MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3040329924 · doi:10.2979/victorianstudies.62.2.02

Angry Women and the Dramatic Monologue

2020· article· en· W3040329924 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Grégory, Harrington

Notice bibliographique

RevueVictorian Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueGender, Feminism, and Media
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésAngerImpeachmentLawSupreme courtSociologyCriminologyPsychologyPolitical scienceSocial psychologyPolitics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Angry Women and the Dramatic Monologue Melissa Valiska Gregory (bio) and Emily Harrington (bio) "I was actually, to be honest, angry with him, and you know, I hate to say it, but often when women show anger, it's not fully appreciated. It's often, you know, pushed onto emotional issues perhaps, or deflected onto other people." ("Transcript: Fiona Hill") Fiona Hill, former Russia expert for the National Security Council, uttered these words while testifying before the U. S. Congress in public impeachment hearings. It was startling to hear these words while working on this introduction, not only because each of these essays attests to the longstanding truth of Hill's insight, but also because the event that inspired us to organize this roundtable over a year ago was another congressional hearing: Christine Blasey Ford's testimony about her sexual assault by Brett Kavanaugh, who was later confirmed to the U. S. Supreme Court. As Lesley Goodman points out in her essay in this cluster, while Kavanaugh erupted in anger in his own testimony in response to the accusations, Ford was careful, measured, and considered in her speech. She must have known that were she to express anger at Kavanaugh, it would not have been, in Hill's word, "appreciated." As we watched these hearings, we were angry. Angry on Dr. Ford's behalf, on behalf of all victims of sexual violence, and against the culture that underwrites such violence and invalidates women's emotional responses to it. At the same time, we had been hearing Rebecca Traister promote her new book Good and Mad: The [End Page 178] Revolutionary Power of Women's Anger, which argues that women's public expressions of anger have led to social change in the last half-century in the U. S. We began to ask: how does the legacy of poetic expressions of women's anger in the nineteenth century resonate with these contemporary women, speaking publicly now, narrating an expression of anger from the past? Or with women who are hiding anger? Or subsuming it to fear? How can Victorian poetry illuminate the appeals that these expressions make to their listeners? To answer these questions, the women participating in this roundtable turn to the dramatic monologue, the nineteenth-century genre famous for its rendering of heightened emotions and extreme psychology. Anger is arguably the dramatic monologue's quintessential emotion. By relocating the lyric "I" within a specific historical or fictional context, authors can experiment with subjectivities that are—or at least appear to be—radically different from their own, embodying stances that are unconventional, transgressive, or severely anti-social. Nineteenth-century women poets offer particularly compelling examples of psychologically extreme characters in monologues that perform bitter critiques of gender-based double standards, often insisting on the psyche in extremis as a product of social conditions, rather than as a study in idiosyncrasy. But, as the diversity of authors and poems addressed in this roundtable suggests, in order to recognize and work through the nuances of these critiques, we need to view genre formation not as an inanimate taxonomic object but as an ongoing, dynamic process of engagement between reader and text. As Wai Chee Dimock observes, "far from being clear-cut slices of the literary pie, genres have … an on-demand spatial occupancy. They can be brought forth or sent back as the user chooses, switched on or off, or scaled up or down" (1379). The essays in this roundtable scale up the dramatic monologue, expanding its chronological, national, and formal boundaries in order to explore the complexities of its engagement with women's anger. Collectively, our more inclusive vision of the history of this genre, so often associated with Victorian Britain, welcomes American and Canadian authors, and Romantic-era and modernist poets, and even engages conversation and verse narrative poems. Creating a broader vision of the monologue helps us, as Monique Morgan argues, "to see more clearly the polemical content, and the range of rhetorical goals and techniques" that the genre deploys (201). It also invites new questions about one of the dramatic monologue's most central conventions: the use of a speaker who is established as someone other than the...

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)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,010
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 enseignants0,027
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,091

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,010
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0260,016
Communication savante0,0110,007
Science ouverte0,0010,012
Intégrité de la recherche0,0040,011
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0270,006

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 Opus0,060
Tête enseignante GPT0,317
Écart entre enseignants0,257 · 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

Citations1
Publié2020
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueVictorian StudiesMême sujetGender, Feminism, and MediaTravaux en français237 207