MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W110831927 · doi:10.1353/srm.2013.0026

Malthus Our Contemporary?: Toward a Political Economy of Sex

2013· article· en· W110831927 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maureen N. McLane

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Romanticism · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Economy and Marxism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsRomancePostmodernismSociologyPhilosophyHistoryLiteratureLawEpistemologyArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MAUREEN N. MCLANE Malthus Our Contemporary?: Toward a Political Economy ofSex Species Means Guilt. —Bruce Andrews1 . . . desire, as Aristotle knew, is all angle, and so he gave us the math to keep track of our loves: Number, he said, has two senses: what is counted or countable, and that by which we count. —Angie Estes, “Take Cover,” Tryst2 I BEGIN WITH A REMARK OF HAZLITT, WHO IN THE SPIRIT OF THE AGE glossed an aspect of what we might call The Malthus Meme: “There is this to be said for Mr. Malthus, that in speaking of him, one knows what one is talking about.”3 But do we know what we’re talking about when we talk about Malthus? This essay proposes to reopen the question of “Mal­ thus,” and of Malthusian reckoning—or rather, to track the many ways Malthusian political economy might provide one horizon for a reckoning historicizable yet interminable and trans-specific. Or perhaps it is more precise to say that this essay partakes of, even as it registers, a return to Mal­ thus in several fields. Malthus is, among many things, a Romantic theorist I would like to thank Kevin Gilmartin, who first invited me to return to Malthus, and to thank as well the three anonymous readers for Studies in Romanticism: this essay benefited im­ measurably from their responsiveness, severity, and scrupulosity, and from the attentiveness of Charles Kzepka and Deborah Swedberg. Best thanks as always to Laura Slatkin. i. Bruce Andrews, “Species Means Guilt,” Postmodern American Poetry: A Norton Anthology, ed. Paul Hoover (New York: Norton, 1994), 532-34. 2. Angie Estes, “Take Cover,” Tryst (Oberlin: Oberlin College Press, 2009), 62-63. 3. William Hazlitt, “Mr. Malthus,” in The Spirit ofthe Age: or, Contemporary Portraits (New York: John Wiley, 1849), 149. SiR, 52 (Fall 2013) 337 338 MAUREEN N. MCLANE of change in biological populations; he is also necessarily a theorist of time—the time of production and reproduction within and across genera­ tions (and indeed across species), how this timing might be sped or slowed. Malthus emerges here as a sexual theorist worth taking seriously; his work intriguingly anticipates the possibility of rethinking biological networks through information theory. This essay proposes as well that Malthusian counting is not an arithmetic, geometric, or even algorithmic operation so much as a matching operation—and here I draw on recent work by (among others) Marjorie Levinson. For one wittily efficient take on The Malthus Meme, consider Stephen Leacock, Canadian poet and humorist, in his Depression-era “Oh! Mr. Malthus!” (1936): “Mother, Mother, here comes Malthus, Mother, hold me tight! Look! It’s Mr. Malthus, Mother! Hide me out of sight. ” This was the cry of little Jane In bed she moaning lay, Delirious with Stomach Pain, That would not go away. All because her small Existence Over-pressed upon Subsistence; Human Numbers didn’t need her; Human Effort couldn’t feed her. Little Janie didn’t know The Geometric Ratio. Poor Wee Janie had never done Course Economics No. 1; Never reached in Education Theories of Population,— Theories which tend to show Just how far our Food will go, Mathematically found Just enough to go around. This, my little Jane, is why Pauper Children have to die. Pauper Children underfed Die delirious in Bed; Thus at Malthus’s Command Match Supply with true Demand.4 4. Stephen Leacock, “Oh! Mr. Malthus!” in Hellements ofHickotwmics in Hiccoughs of Verse MALTHUS OUR CONTEMPORARY? 339 “Theories of Population,” “The Geometric Ratio,” “subsistence,” “Sup­ ply” and “Demand”—all are keywords of Malthusian political economy, “geometric ratio” perhaps the most marked as a Malthusian phrase, desig­ nating the rate of increase of animal populations (destined to outstrip any increase in the vegetal kingdom, which according to Malthus would in­ crease only along an “arithmetic ratio”). Malthus’s concerns and his con­ ceptual apparatus were of course those of his age, yet as Leacock’s bounc­ ing couplets attest, they were still and newly citable in the 1930s; and in several ways, mutatis mutandis, Malthus’s concerns remain ours. It seems timely, then, to assess whether and how Malthus might still be “good to think with,” in Claude Levi-Strauss’s...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.030
Scholarly communication0.0100.011
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.123
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in RomanticismSame topicPolitical Economy and MarxismFrench-language works237,207