MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2335972822 · doi:10.20361/g2kw31

What Pet Should I Get? by Dr. Seuss

2015· article· en· W2335972822 sur OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Erika Banski

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe Deakin Review of Children s Literature · 2015
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueThemes in Literature Analysis
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésStudioCartoonistReading (process)VocabularyLiteratureArtVisual artsHistoryArt historyPsychologyPoliticsLinguisticsPhilosophyLaw

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Seuss, Dr. What Pet Should I Get? New York: Random House Children’s Books, 2015. Print.This title will be of great interest to children’s literature specialists and researchers. The end notes tell us that in 1991, when Theodor Seuss Geisel (Dr. Seuss) died, the manuscript was left in a box of his studio projects. His widow, Audrey, and former secretary, Claudia Prescott, discovered it in the fall of 2013. The manuscript comprised line drawings to which pieces of paper containing potential text had been attached. In some instances, multiple versions of text had been taped on top of each other.Cathy Goldsmith, Seuss’s art director for the last eleven years of his life, surmises that Seuss began the book between 1958 and 1962. If she is correct, Seuss was by this time a very well established figure in children’s literature, having had success with such treasures as And to Think That I Saw it on Mulberry Street (1937); The 500 Hats of Bartholemew Cubbins (1938); Horton Hatches the Egg (1940); and How the Grinch Stole Christmas (1957).Seuss had ventured into writing for children after a very successful career as a cartoonist. (In particular, his design of advertisements had proven lucrative.) Beginning in the late 1950s, however, his artistic and literary talents were to be employed in yet another direction, the Beginner Books that Random House would publish to foster reading interest among children in their primary school years. The challenge was to create an interesting picture book using the controlled vocabulary (200 to 300 very basic words) of the “Dick, Jane and Baby Sally” variety of primer. Seuss was up for the challenge. Certainly, The Cat in the Hat, also 1957, had astonishing success in this regard. It may well be that What Pet Should I Get? was another such attempt. In any case, its story line is simple: two children in a pet store face the dilemma of selecting just one of the vast array of adorable possibilities.Goldsmith and the editors at Random House have done their best to create the book Seuss might have intended. They have made decisions about not only which lines of text might best suit his drawings, but also the color palette he might have selected, the position and nature of the font, and so forth. The end result is mixed in terms of its literary impact. The drawings are pure Seuss; his signature is all over them. The color palette is, arguably, what he might have chosen. The text, however, is dull. It never lifts from the page—possibly because Seuss felt he must restrict his vocabulary choices. THEN . . . I saw a new kind! And they were good, too! How could I pick one? Now what should we do? We could only pick one. That is what my dad said, Now how could I make up that mind in my head? (page 18, unnumbered) This is scarcely lively, engaging Seuss. When he was at his best, his writing maintained a consistent beat, a measured foot, and, often, an internal rhyme. He repeated, distorted and created words in the cause of a rollicking rhythm. Consider this stanza describing the fiendish Grinch in flight with the holiday loot that he has stolen from Whoville. Three thousand feet up! Up the side of Mt. Crumpit, He rode with his load to the tiptop to dump it! “Pooh-Pooh to the Whos!” he was grinch-ish-ly humming. “They’re finding out now that no Christmas is coming! “They’re just waking up! I know just what they’ll do! “Their mouths will hang open a minute or two “Then the Whos down in Who-ville will all cry BOO-HOO!The passage simply spirits the reader along. Sadly, What Pet Should I Get? does not contain this kind of writing. Still, we must treasure the manuscript. It gives us insight into the artist at work: what he envisioned, how he began, what he decreed to be finished or not. This early draft of What Pet Should I Get? was probably not quite what Seuss had hoped it would be. It was not perfect. It was not finished. He set it aside. The inescapable conclusion is that he, who gave much to his readers, demanded much of himself.Rating: Not applicable in this caseReviewer: Leslie AitkenLeslie Aitken’s long career in librarianship involved selection of children’s literature for school, public, special, and university collections. She is a former Curriculum Librarian at the University of Alberta.

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)0,008
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: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,061
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,205

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,008
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,002
Communication savante0,0030,004
Science ouverte0,0010,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,008
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0610,049

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 Opus0,022
Tête enseignante GPT0,274
Écart entre enseignants0,252 · 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
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
Publié2015
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe Deakin Review of Children s LiteratureMême sujetThemes in Literature AnalysisTravaux en français237 207