The Lush and the Barren: Nature in William Bartram’s Travels and Cormac McCarthy’s The Road
Bibliographic record
Abstract
“The Lush and the Barren: Nature in William Bartram’s Travels and Cormac McCarthy’s The Road” seeks to understand the connections between these two seemingly disparate texts. The works exist on binaries of the environmental paradigm – Travels presents a fecund landscape; The Road envisions a scorched one. “The Lush and the Barren” considers these works as being two faces on the same coin of the southern American terrain. Positioned between each text, haunts the environmental destruction of a small town in East Tennessee called Copperhill. Destroyed by copper smelting in the early twentieth century, the land surrounding Copperhill for many years resembled a moonscape. The desolate ground of Ducktown Basin looms and has become more than a razed corner of Tennessee; it possesses symbolic resonance and serves as crossroads between two moments in the history of America: Travels looks back beyond the age of written memory to a time when the land was flocked in so-called virgin wilderness, and The Road that points ahead to an apocalyptic future, where the countryside is completely destroyed and burned to cinder. If Copperhill provides a glimpse into two worlds, an echo stone from which the imagined and the unimaginable commingle, then two literary works, William Bartram’s Travels and Cormac McCarthy’s The Road, function as mythical road maps from out of the garden and into the desert of our own destruction. “The Lush and The Barren” holds up these three landscapes and muses on the possible destiny of America.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".