MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984765046 · doi:10.1353/mfs.2007.0061

Passionate Collaborations: Learning to Live with Gertrude Stein (review)

2007· article· en· W1984765046 on OpenAlex
Georgia Johnston

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

VenueModern fiction studies · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt, Politics, and Modernism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPICASSOPortraitModernism (music)Art historyScholarshipPoliticsArtHistorySociologyPaintingLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Passionate Collaborations: Learning to Live with Gertrude Stein Georgia Johnston Karin Cope. Passionate Collaborations: Learning to Live with Gertrude Stein. Victoria, BC, Canada: ELS Editions, 2005. 343 pp. Karin Cope's new book on Gertrude Stein could not have been written without earlier thought-provoking representations of Stein as an important modernist who stretched language and genre. Scholars of Stein's work, such as Ellen Berry, Clive Bush, Harriet Chessman, Marianne DeKoven, Elizabeth Fifer, Elizabeth Meese, Lisa Ruddick, Juliana Spahr, and Catharine Stimpson, have developed ways of reading Stein that elucidate her texts as deliberate, political, smart, and literary. Cope adds to this forceful critical work. Her book is a welcome addition to the scholarship on Stein—more than welcome; her book is a tour de force—an insightful, stagy presentation of Stein in terms of collaboration. In Cope's own words, Passionate Collaborations"explores some of the material traces of Stein's historical collaborations," including those with Picasso, with Toklas, and with the World War II Vichy government (18). Cope explores "what those collaborations appear to have required and produced," both textually and in the "history of modernism" (19). Cope begins with Stein's portrait of Picasso and Picasso's portrait of Stein. They become, in Cope's hands, markers of larger literary and artistic shifts in literature and art. Cope shows how central the portrait is for Stein and Picasso. Using theories of abjection and psychology, she examines the personal responses that the collaborations created. For example, Picasso's responses to Stein and Stein's to Picasso, she argues, must have included denigration and abjection, which fuel a "showing forth of insecurity, confusion, and error as privileged sites of creativity and production" (58). These feelings reverberate with "defacement," "deformation" (55), and "error" (46). When Cope asks, "What did Picasso confront in Stein that caused him to change the manner in which he painted female figures?" she traces a collaboration that shows that "Stein seduced Picasso in some way with her presence," while, simultaneously, that seduction could not fit his "heterosexual desire" (94). Throughout her discussions of Picasso and his work, Cope weaves Stein's texts, revealing that Stein created "something quite untoward, quite unprecedented" (96). In the center of this book about Stein's accomplishments through collaboration, Cope reproduces debilitating harangues directed at Stein over this past century. One writer saw Stein, her body, and her work as "vegetable accumulation" (140). Others revile Stein for "a tricky disguise of Nature, that she was of the company of Amazons," insist on her "arrested-development," and accuse her of a "loafing mind" (152, 148,144). Cope is extraordinarily nonconformist in her presentation of these critical writings, placing them in the margins [End Page 605]of her own commentary, not in quotation marks or italicized but simply in a different font. That decision about this book's space is an ingenious one, because the placement in the margins reiterates an understanding that these past critical writings are always in our critical margins, here literally. These combined responses to Stein, from authors like Wyndham Lewis, B. L. Reid, Ezra Pound, Robert McAlman and Kay Boyle, Katherine Anne Porter, and even Sandra Gilbert and Susan Gubar, astound and shock, especially in the context of Cope's own insights about Stein and her work, which reiterate Stein's textual genius. By representing this "Case Against Gertrude Stein"—what she calls a "revenge on Stein by belittling her" (20)—in the margins of her own writing, Cope peculiarly, effectively, and powerfully underscores how changing critical focus affects meaning. This chapter elucidates criticism's effects on literary texts and their receptions—and the importance of reading practices. As Cope traces Stein's collaborations within her historical period, she also explores how readers collaborate with Stein. She posits that Stein's texts interpellate—hail and name—readers—even if those readers do not yet exist. Theories of interpellation are nothing new; for example, Catherine Belsey presented the case in 1980 that the nineteenth-century realist novel interpellates a reader who believes she is autonomous and uniquely individual, thus buttressing a dominant realist ideology that needs such subjects for capitalism. Susan Lanser wrote in 1988 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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.807
Threshold uncertainty score0.698

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.228 · 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