MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964173649 · doi:10.3138/utq.80.3.680

Dante Gabriel Rossetti's ‘Inner Standing-Point’ and ‘Jenny’ Reconstrued

2011· article· en· W1964173649 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
D.M.R. Bentley

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Toronto Quarterly · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicVisual Culture and Art Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoetryPoint (geometry)LiteratureEmpathyPeriod (music)ArtPhilosophyAestheticsPsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The idea that the ‘emotional influence’ of art demands an ‘inner standing-point’ was first expressed in writing by Dante Gabriel Rossetti in 1869, but it did not appear in print until 1871, when he summoned it as part of his defence of his poem ‘Jenny’ against the ‘Fleshly School’ attack of Robert Buchanan. When understood as a form of Einfühlung/empathy and ‘negative capability,’ the idea can be seen operating in several of Rossetti's poems and pictures of the period of the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood (1848–53) and earlier. So understood, it also provides a crucial and highly productive point of entry into ‘Jenny,’ where the reader is asked to feel inside the ‘situation’ and mentality of the ‘young and thoughtful man of the world’ who speaks the ‘semi-dramatic monologue’ while the prostitute of the title lies asleep on his knee. In the course of his increasingly sympathetic response to Jenny, the speaker creates an intricate web of allusions to biblical texts, references to contemporary legislation, and intertextual relationships with works by such artists and writers as Augustine, Titian, Hogarth, Ruskin, and E.B. Browning.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.025
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.168 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Toronto QuarterlySame topicVisual Culture and Art TheoryFrench-language works237,207