MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969664379 · doi:10.3138/utq.80.3.756

How Poetry Moves Readers: Sidney, Spenser, and Milton

2011· article· en· W1969664379 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Barbara Kiefer Lewalski

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Toronto Quarterly · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicRenewable Energy and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoetryVirtuePassionsPoeticsRhetoricLiteraturePoliticsPhilosophyPower (physics)ArcadiaAestheticsArtLawEpistemologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper begins from the new emphasis in Sidney's Defence of Poetry on poetry's capacity to move – not simply to teach and delight, the usual formula. Challenging Plato, Gosson, and many others, he argued poetry's superiority to history and philosophy by claiming that it holds forth models of virtue and vice that cannot fail to move readers, respectively, to emulation or abhorrence. Moving the audience is an effect more commonly associated with rhetoric, and Sidney also makes an explicit connection between moving to personal and to political virtue. I argue that Spenser, and later Milton follow Sidney in claiming poetry's power to move in both spheres, but that all these poets develop a much more complex poetics of moving in their literary works: the Old Arcadia, the Faerie Queene, and Paradise Lost. Within all these works, poetic speakers are shown moving audiences but find they cannot control the audiences' reactions. Sidney, Spenser, and Milton themselves seek to move readers through these works, but now by specifically literary means, inviting readers to experience the passions, complexities, and conflicts that always attend moral and political choices.

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)0.000
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.485
Threshold uncertainty score0.944

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.180
Teacher spread0.167 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations23
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Toronto QuarterlySame topicRenewable Energy and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207