MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2401471252 · doi:10.1353/hpn.2016.0056

Heroic Forms: Cervantes and the Literature of War by Stephen Rupp

2016· article· en· W2401471252 sur OpenAlex
Eduardo Guerrero

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueHispania · 2016
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueEarly Modern Spanish Literature
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésLiteratureRomanceHistory of literatureScholarshipLiterary criticismHistoryInterpretation (philosophy)Literary theoryPhilosophyArtLawLinguistics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Heroic Forms: Cervantes and the Literature of War by Stephen Rupp Eduardo Olid Guerrero Rupp, Stephen. Heroic Forms: Cervantes and the Literature of War. Toronto: Toronto UP, 2014. Pp. 251. ISBN 978-1-4426-4912-5 Stephen Rupp informs us that Heroic Forms: Cervantes and the Literature of War centers on Cervantes’s “presentation of warfare and soldiers’ lives in a range of literary genres, both the canonical kinds explicated in Renaissance literary theory and such non-official forms as romance and picaresque fiction” (xi). In general, Rupp’s readings of Cervantes’s works demonstrate a keen eye for generic motifs, classical, Renaissance, and even contemporary intertextualities. Even though there is no rationale for the specific selection of texts and scenes, each of them is discussed at length; most often with special attention given to their relationship with the literary genres with which they have been traditionally associated. Most scholars now accept and assume Cervantes’s manipulation of a multiplicity of literary genres. Rupp challenges and also confirms this perception in relation to war and heroism, and expands his analysis to other literary influences, theories, and interpretations. He manages an interesting theoretical framework, quoting classical thinkers and contemporary theorists, and incorporating them without forcing the interpretation. However, for a book published in 2014, there is a lack of updated sources available (2009–12) on the topic. Perhaps due to the excessive focus on the position of Cervantes’s works within contemporary theory of literary genres, recent bibliography and Spanish scholarship on the topic of early modern war is not well represented (e.g., Estudios sobre cultura, guerra y política en la corona de Castilla: Siglos XIV–XVII by Fernando Castillo Cáceres, or La violencia en el mundo hispánico en el Siglo de Oro by Juan Manuel Escudero y Victoriano Roncero). Furthermore, in this monograph Rupp’s previous work comparing English and Spanish theatre, and his study on Calderón de la Barca and the anti-Machiavellian tradition, would have been useful to complete [End Page 352] his criticism. Machiavelli’s influence seems almost unavoidable not only with Il Principe, but even more with Dell’arte della guerra (1521), for it was a well-known treaty at the time (with an earlier Spanish version by Diego Salazar titled Tratado de re militari in 1536). The first chapter, titled “Warriors: Epic and Tragedy” dedicated to La Numancia, is his best. Rupp stresses that his main focus is to study how this play “combines the patterns of epic and tragedy to examine the challenges of heroic conduct in siege warfare and the instability of the rewards of fame and glory that classical epic offers to its exemplary warriors” (27). His conclusion on how this play looks for an epic catharsis in its Spanish audience by contrasting the practicality of military strategy is very convincing. Still, it would have been interesting to establish parallelism with two well-known samples: Lope de Vega’s El asalto de Mastrique (1579), and Calderón de la Barca’s El sitio de Breda (1640). Chapter 2, “Defenders: Pastoral and Satire,” examines three episodes in Don Quixote. The first one is the trip that the knight and his squire make to El Toboso looking for Dulcinea (DQ II). For Rupp, it is a good sample of Don Quixote’s concern with his legacy and his idea of reaching fame through military deeds. In the second selection that explores the attack on the sheep flocks transformed into two armies by Don Quixote, Rupp sees it as an intrusion of epic violence into pastoral peace (DQ I). Here is Rupp’s only mention of the comedian type of the miles gloriosus that arguably deserved its own subchapter in Heroic Forms. Rupp’s study of Don Quixote’s description of the two armies, with references to Ariosto’s Orlando furioso is very rewarding and insightful. The chapter ends exploring the adventure of the braying regidores and their mocking neighbors (DQ II). Once more, Rupp shows a fine eye for critical analysis when he centers his argument on the concept of casus belli, referring to Francisco de Vitoria’s On the Law of War (1539), to conclude...

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.

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: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,867
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,646

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)0,0010,000

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 Opus0,006
Tête enseignante GPT0,178
Écart entre enseignants0,172 · 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