MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1520487660 · doi:10.1353/vpr.2012.0045

Museum Trouble: Edwardian Fiction and the Rise of Modernism (review)

2012· article· en· W1520487660 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Casey Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueVictorian periodicals review · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterature: history, themes, analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModernism (music)BeautyNarrativePoliticsHistoryFace (sociological concept)AlienIdentity (music)Art historyAestheticsArtLiteratureSociologyLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Museum Trouble: Edwardian Fiction and the Rise of Modernism Casey Smith (bio) Ruth Hoberman, Museum Trouble: Edwardian Fiction and the Rise of Modernism (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2011), pp. xxvi + 236, $39.50 cloth. Museums, it seems, have always been in trouble, the source of trouble, and the scene of trouble. The objects on display, art or otherwise, have histories that are reconfigured by new curatorial discourses that apply an often alien narrative to the objects’ original histories. The consequent ruptures impose order and discipline, not only on museum visitors but also on artists, staff, and museum trustees, as well as on the cultural, political, and economic superstructures that undergird the museum’s contested mission. In the years spanning 1890 to 1914, museums experienced a collision of the Ruskinian emphasis on education and “moral uplift” with the Paterian emphasis on the cultivation of beauty for its own sake. Today this split is still at the core of the museum experience and perhaps behind the continued and continuous troubles that museums face. Ruth Hoberman’s compelling Museum Trouble reminds us that museums as we know them today are a relatively recent phenomenon. In 1800 the idea of a collection of art and objects that was open to public perusal was simply unknown, but by the end of the century, museums, especially in capital cities, were a central part of urban experience. That they were a “means of constructing and consolidating national identity” is beyond dispute (2). The same can be said for national libraries such as the British Museum Library, the Bibliothèque Nationale, and the Library of Congress. This phenomenon, Hoberman convincingly argues, was not only coincident with what we now somewhat uneasily call “literary modernism” but was also a crucial component in its formation. The evidence that Hoberman summons to make her case evinces a deep familiarity with the periodical press of the late Victorian and Edwardian eras. Although she only briefly discusses the role of the periodical press itself, she finds examples and arguments in dozens of journals, magazines, and newspapers, such as the Estates Gazette, Chums: An Illustrated Paper for Boys, Fun, Englishwoman’s Review, Punch, Blackwood’s Magazine, and Saturday Review. Students and scholars of the Victorian periodical press will find fascinating material on nearly every page of Museum Trouble. Hoberman weaves together this evidence with remarkable and seamless fluidity. [End Page 507] In the chapter “Aesthetic Value in Flux,” Hoberman shows how the establishment of art journals such as the Connoisseur (1901) and the Burlington Magazine (1903) served to legitimize the discipline of art history as a profession with its own standards and protocols. Unlike the government-run South Kensington Museum, the British Museum and the National Gallery were “administered by boards of trustees—generally aristocrats and wealthy businessmen,” who despite their best intentions knew little about art and museum management. Many trustee-run museums today face similar struggles (12). Museum Trouble also offers nuanced close readings of Edwardian fiction. Hoberman’s analyses of museum encounters in Henry James’s novels The Golden Bowl (1904) and The Outcry (1911) are particularly strong, but the book’s scope is considerably wider. Some of the material was previously published in different form in Feminist Studies (2002), Victorian Literature and Culture (2003), and Reading Women (2005), the collection of essays edited by Janet Badia and Jennifer Phegley. Cultural historians of the late Victorian period, including those not focused on literary studies, will find much to recommend in these pages. Hoberman’s range of scholarship is nothing short of amazing; her notes and bibliography are extensive and worth consulting in themselves. The inclusion of W. B. Yeats and James Joyce in the final chapter, “Museum Dreams,” seems somewhat quick and perfunctory (unlike the treatment of Virginia Woolf in this chapter), but this is such a minor problem that it seems hardly worth noting. Overall, Museum Trouble is a model of engaged cultural and literary history. Hoberman asks, “What gives art its power, and how should viewers respond to it? What kind of knowledge do museums generate, and what do museumgoers learn?” (10). Answers to these questions were not simple or univocal in the late nineteenth and...

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.381
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVictorian periodicals reviewSame topicLiterature: history, themes, analysisFrench-language works237,207