Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although Blake combined the “sister arts” of poetry, painting, and music in much of his early illuminated work, scholars have (with a few exceptions) rarely considered the musical aspect of his multi-media practice in detail. This tendency to “forget” about Blake’s musical artistry is entirely understandable, because the melodies that Blake wrote for many of his early poems did not survive his death in 1827. Building upon B. H. Fairchild’s groundbreaking work in Such Holy Song (1980), this multi-media essay examines Blake’s musical practice in relation to the poetry and designs of Songs of Innocence and of Experience. Beginning with a biographical discussion of Blake’s musicianship, the essay considers the role music played as an integral and holistic aspect of Blake’s “composite art.” Subsequently, the essay addresses some of the interpretive challenges facing modern composers who attempt to set Blake’s poetry to music; and it explores some of the ways in which music can inform modern pedagogy of the Songs. In an appendix, the essay places Blake’s verbal and visual media into a musical context by providing access to relevant MP3 music files taken from Kevin Hutchings’ CD Songs of William Blake (2007).
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".