MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045051204 · doi:10.1353/mod.2003.0087

The Criterion: Cultural Politics and Periodical Networks in Inter-War Britain (review)

2003· article· en· W2045051204 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ronald Schuchard

Bibliographic record

VenueModernism/modernity · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIrish and British Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsPolitical scienceHistoryMedia studiesSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There have been a variety of flying visits to the Criterion over the years, in-and-out engagements with Eliot's seventeen-year struggle to create an eighteen-volume record of intellectual life between the wars. Some hefty doctoral dissertations on the periodical await an occasional reader on the shelves of university libraries, but some contemporary critics more readily thumb the pages of the Criterion itself in search of evidence for agenda-driven studies of Eliot's religious, political, and economic biases. In the face of this academic activity, Jason Harding has taken the Criterion out of vacuum-sealed isolation and re-examined it in relation to other literary reviews of the time, showing Eliot and his contributors making their way in a post-war cultural climate in competition with other editors and their writers, all vying for the attention and support of a limited literary public and readership. To Harding, the character of the Criterion "cannot be divorced from the alliances and loyalties, rivalries, animosities, and friendships that mark all social relations as fully human" (7), and in the process of reconstructing these intellectual relationships he has admirably scoured all the accessible archives in Great Britain, America, and Canada, interviewing when possible the surviving participants and witnesses. Harding's laudable aim has been "to provide a thickly textured account of the milieu of British inter-war literary journalism necessary for measured assessment of the history and significance of the Criterion" (21). That assessment comes through a disinterested immersion in magazines and milieus and in a jargon-free narrative that seeks neither to indict nor exonerate the less attractive aspects of Eliot's Tory-Anglican conservatism, but certainly to address what he describes as "slack charges of 'fascism' and 'anti-Semitism'" (6) that have followed upon Eliot's editorial provision for the symposial examination of right-wing causes.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.015
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.290 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModernism/modernitySame topicIrish and British StudiesFrench-language works237,207