MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1787151948 · doi:10.1111/lic3.12054

An Introduction to the ‘literary person[s]’ of Anne Lister and the Ladies of Llangollen

2013· article· en· W1787151948 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

VenueLiterature Compass · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHistorical and Scientific Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFavouritePoetryReading (process)LiteratureAuntPresentation (obstetrics)ArtHistoryArt historyPhilosophyMedicineTheologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Anne Lister eagerly looked forward to her tour of North Wales in July 1822 – a tour made in the company of a dear aunt, and whose principal highlight would be a visit to Eleanor Butler and Sarah Ponsonby, the celebrated Ladies of Llangollen. Ten days prior to her departure, Lister received a letter from her friend, Isabel Dalton, reassuring her that apparently ‘no introduction’ to the Ladies would be necessary: “Any literary person especially calling on them would be taken as a compliment.” Butler and Ponsonby were accustomed to receiving visits from the best of ‘literary persons’, including William Wordsworth, Caroline Lamb, Edmund Burke, and Sir Walter Scott. While Lister lacked such illustrious renown, she was certainly qualified to make the visit. Her diaries reveal that Halifax Library was one of her regular haunts, that she kept careful note of her reading, regularly perused literary reviews, and enjoyed performing favourite book passages and songs to friends and family. She relied on her literary knowledge to further her amorous intrigues, was generous in her presentation of bound books as gifts and love tokens, and confided in a select few of her ‘ambition in the literary way’ and related wish for ‘a name in the world’. Unsurprisingly then, the Ladies of Llangollen’s ‘rustic library’ made an immediate impression on Lister, who warmly admired their ‘little bookcase with 30 or 40 little volumes [of] chiefly poetry, Spenser, Chaucer, Pope, Cowper, Homer, Shakespeare, etc. –’. For their part, Butler and Ponsonby were ‘always reading’; or, in their own words, indulging in ‘the exquisite pleasures of retirement and the luxury of purchasing books’. A study of the literary interests and reading practices recorded by Lister and the Ladies of Llangollen offers a valuable extension to our understanding of these fascinating diarists and the importance placed by all three women on the desirability of a literary mindset. In its investigation of the links between textuality and subjectivity, my article considers the meanings associated with different reading spaces, and how the literary pursuits of Anne Lister and the Ladies of Llangollen related to their larger academic interests, attitudes to female education, sexual identity, and financial independence.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.216 · 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