MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4389736377 · doi:10.1353/esq.2023.a915297

Lydia Huntley Sigourney, Moral Pieces , and the War of 1812

2023· article· en· W4389736377 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
G. Martin Murphy

Notice bibliographique

RevueESQ · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPsychologyEnvironmental ethicsPhilosophy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Lydia Huntley Sigourney, Moral Pieces, and the War of 1812 Gretchen Murphy (bio) The opening poem of Lydia Huntley Sigourney’s Moral Pieces in Prose and Verse (1815) announces the volume as written in a nation at war. The speaker of the volume’s introduction presents to the reader her art, figured as a floral wreath and music played upon a harp, despite the fact that the “clang of war / the trumpet roar” (line 5) may scatter her flowers and drown out her song, making her aesthetic achievements matter less than moral and spiritual ones at this tumultuous time. The importance of the War of 1812 to Moral Pieces has gone unremarked by critics, who typically characterize the volume as consisting of juvenilia and didactic pieces intended for classroom use. But as Daniel Wadsworth states in the “Advertisement” that prefaces the volume, “a few of the productions now brought before the public were intended for the use of a School; but the greater part arose from the impulse of the moment” between daily chores.1 This impulse of the moment, I will argue, was the Federalist political crisis the War of 1812, which gripped Hartford in the year 1814 when these pieces were composed. This essay will interpret six poems from Moral Pieces that explicitly figure the War of 1812, placing them in the context of Federalist political response to the war. After providing this [End Page 303] historical context, I will analyze Sigourney’s poetic response to tropes of pro-war poetry, identifying auditory affect, or how feelings sound, as an important conceptual idea in the War of 1812 poetry. A final section will examine Sigourney’s relationship with Federalism in the years following the war. Scholars have perhaps overlooked Sigourney’s partisan approach to the War of 1812 and its prominence in this volume because the war itself barely figures in American historical memory. Its resolution changed no borders or policies, and historians still debate its motivations. The Madison administration cited Britain’s ongoing interference with United States shipping interests, including the impressment of sailors on US merchant ships at sea, as a casus belli. But historians have considered, as factors impelling the crisis, the assertion of US sovereignty, expansion into Canada, and the subjugation of Indian tribes that were using North American political tensions as an opportunity for strategic resistance.2 The war’s starkly partisan nature has also muddied its purpose. Not a single Federalist in Congress voted for the war, which they saw as waged in the interests of their opponents, the Democratic-Republicans who controlled Washington. Federalists, who dominated in the New England states but were a minority in Congress, acted on their objection to the war in various ways, including refusing to send state militia, enabling banks to withhold credit, and finally holding the ill-fated Hartford Convention, where representatives from New England states debated making a separate peace with England.3 Indeed, from the outset, the perception of Federalist disloyalty may have heightened the Madison administration’s willingness to wage war, as rumors circulated that the Federalists were conspiring with the British to break up the union, forming the perception of a convergence of internal and external enemies that the US could oppose in one blow.4 The experience of being cast as an internal enemy motivates the emotional range, pitch, and formal choices of Sigourney’s [End Page 304] war poetry, and, I will argue, animates its trajectory: muted ambivalence, aversion, and shame give way to heroic gendered narratives of rescue in an effort to motivate an audible form of dissent from one’s own nation at war. This negative perception of the Federalists in particular perhaps explains why Sigourney’s War of 1812 poetry has gone unremarked. Critics may have shown little interest in exploring Sigourney’s political commitments to Federalism because finding these linkages would hitch Sigourney to a group with a tarnished historical legacy, one colored not only by these accusations of treachery but also by the perception that their broader political interests in a republican government where wise elites lead with virtue and self-restraint were anti-egalitarian and rearguard.5 Certainly, the war seemed to catalyze...

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)0,002
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 enseignants0,012
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,033

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0060,005
Communication savante0,0060,003
Science ouverte0,0010,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,004
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0100,002

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 Opus0,026
Tête enseignante GPT0,305
Écart entre enseignants0,279 · 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
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueESQMême sujetAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsTravaux en français237 207