MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3016245556 · doi:10.1353/vpr.2020.0014

From a Photograph: Authenticity, Science and the Periodical Press, 1870–1890 by Geoffrey Belknap, and: Replication in the Long Nineteenth Century: Re-makings and Reproductions ed. by Julie Codell and Linda K. Hughes

2020· article· en· W3016245556 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Helena Goodwyn

Notice bibliographique

RevueVictorian periodicals review · 2020
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueHistory of Science and Medicine
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésArt historyHistoryPortraitReading (process)ClassicsArtLawPolitical science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: From a Photograph: Authenticity, Science and the Periodical Press, 1870–1890 by Geoffrey Belknap, and: Replication in the Long Nineteenth Century: Re-makings and Reproductions ed. by Julie Codell and Linda K. Hughes Helena Goodwyn (bio) Geoffrey Belknap, From a Photograph: Authenticity, Science and the Periodical Press, 1870–1890 (London: Bloomsbury, 2016), pp. xix + 268, £90 cloth, £28.99 paperback. Julie Codell and Linda K. Hughes, eds., Replication in the Long Nineteenth Century: Re-makings and Reproductions (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2018), pp. x + 310, £80/$125 cloth. As the title of Geoffrey Belknap's From a Photograph: Authenticity, Science and the Periodical Press, 1870–1890 suggests, this volume has the capacity to make a significant contribution to the field of nineteenth-century periodical studies. While the investigation focuses primarily on the Graphic, Nature, and the Astronomical Register, many other periodicals also feature, such as the Aberdeen Weekly Journal, English Mechanic, Knowledge, Leisure Hour, the Manchester Times, and Punch, to name but a few. Belknap contends that "reading" photographs published in the periodical press between 1870 and 1890 was a "process of disentangling layers of reproduction" that ultimately sought to ask whether a photograph could be deemed "trustworthy" (2, 4). Chapter one focuses on the first two decades of the Graphic, a weekly periodical launched in 1869 (it became the Daily Graphic in 1890) and the main rival to the Illustrated London News. Belknap examines portraits, foreign landscapes, and objects depicted in the pages of the Graphic and the Illustrated London News, establishing the importance of the phrase "from a photograph" in the Graphic's claim to greater representative accuracy (39). Chapter two focuses on the scientific press and its use of the photograph to "authenticate [End Page 159] observational data" (86). This chapter further shows how, prior to 1890, scientific periodicals had to map carefully the stages of translation from photograph to illustration in order for the photographic source to have the desired validity-enhancing effect. Chapter three positions photography not only as a technology of representation but also of communication, affecting understandings of space, distance, and time. Developing this argument further in a chapter titled "Photographing the Invisible: The Periodical and the Reproduction of the Instant," Belknap documents the photograph's role in stabilizing the "instant," a time concept that has significant implications for the history of the periodical as well. Concluding his study, Belknap discusses the politics of reproduction inherent to any examination of photography in the nineteenth-century periodical press. He makes the case for the history of photography and periodical journalism as inextricably bound together in the process of establishing printed media as stable depositories of "true" meaning; more specifically he demonstrates their dual importance to the establishment of science as a subject that is authenticated by replication. From a Photograph provides a useful intervention in complicating the many ways in which we approach the field of nineteenth-century periodical studies. Julie Codell and Linda K. Hughes's edited collection, Replication in the Long Nineteenth Century: Re-makings and Reproductions, is a quintessentially interdisciplinary set of essays that engages the many meanings of the term "replication" across the long nineteenth century. In their introduction to the collection, Codell and Hughes emphasise not only the various and often complex meanings of replication but also the shifting cultural value attached to the replica. They highlight the way the nineteenth-century replica "disrupted" Romantic understandings of originality and genius before modernism demanded a turn to the small, the avant garde, and the exclusive (14). Codell and Hughes remind us that postmodernism and its attendant theorists, particularly Jean Baudrillard, Jacques Derrida, and Jean-François Lyotard, in some ways reprivileged the replica or, at the very least, questioned whether there could ever be such a thing as the original. This has interesting implications. If Western culture exists on a pendulum of taste that alternates between denigrating and celebrating the concept of the replica, our current state of post-postmodernism or post-humanism (as some critical voices declare it) may be approaching a move against the reproduction, the mass produced, and the virtual. In "The Failure of Replication in Nineteenth-Century Literature: Why It All Just Comes Out...

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)0,006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,996
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,237

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,006
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0030,006
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0040,005
Communication savante0,0080,009
Science ouverte0,0010,004
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,004
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0710,027

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 Opus0,026
Tête enseignante GPT0,259
Écart entre enseignants0,233 · 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.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

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
Publié2020
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueVictorian periodicals reviewMême sujetHistory of Science and MedicineTravaux en français237 207