” (Stewart 5). Even the name “The Retreat” was adopted to convey the image that the institution was to be used for the reparation and safety of the body and the mind. Design Treatment would not follow the regimen of contemporary medical knowledge, and, in the correspondence between Tuke and John Bevans, there is no [End Page 9] information, either prior to construction or during building, to show that either had any knowledge of the current ideas and debates concerning the treatment or cause of insanity. Rather, the building would convey healthful discipline and moral qualities. It would not be a static space but rather a therapeutic instrument assisting in healing (see Edginton, “Well-Ordered”). The task for Tuke and Bevans was to represent moral treatment in a built form. While many public asylum designs failed in their attempts to create a healthful environment for treatment because of overcrowding or lack of funding (Digby 9), The Retreat retained the vision of Tuke and Bevans. The Visitors of the Commission in Lunacy (8 March 1873) observed this almost eighty years later: “We are glad that attention continues to be given to the important object of [keeping] the interior of the Hospital cheerful and comfortable in aspects which it calculated to produce a beneficial affect upon the inmates” (Commissioners in Lunacy np). One of the distinct features of The Retreat is its attachment to the natural landscape. The placement of the building outside the city as well as its aspect and landscaping were seen as appropriate measures used to treat those...

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 candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: Autre
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,527
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

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)0,0040,002

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 Opus0,016
Tête enseignante GPT0,205
Écart entre enseignants0,188 · 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; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreAutre

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

En bref

Citations1
Publié2013
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueVictorian reviewMême sujetTravel Writing and LiteratureTravaux en français237 207