MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

<em>Architectural Identities: Domesticity, Literature and the Victorian Middle Classes</em>, by Andrea Kaston Tange<br/><em>Building Romanticism: Literature and Architecture in Nineteenth-Century Britain</em>, by Nicole Reynolds

2012· article· en· W1511777473 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueVictorian Studies · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPostcolonial and Cultural Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArchitectureRomanticismArt historyCasualHistoryArtArchaeologyLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Architectural Identities: Domesticity, Literature and the Victorian Middle Classes, and: Building Romanticism: Literature and Architecture in Nineteenth-Century Britain Gail Cunningham (bio) Architectural Identities: Domesticity, Literature and the Victorian Middle Classes, by Andrea Kaston Tange; pp. xiv + 341. Toronto, Buffalo, and London: Toronto University Press, 2010, $70.00, £45.00. Building Romanticism: Literature and Architecture in Nineteenth-Century Britain, by Nicole Reynolds; pp. viii + 211. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 2010, $70.00, £62.50. In twenty-first-century Britain, a little under twenty percent of houses are nineteenth-century or earlier. A significant proportion of the population lives in dwellings built by the Victorians or their immediate precursors, and a far higher number of Britons—indeed virtually all—inhabit Victorian spaces on a casual, almost daily basis, in schools, colleges, shops, banks, railway stations, government buildings, suburban streets, or entire town centres. Victorian literature, dominated by the novel as its most popular form and by the domestic as its prevalent subject, often works within a recognisable built environment that surrounded its first readers and continues to exist in much adapted form to the present day. Yet the practical, cultural, and imaginative significance of this environment has been only partially examined by students of literature. Charles Dickens's London, the great industrial centres of Northern England, and the gothic gloom of sensation fiction have all of course received due attention. But until fairly recently the character and significance of domestic architecture, its spatial configurations and the disposition and actions of people within them, have been less rigorously studied. Invaluable work in the past few years, such as that by Judith Flanders on the Victorian house; Lynne Hapgood on suburbia; Annemarie Adams on architecture, women, and health; and Thad Logan on the Victorian parlour, has begun to expand our understanding of both the physical characteristics of these spaces and their rich cultural significance. The two books under review contribute interestingly to a growing body of work that examines the relationship between the architectural details of domestic space and the people, real or imagined, who lived and worked within it. That this relationship has genuine potency is dramatically demonstrated by the Road Hill House murder, the subject of an excellent recent study by Kate Summerscale. When three-year-old Saville Kent was discovered to be absent from his bed on the morning of 30 June 1860, and his body subsequently found stuffed down a servants' privy in the garden with its throat slit, the domestic arrangements of a middle-class Victorian family were thrown open to the public gaze, and their scrutiny forged a potential path to the gallows. The press published detailed floor plans of the Kent house, and public and police together examined the relations between rooms and occupants for clues as to motive and murderer. Why did the two youngest children sleep in a room next to their parents? Did Mr. Kent steal out in the middle of the night to fornicate with their nursemaid? Why were the children from his previous marriage consigned to bedrooms on the second floor with the housemaid and cook, and what simmering resentments were caused to the adolescent son by having to use the servants' staircase next to his room? Who amongst family and servants had access to the lumber room where the laundry was sorted and so could have purloined the missing nightdress? Such questions occurred to the contemporary public, and thanks to recent work [End Page 319] on domestic architecture may now also be prompted for modern scholars with access to the Road Hill House floor plans. Less sensationally, but with more wide-ranging and nuanced implication, aspects of Victorian imaginative writing that had previously gone unacknowledged are now opened to understanding. Recognizing the disposition of space according to gender and function, for example, suggests a further significance to George Eliot's situating of Dorothea Brooke and Will Ladislaw's declaration of love in the Lowick library, generally a space for solitary male reading and Casaubon's particular sanctuary. George Gissing's passing comment in In the Year of Jubilee (1894) that Nancy Lord's drawing room is correctly situated on the first floor will strike a...

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.218 · 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