Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The word slum was first coined in 1825 as a reference to the “back slums lying in the rear of Broad St” (OED). It did not take long for the term to acquire negative connotations, as seen in Leslie Stephen’s Playground of Europe (1871), wherein he describes “[t]he unspeakable ugliness of a back slum in London” (p. 176). By 1884 the word referred to both place and activity (“the visitation of slums” “for amusement” [Christian World, 22 May 1884]). To go slumming was, in effect, to transform working-class subjects and spaces into sources of interest or fascination—if not outright entertainment. This transformation of the poor was itself a pleasure for slum visitors, who juxtaposed their own bourgeois (i.e., morally superior) identities against the constructed slum Other. Besides reifying their classed sense of self, people from the upper classes sought out underground working-class subcultures and/or literal spaces of supposed deprivation (the slums), with motives ranging from social documentation or assistance of the poor to unabashed pleasure-seeking. Still, historian Seth Koven reminds us that whether inspired by altruism or selfishness these are all acts of self-serving “slumming” (see Koven 2004, cited under Secondary Sources: Entertainment and Slum Fiction). The reformers who looked to impose their own middle-class values, the women journalists who gained professional legitimacy, and the “swells” who pursued nights of titillating debauchery are just some of those who went slumming at the expense of their working-class and poor subjects. This article intends to reflect the range in ways and reasons why late Victorians slummed. For ease of use, we have divided our selections by primary and secondary sources, each half containing five parallel subcategories. We eschew a definition or class designation of the slummers themselves to keep focus on the act of slumming—for slumming was first and foremost a relationship of power, and those who slummed sometimes “had little in common beyond their sense that they commanded resources entitling them to gawk at or help the poor” (Koven 2004, p. 10, cited under Secondary Sources: Entertainment and Slum Fiction). The first major category focuses on those who went slumming precisely because of this power dynamic and the “Entertainment” it afforded. Many books were penned to help gentlemen “swells” navigate London’s growing slums, which themselves shifted location, composition, and character over the century. The proliferation of periodicals and tourist guides reflects the popularity of cross-class voyeurism that slumming afforded. This section concludes with a discussion of music halls, a new type of venue where bourgeois slummers could observe (and eventually appropriate) working-class popular entertainment. “Social Reform Writings” follows those who slummed for supposedly altruistic ends. It includes works of social investigation, attempts to scientifically taxonomize urban poverty, and has a section on slum crime. Selections of journalism demonstrate how women went slumming to advance their careers while men slummed for the thrill of sexual contact with poor men. Photographic materials show how emerging flash technology underwrote the literal objectification of the poor, while the third section, “Settlements and Organizations,” focuses on the reformers who stayed in the slums and tried to effect change through decidedly middle-class example. Still other reformers embraced the idea of (re)settlement as a solution for poverty; some in this group went so far as to promote eugenic-leaning farm colonies and/or migration to England’s global settlements. Finally, the stand-alone categories “Digital Archives” and “Working-Class Autobiographies” remind us, as scholars, to always consult the primary sources—particularly when it comes to socially and economically precarious communities.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,008 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,277 | 0,083 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».